1992-12-08CITY OF MOUNq) NIISSION STATENIENT; The City of Mound, through
teamwork and cooperation, provides at a reasonable cost, quality
services that respond to the needs of all citizens, fostering a
safe, attractive and flourishing community·
AGENDA
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
MOUND CITY COUNCH. - REGULAR MEETING
7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, DECEMBER $, 1992 .
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 24, 1992
REGULAR MEETING
PG. 5078-5084
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE #92-060, 061, 062 & 063:
NEIL WEBER FOR TEAL POINTE DEVELOPMENT CO., BLOCKS
10, 11, 15 & 16, WHIPPLE, PID #25-117-24 12 0225,
0118, 0119, 0120·
R~QUEST:
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AREA, STREET VACATION & VARIANCE. PG. 5085-5133
RESOLUTION OF DENIAL - REQUEST FOR MINOR
SUBDIVISION, 1720 DOVE LANE, MAXINE BEISSEL.
PG. 5134-5136
REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT - PROPOSED
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT - COTTONWOOD LANE/DAKOTA
RAIL, JOHN CAMERON, CITY ENGINEER. PG. 5137-5144
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CLASS III RESTAURANT
AND BAR FOR "HEADLINERS BAR & GRILL" IN THE B-1
CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT AT 5241 SHORELINE
DRIVE. (SUGGESTED DATE: JANUARY 12, 1993, 7:30
P.M.) PG. 5145
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR AN
"ON-SALE" INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR MARK
SALITERMAN & BILL FEEHAN, DBA HEADLINERS BAR & GRILL,
5241 SHORELINE DRIVE. (SUGGESTED DATE:
JANUARY 12, 1993, 7:30 P.M.) PG. 5146
5075
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
DIBCUBSION: PROPOSED INCREASE AND OTHER CHANGES
RELATED TO RECYCLING CONTRACTOR. PG. 5147-5153
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO VACATE
A PORTION OF WINDSOR ROAD. (SUGGESTED DATE:
JANUARY 12, 1993, 7:30 P.M.) PG. 5154
RESOLUTION APPROVING A GAMBLING PERMIT APPLICATION
FOR OUR LADY OF THE LAKE SCHOOL - 2/6/93 - RAFFLE
AND PULL-TABS. PG. 5155
LICENSE APPLICATIONS:
A. TEEN CLUB (BRADFER, INC. DBA SOMEPLACE ELSE),
2313 COMMERCE BLVD. - GAMES OF SKILL, POOL TABLE,
AMUSEMENT DEVICES & PUBLIC DANCE. PG. 5156
Be
OUR LADY OF THE LAKE SCHOOL - TEMPORARY ON-SALE
NONINTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR PERMIT - 2/6/93 -
LAS VEGAS NITE. PG. 5156
PAYMENT OF BILLS.
PG. 5157-5162
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
As
Department Head Monthly Reports for November
1992. PG. 5163-5184
B. L.M.C.D. mailings.
PG. 5185-5230
Ce
Letter from Triax Cablevision re: rate
increase.
PG. 5231
De
REMINDER: 1993 Budget Hearings are scheduled
for Wednesday, December 9, 1992 and Wednesday,
December 16, 1992, at 7:30 PM, Mound City Hall.
Please bring your copies of the 1993 Proposed
Budget with you to these meetings.
Eo
REMINDER: Annual City of Mound Christmas Party
is scheduled for Friday, December 18, 1992, Mound
American Legion. Invitations have been sent out
and we need RSVP's by Friday, December 11, 1992.
Fe
Letters of interest from two persons applying for
vacancy on Parks & Open Space Commission.
Interviews will be held Thursday, December 10,
1992, 7:00 P.M., Mound City Hall. You are
invited to attend. Commissioners will rank
candidates and submit a recommendation to you
for your consideration. PG. 5232-5233
5076
He
Planning Commission Minutes of November
23, 1992.
Economic Development Commission Minutes of
November 19, 1992.
PG. 5234-5240
PG. 5241
5077
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 24, 1992
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in
regular session on Tuesday, November 24, 1992, in the Council
Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Phyllis
Jessen, Liz Jensen and Ken Smith. Andrea Ahrens was absent and
excused. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr.,
Finance Director Gino Businaro, Acting Clerk Linda Strong, City
Attorney Curt Pearson, city Planner Mark Koegler, Building official
Jon Sutherland and the following interested citizens: Linda and
Terry Olson, Kris Huspek and David Olson and Kevin Olson of
Weebelos Den 4, Duane Werner, Tom Sachariason, Michael Mueller,
Peggy Heck, Roger Stephanson, Howard Barrett, Michael Gilbertson,
Lori Phernetton, Bill Meyer, James Clark, Bob and Maxine Beissel,
Parker Hodges and Denny Flack.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited assisted by Weeblo Scouts Den
4.
City Manager Ed Shukle introduced the City's new Finance Director,
Gino Businaro to the Council. Council welcomed him to the staff.
RECYCLOTTO WINNER Mayor Johnson announced that Duane Werner, 2888
Highland Blvd., had won 150 Westonka Dollars for the week of
November 10th. He was in attendance and received his winnings.
The Mayor also mentioned Mrs. Metzer of Fairview Lane had won 50
Westonka Dollars for the week of November 16th. There was no
winner the week of November 24th.
1.0 MINUTES
MOTION made by smith, seconded by Jensen to approve the
Minutes of the November 10, 1992, Regular Meeting. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.1 CONTINUED PUBLIC HE~RING: PROPOSED ZONING CODE MODIFICATIONS
AND PROPOSED SHORELP~ND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE.
Mark Koegler, City Planner, updated Council on the Shoreland
Ordinance and Zoning Code Modification. The ordinance is being
implemented into the zoning code. During this process,
inconsistencies and duplications have been discovered. Mark stated
that the DNR has extended the approval deadline until May 10, 1993.
Mark suggested that the public hearing be continued until January
1993 to allow for a completely updated comprehensive plan. Mark
informed Council of the items of concern that the Planning
Commission felt needed work; lot sizes, fence ordinance and sheds.
Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing and asked if there was
anyone present who wished to speak.
Michelle Stutsman, 2173 Cardinal Lane, asked about platted
unimproved streets. Jon Sutherland, Building Official, informed
Ms. Stutsman that this item was not covered within the proposed
ordinance and recommended she speak with City staff.
Council discussed the placement of sheds and how this is regulated
and indicated they be placed in the least conspicuous area within
setbacks. Denny Flack, 1609 Bluebird Lane, asked Council about
lock boxes on the commons. Mayor Johnson stated that no structure
was allowed on the commons without a Construction on Public Lands
permit being issued, nothing will be allowed on the Commons without
a permit. Councilmember Smith stated that wording is to be added to
Section 1200.20, subd. 3.B2. regarding the use of lock boxes only
on private lakeshore.
Lot sizes were discussed. Bill Meyer, 6601 Bartlett Boulevard,
spoke with Council regarding the redevelopment of Mound in the next
100 years. He stated that economic conditions could lead to more
subdivisions and smaller lots and the planners of Mound should be
aware and hopefully prevent this. As chair of the Planning
Commission, Bill spoke regarding the commission,s split decisions
on this item. Michael Mueller, 5910 Ridgewood Road, and a
Planning Commission member stated he was against requiring larger
lots. Jim Clark, 1665 Bluebird Lane, asked Council about his lot
which is 9600 square feet and subdividing into 3 lots at 3200
square feet each. Council discussed the possibility of lot sizes
being in increments of 3200 square feet, i.e., 6400, 9600, because
of the grid system used in originally laying out the lots.
Legality was discussed in changing lot size requirements. No
action was taken by Council and consensus was to extend public
hearing until January 26, 1993 regular council meeting.
MOTION by Smith and seconded by Jessen to continue the Public
Hearing on the Proposed Zoning Code Modifications and Proposed
Shoreland Management Ordinance until January 26, 1993 regular
Council meeting.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.2
pUBLIC HEARING: CASE ~92-066: APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A WHOLESALE AND ASSEMBLY OPERATION IN THE I-1
INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT CONSISTING OF DESIGN AND
MANUFACTURING OF ARTWEARAND JEWELRY BY P HECK DESIGN AT 5571
LYNWOOD BLVD. '
City Planner, Mark Koegler, summarized this item stating there was
no negative impact on the surrounding businesses, the proposed use
is consistent with the zoning code and staff recommended approval.
Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. There was no one present
2
who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public hearing. Peggy
Heck, owner, was present and stated she was not a retail store, but
would like to have occasional sample sales.
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-151
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ALLOW THE ASSEMBLY/STORAGE OF
GLASS AND POTTERY FOR P. HECK DESIGNS AT
5571 LYNWOOD BLVD., KOEHLER'S ADDITION TO
MOUND, PID #13-117-24 33 0073, P&Z CASE
#92-066.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried
1.3 CASE ~92-053: REQUEST FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION, MAXINE BEISSEL,
1720 DOVE L]%NE, LOT 7-9, BLOCK 12v PID #13-117-24 13 0006.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, updated Council on this item stating
that the Planning Commission recommended denial. Council had
tabled this version of the division stating the land could be
divided in a different configuration to be more appealing. Mark
presented another division arrangement, allowing for only a 20'
wide house on one of the lots. After much discussion, Council
consensus was to deny the request.
Jessen moved, Johnson seconded the following motion:
MOTION to direct Staff to prepare a resolution to deny the
request for minor subdivision of 1720 Dove Lane, Lot 7-9,
Block 12, PID #13-117-24 13 0006. The vote was unanimous,
motion carried.
1.4
CASE ~92-067: REQUEST FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION, RONALD NERAASEN
OF 4725 BEDFORD ROAD AND ROBERTA J.NELSON OF 4739 BEDFORD
ROAD, WYCHWOOD, BLOCK 13, LOTS 5-8 AND 24-28, PID #19-117-23
32 0143 AND 1044.
City Planner Mark Koegler updated Council stating that the
applicant is proposing a minor subdivision to modify a lot line
between the subject parcel and the residential property lying
immediately to the east. The new line will remove an existing jog
that occurs between the two property ownerships. Parcel A will
contain 10,438 square feet and Parcel B will have 17,717 square
feet. Both property owners are aware of a title defect and that
their signatures are required on the resolution and that the
resolution must be recorded as such with the county.
Smith moved, Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-152
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION
FOR LOTS 5, 28 ~d~D 27, BLOCK 13 WYCHWOOD,
AND LOTS 6, 7, 8, 24, 25, AND 26, BLOCK
13, WYCHWOOD, PID'S 19-118-23 32 0143 &
0144, 4725 AND 4739 BEDFORD ROAD,
CASE #92-067.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.5
CASE NO. 92-068= MIKE GILBERTSON, 4350 WILSHIRE BLVD., FIRST
REARRANGEMENT OF PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST DIVISION, LOTS 78
AND 79, PID #19-117-23 13 0010.
Council discussed this item with the applicant, Mike Gilbertson.
He has a shed located actually on county property. The shed is
full of personal items and the applicant intends to remove the shed
after the garage is built. Council wanted assurance that the shed
will be removed. The resolution was amended to include the
conditions to revoke the building permit if the shed is not totally
removed by May 1, 1993. Mr. Gilbertson accepted this condition.
Smith moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-153 RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIOUS SETBACK
VARIANCES TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
GARAGE ADDITION AND A DECK AND APPROVING
A FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR 4350 WILSHIRE
BLVD., LOTS 78 AND 79, THE FIRST RE-
ARRANGEMENT OF PHELP'S ISLAND PARK 1ST
DIVISION, AS AMENDED, PID #19-117-34 13
0010, P&Z CASE #92-068.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.6 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT
Lori Phernetton, 1935 Shorewood Lane, came before council with
photographs of her neighbor's gravel driveway that has washed into
her driveway. She had asked the neighbor to remove the runoff, he
refused, she then called the City. The City removed it. This has
happened three times and the City had cleaned it up all three
times. She had other complaints about the neighbor. City
Attorney Curt Pearson suggested a mediation service that is
available to the public. No action was taken by Council.
1.7 APPROVAL OF 1993 DOCK FOP. MN
City Manager Ed Shukle stated that minor changes had been made and
they are:
4
Dock License Application. The last three words within
the first paragraph should read, "by March
31."
Dock Program Information. No changes
Letter to Dock License Applicant.
first paragraph to February 28,
number 3, remove "tires".
Change the date in the
1993. On page two,
Notice. A copy of the city Code Section 320 has been
added as page two of the Notice.
5. Mooring Buoy License Application. No Changes
6. Commercial Dock License Application. No Changes
Memorandum to Dock License Holder. A change within the
4th paragraph, "The area must be free of litter, debris
~ - th~ .~.~A~ which has
and aquatic vegetation ~^~ .... ~ ~ ~ A
accumulated on the shoreland.
The Parks and Open Space Commission has recommended approval on the
1993 Dock License Application.
MOTION by Smith, seconded by Jessen to approve the 1993 Dock
License Application as presented and amended. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.8 APPROVAL OF THE 1993 DOCK LOCATION MAP.
City Manager Ed Shukle stated that the map is unchanged from 1992.
The Parks and Open Space Commission recommended approval.
smith moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-154 RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH THE PARKS AND
OPEN SPACE COMMISSION AND APPROVING THE
1993 DOCK LOCATION MAP AS SUBMITTED.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.9
APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION ON PUBLIC LANDS FOR ROGER
STEPHANSON, AT 4601 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, BLOCK 1, LOT 7, DEVON,
FOR MASONRY RETAINING WALL.
Building official Jon Sutherland stated the applicant wanted to do
a minor modification to the stairway landing he constructed
according to Resolution #92-62 and build a retaining wall for this
stair landing. Parks and Open Space Commission recommended
approval providing this resolution ran concurrent with the 92-62
resolution and both expired in five years.
Jessen moved and Smith seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-155 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A CONSTRUCTION ON
PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR 5 YEARS RENEWABLE
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL
ON DEVON COMMONS ABUTTING 4601 ISLAND
VIEW DRIVE, BLOCK 1, LOT 7, DEVON, DOCK
SITE #41170.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.10 RESOLUTION TO CANVASS THE RECOUNT OF THE MAYORALRACE FROM THE
NOVEMBER 3, 1992 GENERAL ELECTION.
City Manager Ed Shukle stated that after the recount, the vote
difference remained at 19.
Jensen moved and Smith seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-156 RESOLUTION TO CANVASS THE RECOUNT OF THE
MAYORAL RACE FROM THE NOVEMBER 3, 1992
GENERAL ELECTION.
The resolution passed with a 3-0 vote, Mayor Johnson abstained.
1.11 PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION by Smith, seconded by Jessen to authorize payment of
bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of
$143,716.01, when funds are available. A roll call vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
ADD-ON
1.12 KNUTSON SERVICES
City Manager referred to an add-on item regarding Knutson Services,
Inc., the company that does the recycling in Mound and five other
cities. They are on contract until 12-31-94, however, they would
like to increase the per household charge through the end of the
contract by ten cents. No action was taken. The City Manager will
check into the legal aspect.
~OMMITTEE OF T~ WHOLE MEETINC Council consensus was to cancel the
Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for December 14, 1992.
GOAL SETTIN~ Mayor Johnson requested that goal setting be on the
first agenda in January 1993.
6
INTERVIEWS city Manager Ed Shukle reminded Council of the joint
interviews coming up for the Parks and Open Space Commission on
December 10th at 7 PM, and the EDC interviews on December 17th at
7 AM.
1.13 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. Reminder: Thanksgiving Holiday, Thursday, November 26th
and Friday, November 27th, City Hall will be closed.
Bo
Reminder: 1993 Budget Hearings are scheduled for
Wednesday, December 9, 1992 and Wednesday, December 16,
1992 at 7:30 PM, city Hall.
Reminder: Annual city of Mound Christmas Party is
scheduled for Friday, December 18, 1992, Mound American
Legion.
Letter from DNR RE:
Grant Agreement.
Extension of Shoreland Adoption
E. LMCD Mailings
F. Planning Commission Minutes of November 9, 1992
Ge
Park and Open Space Commission Minutes of November 12,
1992.
MOTION by Smith, seconded by Johnson to adjourn meeting at 11
PM. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
city Manager
Attest: City Clerk
7
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
.PLANNING REPORT SUPPLEMENT
TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: December 1, 1992
SUBJECT: Teal Pointe Development Proposal
APPLICANT: Teal Pointe Development Co. (Neil Weber)
CASE NUMBER: 92-060, 92-061, 92-062 and 92-063
HKG FILE NUMBER: 92-37j
LOCATION: Property lying immediately east of the termini of Drummond Road
and Windsor Road
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-2)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND/COMMENT: The Teal Pointe development proposal was
reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 10, 1992. Since that meeting,
the applicant has submitted modified plans in conformance with the
recommendations of the Commission and staff. The intent of this supplementary
report is to: 1) provide a brief overview of the changes that have occurred, 2) based
on the modified plan, identify all required approvals including variances, and 3)
provide a commentary on the application of proposed shoreland management
standards to the proposed project.
Plan Modification~
Most of the modifications of the plan that have occurred since the Planning
Commission meeting relate to engineering concerns. The proposal still calls for the
creation of a total of 9 lots, all with areas exceeding 10,000 square feet. The average
lot size as proposed is 12,800 square feet. The R-2 zone requires a minimum lot size
of 6,000 square feet.
Land Use / Environmental · Planning / Design
-300 Metro Boulevard/Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160
Teal Pointe Planning Report Supplement
December 1, 1992
Page 2
Windsor Road is to be extended as a public street into the property terminating in a
cul-de-sac. Windsor Road will serve lots 4 through 9. Lots 1 - 3 will be served by a
private roadway/driveway that is labeled as Outlot A. Windsor Road has a
proposed 40 foot right-of-way with a paved area of 28 feet. The proposed street will
match the existing width of Windsor Road. The private driveway on Outlot A will
have a width of 22 feet which matches the existing width of Drummond Road.
Since the plan was presented to the Planning Commission, the developer has also
added catch basins and storm sewer along Windsor Road. The City Engineer will
present a complete overview of all of the engineering related changes at the City
Council meeting.
Required Approvals
As proposed, the development plans for Teal Pointe will require the following
approvals from the City Council.
Approval of a conditional use permit to establish Teal Pointe as a
Planned Development Area. The conditional use permit should also
address the issue of establishing Outlot A as a private street. Section
330:95 Subd. 1 states, "Private streets shall not be permitted nor shall
public improvements be approved for any new private street unless
approved by the City Council as part of a conditional use permit for an
overall development plan."
Approval of the preliminary plat for Teal Pointe. This approval
should include the following variances:
Ao
Street frontage variances for Lots 1 - 3. They will front on a
private street rather than on an improved public street.
Bo
Cul-de-sac length for Windsor Road. The Subdivision
Ordinance limits cul-de-sacs to 500 feet in length. As proposed,
Windsor Road will have a total length of approximately 720 feet.
Co
A variance for the right-of-way widths for Windsor Road
including the cul-de-sac bubble. The plan calls for a ROW width
of 40 feet instead of the required 50 feet and a cul-de-sac bubble
radius of 40 feet in lieu of the required 50 feet.
Teal Pointe Planning Report Supplement
December 1, 1992
Page 3
Do
A variance on the paved area of the cul-de-sac bubble. The plan
calls for a paved area with a 35 foot radius compared to the
normal 40 foot standard paved radius.
o
Approval of the vacation of Cobden Lane. The developer has
requested vacation of the east half of Cobden Lane. The City Engineer
has suggested that if a vacation occurs, it should include all of Cobden
Lane.
Application of Shoreland Standard~
The City of Mound is in the process of adopting a new Shoreland Management
Ordinance. It is anticipated that the new ordinance will be in effect in late January
or early February of 1993. When the Planning Commission reviewed Teal Pointe,
they specifically requested that staff examine the proposed ordinance and provide
comments to the City Council on how its provisions impact the proposed
development plan.
The Planning Commission also asked staff if the new ordinance could be applied to
the proposed plan, even though it is yet to be formally adopted. Staff responded that
in issuing a conditional use permit, the City of Mound is free to impose any and all
restrictions or conditions that are deemed reasonable. This could included the
application of the proposed shoreland provisions if the City Council thought that
such conditions are warranted.
Concerns expressed by the Planning Commission focused on three areas of the
Shoreland Management Ordinance, bluffs, density and impervious cover. The
following addresses each of these concerns:
Bluffs
The proposed $horeland Management Ordinance prohibits development in areas
that are classified as bluffs (>30% slope). Furthermore, the ordinance requires a 30
foot setback from the top of a bluff for all structures. Lots 1, 2, and 3 contain slope
areas exceeding 30% with a maximum slope approaching 45% on portions of Lot 1.
Virtually all of Lots 1, 2, and 3 would be unbuildable if the shoreland provisions
were applied.
So 7
Teal Pointe Planning Report Supplement
December 1, 1992
Page 4
Density
The Planned Development Area (PDA) provisions of the Shoreland Management
Ordinance exempt bluff areas and land lying below the ordinary high water contour
from the total land area used for overall density calculations. This has the effect of
lowering the overall density of an area when these features are present. Omitting
these areas from the calculations, Teal Pointe can have a maximum of 11.5 units
under the density provisions of the Shoreland Management Ordinance. The
proposed plan is well within this density since it calls for a total of 9 lots, three of
which are in bluff areas.
Impervious Cover
Calculation of impervious cover is the subject of specific site plan proposals for
individual lots. Until such time as detailed plans are received, it is impossible to
calculate the amount of impervious cover. Upon adoption of the Shoreland
Management Ordinance, all vacant lots within Teal Pointe will be limited to 30%
impervious cover.
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 12, 1992
PARK DEDICATION DETERMINATION FOR PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
"TEAL POINTE."
The Park Director reported that an application for a preliminary
plat has been received for a development to be named Teal Pointe.
The Park and Open Space Commission needs to make a recommendation
for park dedication requirements for this development.
The City Planner's report explains that the proposed plat shows
Outlots A & B which are proposed to be owned by a homeowners
association and contain the streets and shall not be considered for
park dedication. It has been recommended that the surrounding
wetlands area be designated as Outlot C. The developer intends to
convey Outlot C to the City of Mound. The City Planner also
recommended that Outlot C not be counted as a credit against park
dedication.
Park dedication requirements are identified in City Code Section
330:120. Land dedication of 10% is required, or at the option of
the City, the developer shall contribute a "a minimum of ten
percent (10%) of the total fair market value of the land being
divided. In no case shall the dedication in cash be less than $500
for each lot being created.,,
It is staff,s recommendation that the park dedication requirement
be $500 for each of the proposed 9 single family lots to be created
for a total of $4,500. The balance in the park dedication fund is
approximately $15,700.
The Commission questioned if it was the intent of the developer to
convey the wetlands area (Outlot C) in lieu of a park dedication
fee. Mueller questioned if Outlot C was retained for park
dedication if the City as a whole would benefit from the wetlands.
It was questioned if the DNR will actually control the wetlands.
The Parks Director also suggested that it would be beneficial for
the City to retain an access to the proposed Outlot C.
MOTION made by Asleson, seconded by Anderson to recommend
to the City Council that $500 per lot be obtained for
Park Dedication for the Teal Pointe development. Motion
carried unanimously.
This item will be reviewed by the City Council on December 8, 1992.
MINUTES OF A MEET~G OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 1992
CASE ~92-060f 061, 062, & 063: NElL WEBER FOR TEAL POINTR
DEVELOPMENT CO., WHIPPLE IN BLOCKS 10, 11, 15 & 16, PID'S 25-117-24
12 0225~ OllSt 0119m & 0120. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT AREA, STREET VHCATIONS, AND VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING.
City Planner's Report.
The City Planner reviewed his report on the proposed development to
be named Teal Pointe. This single family development will create
a total of 9 lots, 6 lots off of an extension of Windsor Road and
3 lots off the end of Drummond Road.
In order to develop the subdivision as proposed, a number of
approvals are being required, they include approval of a
Conditional Use permit to allow the subdivision to be processed as
a Planned Development Area (PDA), Preliminary Plat and a Street
3
Plann~n9 Comm~ss£on M[nu%es
November 9, 1992
Vacation request. The proposed plan will also require the approval
of variances from the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance in
the following areas:
Section 330:95 Subd. 1 requires that street rights-of-way must
be 50 feet in width. The proposed plan calls for streets to
be located within privately owned outlots. Outlot A is only
24 feet in width. Outlot B at its narrowest portion has a
width of approximately 34 feet.
Section 330:95 Subd. 8 limits cul-de-sacs to a total length of
500 feet and requires a cul-de-sac radius of 50 feet. The
proposed private street results in a cul-de-sac with a total
length of 830 feet and an improved surface diameter of 70
feet.
3. Section 330:95 Subd 11 states, "Private streets shall not be
permitted nor shall public improvements be approved for any
new private street unless approved by the City Council as part
of a conditional use permit for an overall development plan."
Park dedication requirements will be reviewed by the Park and Open
Space Commission on November 12, 1992.
In general, the proposed development represents a positive addition
to the City of Mound.
The City Planner recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit
to establish Teal Pointe as a Planned Development Area, approval of
the Preliminary Plat, approval of all applicable variances and
approval of the street vacation subject to the following conditions
as well as the conditions found in the City Engineer,s report dated
November 4, 1992.
The wetland area identified on the preliminary plat shall be
designated as Outlot C and shall be deeded to the City of
Mound. Dedication of the wetland area shall not be counted as
a credit against park dedication requirements as specified in
the Mound Code of Ordinances.
Approvals by the City of Mound shall be conditioned on the
applicant securing all required permits from the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District, the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources and all other applicable agencies.
All lots shall be required to observe the front, side and rear
yard structural setbacks as shown on the approved preliminary
plat.
4
Plannin9 Cossissioa Nlnutes
November 9, 1992
Park dedication requirements shall be in conformance with the
recommendations of the Mound Park Commission.
If the Planning Commission concurs with Staff's recommendations, it
is further suggested that the following finding of fact be adopted.
"The Planning Commission finds that the proposed Teal Pointe
development represents a desirable addition to the development of
the City of Mound. Due to the unique natural characteristics of
the site including steep slope areas, mature tree cover and a
significant wetland area, approval of the identified variances is
warranted and it is appropriate to approve a conditional use permit
to establish the project as a Planned Development Area."
City Enqineer's Report.
John Cameron reviewed his report on the Teal Pointe development
proposal from an engineering perspective. The City Engineer's
conclusions and recommendations are as follows: The proposed
preliminary plat is seen as a very desirable use of this vacant
property. The only major obstacle we see that needs to be worked
out is the question of private street and utilities versus public.
From a maintenance perspective, it appears that public ownership
makes more sense, because the City is already in that business.
The major problems we see are snow plowing and maintenance of the
streets and storm sewer system. It may be possible, even though we
have not seen this done, to have everything public except the
sanitary sewer. We are recommending approval of the preliminary
plat, subject to the following conditions:
Preliminary Plat:
1. Revise preliminary plat to show outlot for wetlands and
correct boundary to exclude the Drummond Road right-of-way.
Grading and Drainage:
1. Furnish documentation allowing fill to be placed on adjacent
private property.
2. Adjust slope in fill area to maximum slope of 2-1/2:1.
3. Provide housing type for lots exceeding 10% slope.
Streets:
Construct Windsor Road (Outlot B) as a public street to City
standards. If constructed as a public road, variances will be
required for right-of-way width, right-of-way cul-de-sac
Planning Comlssion Ninutes
November 9, 1992
diameter, and improved/paved portion of cul-de-sac diameter
(proposed to be 70' diameter).
Allow private driveway in Outlot A to be constructed to 22
feet wide with concrete curb and gutter.
Utilities:
Public 6" watermain.
Sanitary Sewer and lift station in Windsor Road to be public,
with design of lift station to meet City requirements. Homes
on Lots 1, 2, and 3 to be serviced by private individual lift
pumps.
3. If the street improvements in Windsor Road are public, then
all storm sewer shall also be public. More detailed plans of
the entire system to be furnished at final plat submission.
4. Review by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Street Vacation:
Recommend street vacation except for Drummond Road.
Vacate full 30 foot right-of-way, retaining 20 foot drainage
and utility easements.
3. Delay recording of street vacations until final plat is filed.
In addition, the Sewer and Water Superintendent also recommended
that the road and utilities be public not private.
A licant's resentation to Plannin Commission.
Nell Weber agreed that Outlot B, the extension of Windsor Road,
could be public. Weber stated that the proposed right-of-way width
for Outlot B is 40' which is only 10' less than what is required
for a public road, and is wider than the existing portion of
Windsor Road. He stated that there will be no problem meeting the
grade at Outlot A for snowplowing.
Weber commented that he is taking a difficult project and coming up
with a creative solution. Weber reviewed the intent of the
development and the type of houses planned to be constructed.
Planning Comlssion Ninutes
November 9, 1992
Planninq Commission Discussion.
Mueller confirmed with the City Planner that Outlots A and B cannot
be used for park dedication.
It was noted that Sinclair Road and Grove Lane cul-de-sacs also
received variances to allow a 70 degree radius.
Hanus questioned staff if they would prefer the proposed lift
stations for lots 1, 2, and 3 to be private or public. Cameron
commented that it would be better for the City if they were private
and then have one force main line under Outlot A. Greg Skinner
noted that there are approximately 16 private lift stations in the
city of Mound.
Mueller questioned if lot 3 would still meet the zoning
requirements and be buildable if Drummond Road is not vacated as
proposed. Weber and Koegler both agreed that some lot lines will
need to be reconfigured to correct this situation.
Mueller questioned how the Shoreland Management Ordinance will
affect this application. He expressed a concern about lots 1, 2,
and 3 having bluff's and if these lots would need variances from
the Shoreland Management Ordinance to be buildable. Koegler
commented that there may be some impact as steep slopes and bluff
areas may not account for lot area.
Weber confirmed that docks are not being planned for this
development.
Chair Meyer opened the public hearing.
The following people spoke in opposition to the proposed
development: Harold Meeker, Alice Rogers, Phil Shepherd, Ron
DeVinney, Nancy Clough, Ed Peterson, Tom Albert, John Edwaard,
Harvey Berquist, and Paul Henry. Some of the comments made in the
negative are as follows:
Concerns were expressed about increased traffic and safety for
children in the area. Traffic on Tuxedo is already too fast
and too much. There is only one point of egress, Tuxedo Blvd.
It was questioned what the long term plan is for the Island.
Density should be addressed. When is it enough?
3. Increased run-off.
7
Pl&nning Com]mis$ion Ninutes
November 9, 1992
What will the development do to surrounding property owner's
taxes and value of homes?
Loss of view.
6. Negative impact on wildlife.
Mark and Julie Lilledahl both spoke in favor of the development,
commenting that the proposed development appears to be well thought
out and would be an improvement to the area. They feel this will
be the best development opportunity for this site as the property
will be developed sooner or later and nine lots are better than
twelve or more. Reuben Hartman also spoke in favor of the
development.
Neil Weber commented that he is concerned about the community and
the environment and this project should improve the wetlands. He
also noted that he had two other plans, one for 16 lots and one for
13 lots, however, he did not think they were good plans for this
property.
C_hair Meyer closed the public hearing.
The concerns relating to increased traffic were discussed by the
Commission.
Mueller commented that the Planning Commission should be able to
review the ramifications the Shoreland Management Ordinance will
have on the proposed development before it goes to the City
Council.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsaddle to table
the request until the City Planner can report how the
Shoreland Management Ordinance will affect the proposed
preliminary plat and to allow the Planning Commission the
opportunity to review the reconfiguration of lots 1, 2,
and 3. Motion carried $ to 3. Those in favor were
Jensen, Johnson, Hanus, Clapsaddle and Mueller. Meyer,
ross and Michael opposed.
Voss commented that he feels the case should be moved along and
that the City Planner could work out the kinks. Meyer and Michael
agreed that any concerns could have been made as conditions upon
approval.
Koegler informed Chair Meyer that City Code Section 330:35 Subd. 8
states, "The Planning Commission shall, within thirty (30) days of
the closing of the hearing, recommend approval, modify and
Planning Commission M~nutes
November 9, 1992
recommend approval or recommend disapproval of the preliminary plat
or waiver of platting and submit to the city Council their findings
and recommendations. Failure to act within thirty (30) days of the
closing of the hearing shall be deemed as an approval of the
preliminary plat by the Planning Commission."
Koegler will have to consult with the City Attorney to see if the
Shoreland Management Ordinance will apply to this application or
the Final Plat application.
MOTION made by Voss to consider the previous motion to
table this matter, Hanus seconded the motion. Motion
carried 5 to 3. Those in favor were: Voss, Hanus,
Jensen, Meyer and Michael. Mueller, Clapsaddle and
Johnson opposed.
It was suggested that the Planning Commission forward the
preliminary plat to the City Council with a condition that the
reconfiguration of the lot lines be reviewed by the Planning
Commission at Final Plat application.
Mueller commented that he would like the Planning Commission to
understand the impacts of the Shoreland Management Ordinance to
this application. Koegler confirmed that when a preliminary plat
is approved you then have an agreement and if the application for
Final Plat meets the requirements in the agreement the City will
approve it. Koegler stated that lots 1, 2, and 3 may be severely
impacted by the Shoreland Management Ordinance.
MOTION made by Voss to recommend approval of the
conditional use permit as recommended by staff based upon
the following findings of fact: "The Planning Commission
finds that the proposed Teal Pointe development
represents a desirable addition to the development of the
City of Mound. Due to the unique natural characteristics
of the site including steep slope areas, mature tree
cover and a significant wetland area, approval of the
identified variances is warranted and it is appropriate
to approve a conditlonal use permit to establish the
project as a Planned Development Area." Approval is
recommended subject to the concerns expressed by the City
Planner, the City Engineer, Public Works Department and
the Planning Commission. Motion seconded by Mueller for
discussion.
Mueller commented that he is in favor of the motion if it includes
all his concerns relating to the streets shown as Outlots A and B
cannot be used for park dedication, it addresses the issue of
9
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 1992
reconfiguring lots 1, 2, and 3, and it addresses the concerns about
how the Shoreland Management Ordinance applies to the development.
Concern was expressed by other commissioners that the motion was
too vague.
MOTION failed $ to 2. Those in favor were:
Mueller. Those opposed were: Meyer,
Clapsaddle, Hanus, Johnson, and Jensen.
Voss and
Michael,
MOTION made by Hanus to recommend approval of the Planned
fo_r.?a. Point as r.comm.nded by staff
~-u xno~ua~ng :ne zo~owlng conditions:
All the conditions as listed in the City Engineer and
City Planner's recommendations.
An agreement needs to be established with the property
owners of the lots adjacent to the street extension off
of Drummond Road as it was noted by the City Engineer
that fill will be required to meet the required grade for
Outlot A.
Drummond Road not be vacated.
As a result of not vacating Drummond Road, lots 1, 2, and
3 will need to be reconfigured.
Due to the steep slopes and bluffs on lots l, 2, and 3,
it should be verified that these lots as proposed will be
buildable.
Delay recording of street vacations until final plat is
filed·
The concerns expressed by the public due to traffic
issues be addressed.
The application of the Shot·land Management Ordinance be
addressed; does it apply or not?
Motion seconded by Michael. Motion carried unanimously.
This item will appear before the City Council on December 8, 1992.
10
¥0 7
CITY of MOUND
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
'2£_',,Z L!",,?~ESOTA 6~2 472
CASE NO. 92-060
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
APPROV/kL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA, PRELIMINARY PLAT,
STREET VACATIONSv ~ STREET DESIGN VARIANCES
FOR "TEAL POINTE"
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 8, 1992 to consider the
approval of a Planned Development Area, a Preliminary Plat, Street
Vacations, and Street Frontage Variances for the proposed plat
named "Teal Pointe." The proposal is to subdivide the subject land
into nine single family lots. The subject lands are in Blocks 10,
11, 15, & 16, Whipple, as shown on the map below:
: ~5~ ' "' ' ' " ' ' ' ~'' i il..:,;'.,,..,'~'~.,~ ~.
~ ~ 0 ' ~, , ...;-:.-5-~-'.-. 'i 'PL.' 4
..,,,.,~, ......... .,,.,,,... .,, ,.., ,. . ..
~,,,. . -.,.,~.. . ~ ..~ ......... ....... ....,.. .-,}~.~. .
All persons appearing at said hearing ~ith refference to the above
~111 be g[ven the opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
Francene C. Clark, city Clerk
Publish in "The Laker" 11-16-92 and 11-23-92, and mailed to
property owners within 350' by 11-25-92.
Om
J ~
~111 ...... 'i ~: '
i~I ~h,til~ I.-Ih
IJJt~.lh~,ji;!!l!~!.
J!lili;l~lJ$1.,''lllj:
i,.t!h~.l,.I
· 1~ · .J'-J.I.J~i'~.:
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
t"4H
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: November 4, 1992
SUBJECT: Teal Pointe Development Proposal
APPLICANT: Teal Pointe Development Co. (Neil Weber)
CASE NUMBERS: 92-060, 92-061, 92-062 and 92-063
HKG FILE NUMBER: 92-37j
LOCATION: Property lying immediately east of the termini of Drummond Road
and Windsor Road
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-2)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
OTHER RELATED REPORTS: City Engineer's report prepared under separate cover.
BACKGROUND: Teal Pointe is a proposed residential development located east of
the existing termini of Windsor Road and Drummond Road. The site consists of a
total of 4.83 acres. The property forms a peninsula that is surrounded on the east
side by extensive wetlands. The center of the peninsula is approximately 35 feet
lower than the elevation of the existing homes and streets to the west. The site
contains scattered mature tree cover that occurs principally around the perimeter of
the peninsula area. The low areas surrounding the site are designated as wetlands
by both the DNR and the City of Mound.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN: The Teal Pointe plans call for the division of
the property into a total of 9 lots, 6 off of a newly constructed cul-de-sac which is an
extension of Windsor Road and 3 lots off of a newly constructed dead end street at
the end of Drummond Road. The lots range in size from 10,000 square feet to 15,500
square feet. The minimum lot size requirement in the R-2 district is 6,000 square
feet.
Land Use/Environmental · Planning / Design
7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 ' (612) 835-9960 ' Fax: (612) 835-3160
5'Io,o
Teal Pointe Planning Report
November 4, 1992
Page 2
The street system serving all of the lots is proposed as a private extension of existing
public streets. Windsor Road will be extended a total of approximately 365 feet
terminating in a 70 foot diameter cul-de-sac. The width of the Windsor Road
extension will be 28 feet which will match the existing roadway width. A new
north/south private street is proposed at the current terminus of Drummond Road.
This new street extends northward approximately 80 feet and has a total width of 22
feet which matches the width of the existing pavement on Drummond.
In addition to the residential lots that are shown on the plan, the plat proposes to
create three outlots. Outlots ^ and B which will be owned by a homeowners
association contain the two private streets that are identified above. Outlot C which
is not identified on the proposed plan consists of the wetlands that surround the
developable portion of the property. The developer intends to convey Outlot C to
the City of Mound.
In order to develop the subdivision as proposed, a number of approvals are being
requested. They include approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the
subdivision to be processed as a Planned Development Area (PDA), preliminary plat
approval and a street vacation request. Variances will also be needed pertaining to
cul-de-sac diameter, right-of-way width, cul-de-sac length and for dimensional
aspects of one of the proposed lots.
Conditional Use Permit
Section 23.412 of the Mound Code of Ordinances allows properties to be developed
as Planned Development Areas subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
The project qualifies as a PDA since its total land area and density fall within the
ordinance thresholds. Teal Pointe is being processed as a PDA in order to provide
design flexibility to accommodate the private streets and the proposed lot
arrangement. Planned Development Areas are required to comply with all Mound
codes and ordinances or seek variances as necessary. Variances involved in this
request are discussed later in this report.
Preliminary Plat Approval
Teal Pointe is classified as a major subdivision. The preliminary plat drawing
identifies the lot arrangement and outlots that were referenced previously in this
report. One lot will require the issuance of a variance. Lot 1 has insufficient
frontage on the proposed street. The lot has a total of 24 feet of frontage in lieu of
the 40 feet required in the Zoning Code. This situation results in a 16 foot variance.
Preliminary plats for PDA's are required to meet the zoning and subdivision criteria
for streets and utilities. The proposed plan will require variances from the
requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance in the following areas:
Teal Pointe Planning Report
November 4, 1992
Page 3
Section 330:95 Subd. 1 requires that street rights-of-way must be 50 feet
in width. The proposed plan calls for streets to be located within
privately owned outlots. Outlot A is only 24 feet in width. Outlot B at
its narrowest portion has a width of approximately ~34 feet.
Section 330:95 Subd. 8 limits cul-de-sacs to a total length of 500 feet and
requires a cul-de-sac radius of 50 feet. The proposed private street
results in a cul-de-sac with a total length of 830 feet and an improved
surface diameter of 70 feet.
Section 330:95 Subd. 11 states, "Private streets shall not be permitted
nor shall public improvements be approved for any new private street
unless approved by the City Council as part of a conditional use permit
for an overall development plan."
Street Vacation
Implementation of the proposed plan requires the vacation of portions of the
existing right-of-way of Windsor Road and Cobden Lane. Vacated land is to be
incorporated into the residential lots as shown on the preliminary plat drawing.
The street vacation request is addressed in the City Engineer's report.
Park Dedication
The Mound Code of Ordinances requires park dedication for lots created through
the subdivision of land. Park dedication requirements are identified in Section
330:120 of the Mound Code of Ordinances. For major subdivisions, a land
dedication of 10% is required or at the option of the City, the developer shall
contribute a "minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total fair market value of the
land being divided. In no case shall the dedication in cash be less than $500 for each
lot being created." The Mound Park Commission will consider the park dedication
requirements for this development at its meeting on November 12, 1992.
COMMENT: Teal Pointe is being proposed as a small development of single family
homes that to a certain degree, will be a neighborhood within a neighborhood. All
of the homes are to be of similar design helping to create a theme for the overall
development. The developer is attempting to preserve the natural amenities such
as the existing tree cover and the surrounding wetland area through the location of
lots and the establishment of an outlot for the wetland that will be deeded to the
City of Mound.
This proposal creates a number of planning and engineering issues that need to be
addressed by the City. The recommendations contained within this report focus on
planning issues. Grading, drainage, utility and street issues are addressed in the City
Engineer's report.
Teal Pointe Planning Report
November 4, 1992
Page 4
In general, the proposed development represents a positive addition to the City of
Mo. und. Processing the proposed development as a PDA is appropriate given the
umque topography and natural characteristics of the site and the desire to preserve
these resources.
Major issues resulting from the proposed plan involve a collection of "detail" items,
virtually all of which are engineering oriented. For example, the issue of private
versus public streets as well as the ownership and operation of utilities is a
significant issue. This issue is thoroughly addressed in the City Engineer's report.
Furthermore, the report offers specific recommendations on the preliminary plat,
grading and drainage issues, street characteristics, utilities and the proposed street
vacation. The recommendations offered by the City Engineer are not duplicated
herein.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit to
establish Teal Pointe as a Planned Development Area, approval of the preliminary
plat, approval of all applicable variances and approval of the street vacation subject
to the following conditions as well as the conditions found in the City Engineer's
report dated November 4, 1992.
The wetland area identified on the preliminary plat shall be designated
as Outlot C and shall be deeded to the City of Mound. Dedication of the
wetland area shall not be counted as a credit against park dedication
requirements as specified in the Mound Code of Ordinances.
o
Approvals by the City of Mound shall be conditioned on the applicant
securing all required permits from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and all other
applicable agencies.
°
All lots shall be required to observe the front, side and rear yard
structural setbacks as shown on the approved preliminary plat.
o
Park dedication requirements shall be in conformance with the
recommendations of the Mound Park Commission.
If the Planning Commission concurs with the Staff recommendations, it is further
suggested that the following finding of fact be adopted. "The Planning Commission
finds that the proposed Teal Pointe development represents a desirable addition to
the development of the City of Mound. Due to the unique natural characteristics of
the site including steep slope areas, mature tree cover and a significant wetland area,
approval of the identified variances is warranted and it is appropriate to approve a
conditional use permit to establish the project as a Planned Development Area."
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
November 4, 1992
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Eng,neers
Planners
Surveyors
Mr. Jon Sutherland
Planning and Zoning
City of Nound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT:
City of Mound, Minnesota
Teal Pointe
Preliminary Plat
Case #92-060, 061, 062, 063
MFRA #7469
Dear Jon:
As requested, we have reviewed the subject preliminary plat, including
related conditional use, variance and street vacation requests, and have the
following comments and recommendations:
Preliminary Plat
Wetlands - there is a large area shown on the plat below the Ordinary
High Water (0HW) elevation of 929.4 which is not identified for future
ownership. We understand that it is the Developer's intention to
dedicate this area to the City which, if the case, it should be
platted as an outlot.
The plat boundary shown on the centerline of Drummond Road needs to be
relocated to the north right-of-way line, because this street cannot
be vacated. Refer to additional comments under Street Vacation.
Drainage and utility easements should be required along all lot
lines. A larger easement will be needed for the storm sewer and
detention pond.
Grading and Drainage
The proposed grading shows some filling of private property (Lots 1
and 2, Block 17, Whipple) not included in the plat. Some type of
easement or agreement will be required.
The proposed slope on 0utlot B at approximately Station 1+25, is too
steep (2:1). The maximum allowed is 2-1/2:1, with 3:1 preferred,
which allows for easier maintenance.
Sections 330:40, Subdivision 4F requires that the preliminary plat
show the type of housing unit to be placed on lots that exceed ten
(10) percent slopes. This requirement will definitely affect Lots 1
through 4 and could include Lots 5, 8 and 9.
An Equal Opportumty Employer
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 4, 1992
Page Two
Streets
The application is for private streets to serve both the three (3)
lots off Dm,mmond Road and the six (6) lots at the end of Windsor
Road. Section 330:100, Subdivision 11 states that the private streets
be approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit required by a
Planned Development Area (PDA). The City's design standards require a
50-foot right-of-way with a 28-foot wide street, measured from back of
~curb to back of curb. 0utlot A, which is set aside for the private
street from Dm,mmond Road, is shown at 24 feet wide, which would only
accommodate a street of 22 feet. Dm~mmond Road in this area was
constructed by the City in 1979 to a width of 22 feet, due to
topography limitations and lack of sufficient right-of-way and/or
construction easements.
The extension of Windsor Road is also proposed to be private. This
construction would meet the City's standard for a 28' street, except
for the diameter of the proposed cul-de-sac. City standards require
100-foot diameter right-of-way, with 80 feet improved. The proposal
is for a 70-foot diameter cul-de-sac, which will require a variance.
Public Works will need to further address the question of private
streets versus public. I do not see an appropriate dividing line
between the two, especially on Windsor Road. The developer has stated
that they (the Homeowners' Association) would furnish an area for snow
storage, but the City still needs some way to turn their plows around
on an 8% grade, without going all the way into the cul-de-sac. It
appears to me that a public street for the extension of Windsor Road
would be much better for both the future residents and the City.
Utilities
Watermain - proposed to be a public main as required by staff.
Minimum size allowed will be 6".
Sanitary Sewer - the plat documents propose a private sanitary sewer
system. The three homes on Lots 1, 2 and 3 at the end of Dr~mmond
Road would each have a private lift station, with the forcemains
connected together allowing one discharge into the City's sanitary
sewer system.
The remaining six (6) lots would be served by one lift station with a
forcemain extended approximately 230 feet westerly to the only
available City manhole. Most of this private forcemain would be
located under a public road in public right-of-way. Public Works will
further comment on the proposal for private sewer.
WloS
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 4, 1992
Page /l~ree
Storm Sewer - more detailed plans and stormwater calculations will be
required at the time of final plat submission. As stated
Weber's letter of October 30, catchbasins will collect the street
runoff and then discharge to a detention/sedimentation pond. Final
plans for this system will need approval of the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District.
If the extension of Windsor Road ends up to be a private road, then
this storm sewer system would also be private. This brings up the
question of maintenance of the system. The City is already equipped
to clean and maintain catchbasins and sumps, whereas the Homeowner's
Association would have to contract this out. We are concerned that,
if this system is not properly maintained, the detention pond could
silt in and become disfunctional.
Street Vacation
The proposed vacation of a portion of Drummond Road as shown on the
preliminary plat documents should not be included, because it would
result in reducing the right-of-way in front of Lots 1 and 2, Block 14
tO 15 feet. This proposed vacation was not included in the
descriptions accompanying the vacation application, but did show up on
the preliminary plat.
The remaining proposed street vacations ask for only half the street
to be vacated, leaving 15 feet which would serve no purpose to the
City. I would recommend that the entire 30-foot width be vacated,
with the City retaining a 20-foot drainage and utility easement
centered on the vacated right-of-way.
The vacation of Cobden Lane directly at the end of Windsor Road will
be contingent on whether the extension of Windsor Road is dedicated as
a public road or kept private.
The resolution vacating said streets should not be recorded until the
final plat is ready to be filed. This way, the City would not loose
dedicated right-of-way should the project not proceed.
Conclusions and Recommendations
We see this proposed preliminary plat as a very desirable use of this
vacant property. The only major obstacle we see that needs to be worked out is
the question of private street and utilities versus public. From a maintenance
perspective, it appears that public ownership makes more sense, because the
City is already in that business. The major problems we see are snow plowing
and maintenance of the streets and storm sewer system. It may be possible,
even though we have not seen this done, to have everything public except the
sanitary sewer. We are recommending approval of the preliminary plat, subject
to the following conditions:
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 4, 1992
Page Four
Preliminary Plat
Revise preliminary plat to show outlot for wetlands and correct
boundary to exclude the D~,mmond Road right-of-way.
Grading and Drainage
Furnish documentation allowing fill to be placed on adjacent
private property.
2. Adjust slope in fill area to maximum slope of 2-1/2:1.
Provide housing type for lots exceeding 10% slope.
Streets
Construct Windsor Road as a public street to City standards,
except for the cul-de-sac which could be reduced by variance to
70 feet diameter. Variances would also be required if the
right-of-way is less then required by code.
o
Allow private driveway in Outlot A to be constructed to 22 feet
wide with concrete curb and gutter.
Utilities
1. Public 6" watermain.
Sanitary sewer and lift station in Windsor Road to be private.
Homes on Lots 1, 2 and 3 to be serviced by private individual
lift pumps.
If the street improvements in Windsor Road are public, then all
the storm sewer would also be public. More detailed plans of the
entire system to be furnished at final plat submission.
Review by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Street Vacation
1. Recommend street vacation except for Dr,,mmond Road.
e
Vacate full 30-foot right-of-way, retaining 20 foot drainage and
utility easements.
Delay recording of street vacations until final plat is filed.
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 4, 1992
Page Five
US.
JC:~mk
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
8-10
CITY of MOUND
November 5, 1992
To:
From:
Subject:
Planning Commission
Oreg Skinner & Geno Hoff
Public Works
Teal Pointe Addition
We have reviewed the plans and written narrative from
Hr. Nell Weber on Teal Pointe and have listed our concerns
below.
PRIVATE ROAD
When we first reviewed the plans we noticed that if this
was going to be a private road the City snow plow was going
to have a problem dumping the snow at the end of the City
Street. This was brought to Hr. Webers attention and is now
making arrangements for an easement at the end of the City
Street to dump the snow. This creates a couple of new
problems. 1) The easement area that is proposed is on an 8%
grade that will cause problems backing up and turning around.
STORM SEWER AND DRAINAGE
Windsor Road is 350' long by 30' wide with 300' of the
road draining to the east. Runoff from the street, right-away
, and private property will all be headed for a private road.
Our concern is what will happen if they do not maintain and
keep the catch basins open at the end of private street. What
happens when there is a problem with the storm sewer such as
a plugged catch basin or a sump basin fills up and the water
spills over the curb onto private property. With this being a
private road we feel the Home Owner's Association will take
one look up the hill and say half the debris and water is
coming form the City Street and will want help maintaining
the storm sewer and will also want the City to pay for Half
the damages.
WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINES
With Mr. Weber requesting that the road be private the City
will need easements for the following. 1) The 6" watermain
(approximately 260') 2) Easement for the 6 water services
that run to each lot, lots 6,7,8 & possibly lot 9 would be
tapped in the cul-de-sac. This would mean just about all of
the cul-de-sac would have easements for the water services
and the 6" watermain. 3) The City would also need an easement
(approximately 60') for part of the 6" main that runs east of
the Cobden Rd. 4) Easements will be required for lots 4 & 5
for water services.
SEWER LINES AND LIFT STATIONS
In Mr. Weber narrative he states that a private sewer system
is important to the success of the project. I fail to see
this as a make or break situation for this project.
Maintaining a private sewer system of this size requires
considerable amount of time and expense. 1) The cost of
equipment to clean and unplug sewer line. I would doubt that
the home owners Association would have this equipment.
Therefore they would have to hire out for this. 2) The
operation and maintenance for the lift station will require
that there be a person with a Class S-D certificate from the
Mn. Pollution Control Agency. 3) Cost to operate the lift
station should be based on a yearly flow of 900,000 gallons
of sewage. 4) A sewer flow meter will be needed to track
flows, this will allow the City of determine if any
inflow/infiltration exists. 5) Provisions for standby power
for pumping during power outages. This requires a generator
with receptacle on lift station or a pumping company with
pump truck. I would suggest a check valve on each service.
It is Public Works recommendation that the Road and Utilites
be public not private.
(9/8/92)
Application for
_MA. IOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, M~ 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
OCT
Planning Commission Date:~_~__-~
City Council Date: ~
Site Visit Scheduled:
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Copy to City Planner:~
Copy to Public Works:~~
Copy to City Engineer:~
Other:
Case No.
qz-o ,O
Sketch Plan Review:
---2-~Preliminary Plat:
Final Plat:
---~Escrow Deposit:.
$150.00
$150.00
$100.00
S1,000.00
Deficient Unit Charges?
Delinquent Taxes?
VARIANCE REQUIRED?
Please type or print the following information:
Owner'sName ~ ~~ ~_~~ ~, Day Phone~]
Appl~cant'., N~e (~f other khan,owner) ~ W~
Ad2~s'~ Day Phone
N~ of Surveyor: Day Phone
N~e of Engineer: '1 "C~ ~~) Day Phone
EXISTING LEG~ DESCRIPTION:
Additio~
Zoning District
PROPOSEDPLATNAME
PID No.
Use of Property:
Block
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other
zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ~ no. If yes, list date(s) of application,
action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
This application must be signed by 911 owners of the s~bject property, or an explanation
Signature o~ ' O;~n6r
Signature-of Owner
Date
Date
NElL WEBER
AR C HIT E C T/PLANNER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA
Site Area Tabulation
SITE ANALYSIS
2.
3.
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Site Location Map
Water Run-Off
Slope Analysis/Wind Currents
Vegetation Coverage
Spacial Analysis
Existing Conditions
Climate
Climate
Sketch Plan (Mound approved July 6, 1992)
Preliminary Plat
Road Profile
-1-
A. INTRODUCTION
This application is a continuation of a process that was started in
December of 1984. The concepts presented are simply a continuation of what
was developed at that time.
We have revised the plans to balance the lot sizes and provide the
flexibility to more fully protect the uniqueness and beauty of the site.
We have met with Mound Staff and Consultants a number of times to
insure that we meet or exceed the standards expected by the city.
We have also meet with gas, telephone and electric representatives
to make sure that all utilities can and will be installed underground.
The access drive further allows us to preserve the uniqueness of
the site. Again this has not changed since the city supported the concept
in 1984. The streets have been vacated which was the first step in
allowing the development to proceed with the concept as presented.
This is in fact a similar approach to what Jonathan has used in its
development in the City of Chaska.
The following list illustrates the actions that the city has already taken
to insure that this project be completed.
Support of Development Concept
The site concept which divided the site into 9 lots witha
street access system was present and supported in 1984.
A. Mound Planning Commission support 12/10/84
B. Mound Council support 12/26/84
Street Vacation
Because the concept was supported the vaction of streets
between the properties was completed.
A. Mound Planning Commission support 4/8/85
B. Mound Council support 5/14/85
Conveyance of Tax Forfeit Property
Because of the support of the development concept the city
supported the conveyance of tax forfeit property to make the
project more complete and of better quality.
A. Mound Council approval 6/11/85
Approval of New Development Concept Plan
A. Mound Planning Commission Sketch Plan Approval 7/8/91
-2-
WRITTEN STATMENT OF PROJECT
The Teal Pointe Development Co. is pleased to present for your approval, a
plan for the development of single family homes on the property located at
the end of Windsor and Drummond Roads in Mound.
We have analyzed the site according to environmental and physical
conditions that are illustrated in the following diagrams. We feel that it
is important to maintain the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Therefore, we are proposing to subdivide the land into nine single family
lots.
We feel it is important that these sites be developed as a unified Whole
rather than individual sites with homes of rather questionable design
character. The intent, therefore, is to have a development of nine homes
all designed by one person, being built to give a feeling of oneness. I
feel this is.a very important characteristic which should be encouraged.
It will be a unified community which will add to the value of the neighborhood.
The area is currently zoned R2 and there is no intention to change that
zoning. Again, I want to emphasize that we are developing single family
homes. The plan calls for nine lots to be developed on the property. If
you count the area above the 929.5 elevation, it is important to note that
each lot would average over 10,000 square feet. It is important for the
protection of each of the individual lot owners as well as to the
surrounding area that these areas be protected now and in the future.
I can not emphasize enough the characteristics that I feel developments
like this can be shown to be a real plus to the neighborhood by careful
and thoughtful design work.
The homes in this area would probably range in the $150,000 to $200,000
price range as a base price. I feel that this is an appropriate value for
homes in this area because of the uniqueness of the site and the beauty of
the surrounding Lake Minnetonka area. The lots will not be sold to
seperate builders but rather will be developed by one entity to insure to
total quality of design. Ail the home will be designed by
Neil Weber, Architect to further insure the total "community" feel of
this development. We would like to make this a project by which others
could be measured.
SITE TABULATION
Total Lane Area of Existing Site 210,396 Square feet 4.83 A.
LOT SITE
1. 11,000 SF
2. 10,000 SF
3. 10,300 SF
4. 14,300 SF
5. 12,700 SF
6. 15,500 SF
7. 10,100 SF
8. 15,200 SF
9. 15,100 SF
OUTLOT A
OUTLOT B
TOTAL PROJECT AREA
1,900 SF
22,100 SF
114,200 square feel Total Lot Area
(12,688 square feet Average)
AREA DEDICATED TO CITY OF MOUND
Note:
138,200 SF (3.17 acres)
72,196 Square Feet (1.65 acres)
This is a 34% dedication of land of the original property area.
C. SITE ANALYSIS
Critical in the production of a plan is a careful site analysis. We have
found over a period of time that this site analysis can be done in two
different ways. First, one may search rather aimlessly, forgetting the use
to which the area is to be put, looking only at' the site itself, and
watching for interesting features and revealing clues. This type of
unsystematic, almost subconscious, reconnaissance often produces
information or connections that would otherwise be missed. It is usually
natural evolution, its former use and associations. Must of the flavor and
structure of a place, as well as the present direction of change, is
thereby revealed.
Second, a more systematic survey can be undertake, guided by the purposes
to be served. Each piece of ground should now be tested for the
suitability for that purpose. Since the data that could be gathered is
later influence the design in some significant way. Some types of
information are almost always required, such as the topography, climatic
data, and the survey of land use and circulation. The following categories
illustrate this survey and the information gathered by it.
Once the information is assembled, it can be put into a concise, usable
form. It will then be brought to a final point -- a graphic and written
statement describing the essential nature of the site for the purpose at
hand. The principal problems raised by the location are set down, as well
as the basic potentialities and values.
This is the basis on which the design is developed. Site analysis is not a
self-contained step that must be completed before the design begins. First
thoughts on design accompany and guide the original reconnaissance, and
analysis continues as long as the design is being created.
The image of the site guides the design. It does not dictate the design,
nor will there by any unique best solution mystically latent in the site,
waiting to be uncovered. The plan develops from the creative effort of the
designer, but is must respond to the site and not disregard it.
We are looking for the best possible use of this site in regard to
developing single family homes. The following characteristics help
influence our plan, and will result in a site plan that is conducive to
what the people of Mound would accept and view as a good development for
their community.
1. Site Location Map
The Site Location Map indicates where the particular site is located within
Mound. The site is located in the central portion of the western end of
Lake Minnetonka, basically in the heart of the western lakes area.
The site is located in a R2 zoning area where many of the lots are at.the
minimum 6,000 square feet per dwelling unit. A couple of blocks away a
commercial use A1 and Alma's Restaurant is located. The site is basically
located at the dead ends of Drummond Road and Windsor Road. The site is
surrounded on three sides by a deep wetlands area which is connected to
Lake Minnetonka, Phelps Bay, by a channel and can be navigated by boat.
The site is isolated from traffic because of these conditions. The site is
surrounded by homes that range in value from $75,000 to $200,000.
A short distance to the south are homes that approach the $250,000 ~alue.
2. Water Run-Off
The site is quite varied in its topography and the water run-off patterns
are quite distinct on the property. While the property is lower t~han the
surrounding street areas, it is still significantly higher than the wetland
areas that surround it. Drawing 2 indicates the direction of the run-off.
The design of the sub-division should reflect the fact that run-off
patterns will not be changed under the new plan and, if fact, should not be
altered. In some cases the speed of the run-off should be slowed down
through various landscaping means.
There has been no attempt to control the run-off conditions in the past in
this area, resulting in some damage to the slough area. It is, therefore,
intended that the current problems be reduced in the future. We have
discussed this with Mound Staff.
3. Slope Analysis/Wind Current
Slopes help to find spacial relationships within the site. More intense
slopes have to be dealt with in different ways than shallow slopes. Slopes
determine whether the units will be walk-out or flat. The existing
topography is important to understand because any development that we would
propose would be done within the intention of minimizing the amount of
earth that needs to be moved. In so doing, the impact on the site would be
reduced. There are some areas that are quite flat and others that are
quite steep. Diagram 3 indicates the slopes that exist on the site, as
well as the direction of the summer and winter winds. One advantage with
the winter winds is that most of the site is protected on the northwest
corner by higher ground, and most df the winter winds would go over the
site helping to protect and insulate the site. The southeast summer winds
would have more of an access to the site because of it coming up across the
water, which is of course, lower than the site.
-6-
4. Vegetation Coverage
Most of the vegetation on the site exists around the edges. The site has
been cleared of most of the dead and dying trees. There are no elms left
on the site. In addition to the removal of the dead trees, a number of
trees have been thinned out to help stregthen the growth of the existing
trees. The center of the site has only a few ~ajor trees located as
illustrated on Drawing 4.
The basic type of vegetation on the site includes read oaks, sugar maple,
lindens, birch, some pin oak and a lot of ingleboom ivy. It is the intent
of the proposed development to retain as much as possible of the existing
vegetation and tree growth. This is one of the great assets of the site
and there is no intention to remove any of the trees that are not
absolutely necessary for the benefit of the whole site.
A final location of dwelling units on this site will be determined by the
careful analysis of the existing tree locations. The drip line of existing
trees must be treated carefully to assure the saving of each tree.
Spacial Analysis
A landscape is typically seen from a rather limited set of viewpoints. The
lines of a site from a critical fixed or moving point should be analyzed
carefully. The essentially visual criterion of this site design is that is
would exhibit a rhythmic pattern throughout the site and coherent
succession of spaces, textures, or objects in which each part relates
harmoniously to the next, but which makes a constant play of variation from
the basic them. If there is a chain of spaces they should seem to be part
of any extended whole. Thus, the early step in the site planning process
is to develop aspacial formm and analyze its visual consequences when seen
in sequence. Spaces should be seen and considered as a total pattern, not
seen as a flat plan from the air, but as a progression through space which
one moves.
Continuity develops the important transitions. The joints between the
house and ground, between the house and its corners, gateways between open
space~,a nd the upper edge of objects, these factors should be looked at
now and developed as the plan develops.
A good site plan is basically straight formward and while being highly
refined at certain critical points, it is often coarse in its overall form.
The spacial analysis is a critical tool in the development of the site
plan. Hard edges are formed where basically you can not see through with
any kind of a vista. Soft edges are edges of vegetation which create
somewhat of a visual barrier but do not totally stop any visual
penetration. The vistas are imporfant considerations when looking at
sittings of homes, sice the vista is a very critical element from a home,
especially on a site of this nature surrounded by such beauty.
-7-
6. Existing Conditions
Drawing 6 exhibits the exis%ing conditions on this site. Spot elevations
and topography give you an example of how the topography varies on this
site. Included are locations of ma3or trees and the marsh grass which
exists around the water line. The elevation 929.5, which is the normal
high water mark of Lake Mlnnetonka, is illustrated, in addition to the
'elevation of 932.5, which is the lowest elevation of that allowed for a
living floor adjacent to Lake Mlnnetonka. As stated earlier, the zoning is
R2 in the area. The site is located at the dead ends of Drummond and
Windsor Roads. Directly ad3acent homes are shown on the exhibit as well.
7 & 8. Climate
Any climate is complex and is usually variable. A site planner must be
concerned particularly with the distribution of air'temperature, relative
humidity, wind direction and force, broken down by month and season. These
are fundamental data for determining the effect of temperature in its
relationship to the comfort zone. In addition, consideration of maximum
zntensltles of rain indicate the need ~or overhead shelter'and requirements
for adequate drainage. Finally, the hours of sunshine, wind direction, and
elevation of the sun indicate measures that must be taken to invite or ward
off solar radiation.
The chart shows that the outdoor temperatures are frequently above'the
comfort zone in July and August, and most useful cooling winds are from the
southwes=. A general analysis coupled with a study of the ways in which
local buildings and the habits of life are already adjusted to climate,
furnish the first clues for the choice of arrangement on the site.
£ach individual site as indicated on the plan would be analyzed, especially
fo~ w~d direction and sun access, to take best advantage of these
condit~¢ns. Diagrams 9 through 12 are showing photographs to and from the
site Iron various points of view. Each photo is labeled and should give
you a feeling for the kind of topography, vegetation, and views that exist.
The s~te is very unique and beautiful. It is very unlike the image that is
normally given to properties on the island in Mound. ! think that the
marketing will take advantage of this and will exploit the fact that this
is a very unique site, with beautiful surroundings, and that once you are
on the site you are aware of the beautiful natural environment so unique to
Lake Minnetonka.
RECEIVED
30 October 1992
PRELIMINARy PLAT AMENDMENT OF WRITTEN NARRATIVE TO TEALE POINTE
John Cameron has asked that I clarify some points on the preliminary plat for Teal Pointe. I
have talked to Greg Skinner and~Hoff of the street and utility department.
I will itemize the issues discussed and I will be prepared to further discuss them at the planning
commission and council meetings.
~WATER LINE
The City wants and we will provide on the final plat a 20' easement (10' each side of the water
line) for the line. We will do this.
,SEWER LINF~
I understand that the City is not enthused about the private sewer fines. This concept is
important to the success of the project. I have attached a copy of the proposed lift station
which meets all state requirements for private lift stations. The home owners association
documents to be completed with the final plat will provide for proper maintenance of Se sewer
system for the life of the project.
The lower 6 lots will slope by gravity to the lift station. The single force main will then be
connected to the city system. It is a single process and relieves the city from concerns.
The upper 3 lots will provide each their own lift stations. There will be a line from each home
which will join together before entering the city's ma)tn hole. This will mean that there will be
only one connection.
PRIVATE ROAD
The private road was also always part of the concept of the project. It is extremely important
to understand that we are proposing a high quality project which is a community unto itself.
The roadway which will meet City standards will be private so that the owners may control
maintenance and the environment around the street.
The road will match the width of Windsor Road. It will have concrete curb and gutter and be
of the same profile as Windsor Road. We are asking no variance from this.
We are asking that the cul-de-sac be 70' in diameter. Staff has indicated that this dimension
has been accepted in the past by the City. We feel that it is important as an attempt to
maintain the beauty on the site. A wider width will cause more loss of vegetation and lower
the quality of the project.
TEALEPTE.OOC
The driveways from the curbs to the garages will be asphalt. The finished project will not
have dry gravel drives.
STORM WATER
Although it may not be clear on the preliminary plat, it is the intention to collect the storm
water by catch basins to holding ponds which will have skimmers. This is much more than the
City provides now at this location. The City allows mn-off without controls.
Details of the skimmer structure will be submitted to City staff prior to construction.
STREET VACATION
Staff has indicated that the vacation of Drummond at the 2 lots at the end of the road can not
be done. I underStand and agree with this.
SNOW PLOWINO
Because the road to the development is a private road, me association will maintain the
plowing of snow on the project. We have agreed and it will be shown on the final plat, that
the City have an easement to store snow plowed by the City on our outlot. We are interested
in cooperating with the City to in fact be able to improve the street service of the existing
neighbors. We will incorporate this concept in the association documents.
HOME CONSTRUCTION
As stated earlier we are talking about a high quality development where homes built will
improve the neighborhood. All homes will be built in such a way to insure that the land and
environment is protected.
I will present concepts of the homes at the planning commission and council meetings which
will show what type of homes they are to be. It will also show how construction on the
steeper dopes will be done to both help stabilize the slope and control mn-off and erosion.
The quality of this project depends on the preservation of the trees and the site. Everything we
do will be orientated toward that end.
Again, this private development is intended to take a piece of difficult but beautiful property
and develop it in such a way that Mound would be proud. It depends on the public/private
type partnership which helps both parties. We will cooperate with the City and we ask that the
City work with us.
Thank you!
ELL Bulletin #607~C
MOUNTED PUMP STATION
~N ~UM~ COMpAny
1t55 3RD STREET $. W.
~ BRIGHTON, MN 55112
PHONE (612) 636.7060
Smith & Lovel~,==
Division
Controls--Wet Well Mounted
Pump Station control panels
are NE/vIA Type 1 with all
coded wiring. Dead front design
and coded wiring increases
operator safety as well as
making service easier and
fas,t~f. A trouble-shooting test
"block is provided for fast
operation diagnosis.
Pumps--Wet Well Mounted Pump
Stations use the proven Smith &
Loveless pump design that is
recognized as the industry leader.
Pump/motor shaft is one piece,
large-diameter stainless steel.
Each pump impeller is individually
trimmed to exact design capacity
with full shrouds left for up to 25%
higher efficiency. This higher
efficiency translates directly into
lower operating costs. The exclusive
Smith & Loveless mechanical seal has
been proven in thousands of installa-
tions. Standard motors are 230-460 V,
3¢, 875, 1170 or 1760 RPM. Other
voltages and single phase are
available in lower horsepower ranges.
The Smith 8, Lo,,eless Wet Well Mounted Pump
Station has been pro~,en in o~'er 3200 installations.
Sizing--Wide range of sizes available with
horsepower range of 1.5 to 30, 4" and 6"
piping, 4n and 6" pumps, up to 1200 GPM
and 150' TDH. Models available to fit
standard 4' through 8' diameter wet wells as
well as 8'x6' and 8'x10' rectangular wet
wells.
Installation--Units weigh 3500 to 5000 lbs.
less suction piping for easy installation.
Generally, all lifting for installation can be
handled by small crane or front-end loader.
The unit is delivered ready for installation
and operation after simple piping, electrical
and displacement switch connection.
Operation--Features 100% duplex operation
with dual piping and priming systems for
full stand-by dependability. Automatic
alternation of pump each 8 hours equalizes
running time on pumps.
Maintenance--The large fiberglass hood
opens completely for easier, faster routine
maintenance and service. All station
components are positioned for easy access.
All controls are clearly labeled for operator
convenience.
Design--The Wet Well Mounted Pump
Station's Iow profile design, modern
appearance and Iow noise level allows
installation near buildings, in parks and
similar locations.
The Smith & Loveless Wet Well Mounted
Pump Station is backed by the best single
source warranty in the industry.
Vacuum Pumps--Dual vacuum
pumps and complete duplex
priming system allow the use of
higher efficiency pumps while
maintaining the complete
reliability necessary in a pump
station application. Vacuum
pumps are mounted for easy
inspection and routine
maintenance.
Check Valves-- Spring-loaded,
external-arm, non-slamming
check valves are specifically de-
signed for this application. Exter-
nal-arm design allows manual op-
eration to back-flush pump vo-
lute and intake piping. Standard
Wet Well Mounted Pump Station
has check valves immediately
below base plate for protection
against freezing. Model "S" unit
mounts check valves and pump
volutes above base plate for ap
plications where regulations
require this configuration.
Fiberglass Hood -- Specially
designed fiberglass hood provides
protection for the wet well
mounted pump station while
providing complete access for
service and maintenance. The
hood includes ventilation louvers,
opening handle, and hasp for
padlock. All hardware is
corrosion proof.
Ventilation-- Heating-- High
capacity, Iow noise level
squirrel-cage blowers are used
to dissipate heat produced by
the motors. A thermostatically
controlled electric heater is
provided for cold weather
protection. In extremely cold
weather, special hood insulation
and a larger heater can be
provided.
5"/2¥
Pure
lass
tilation
Manway
cover
cover
Discharge plug
Suction piping
(not by S&L)
STANDARD MODEL aS"
NEW VARIATIONS ON THE
PROVEN WET WELL MOUNTED
PUMP STATION DESIGN
Recessed Wel Well Mounted Pump Station -- A recessed wet well
mounted pump station is installed directly on the pre-cast reinforced
concrete wet well as shown in the drawing at the left. This creates an
easily accessable steel chamber into which the wet well mounted pump
station is installed.
A special wide-opening fiberglass lid, sealed wet well interface, sepa-
rate access to wet well and environmental system prevent build-up of
corrosive gases.
Turbo Pump Wet Well Mounted Pump Station -- The Smith & Loveless
turbo pump is designed for Iow flow, high clogging risk applications,
such as hospitals, correction institutions, mobile home parks, resorts,
and various industrial applications. Often in these types of installations
the standard 4" non-clog sewage pump is not applicable because of the
Iow flows.
The S&L turbo pump has a specially designed recessed open impeller.
Because the wastewater does not go through the impeller, the tut'
pump will pass any solid that will pass throurh the suction lines, eve
extremely Iow flows.
The S&L turbo pump has capacities of 50 GPM to 300 GPM with 4"
piping and 50 GPM to 500 GPM with 6" piping. The turbo pump
was designed specifically for the wet well mounted pump station
configuration.
OPERATION OF THE
SMITH & LOVELESS
WET WELL
MOUNTED PUMP STATION
When the wastewater level rises in the wet well sufficiently to tilt the Iow level
"on" displacement switch, the vacuum pump connected to the lead pump will ac-
tivate and prime the lead pump. When the wastewater level in the lead pump
reaches the level sensing probe, the vacuum pump shuts off and the lead pump
will immediately start. This pump will remain primed from cycle to cycl.e. If the in-
flow to the wet well is greater than the capacity of the lead pump, the wet well
level will continue to rise until the high level "on" displacement switch is tilted.
This will activate the standby vacuum system and prime the standby pump. When
priming is complete, the standby vacuum pump will shut off and the standby
pump will immediately start. The standby pump also will remain primed from
cycle to cycle. The wastewater is drawn up through the suction pipe to the cen-
trifugal pump, pumped out through the discharge pipe, check valve and plug
valve into the force main. The pumps decrease the wet well level until the pump
Iow level "off" displacement switch tilts and shuts off both pumps. The pumps
remain primed and the vacuum pump will not come on unless the liquid level has
fallen below the level sensing probe, and the Iow level "on" displacement switch
is tilted.
TESTING
Each wet well mounted pump station is rigorously tested on a
specially designed test stand before delivery to the job site.
The test stand accurately simulates design field conditions to
allow checks of impeller trim, motor and pump efficiencies,
voltage draws, all controls and auxiliary equipment. Only as
complete a testing schedule as this can assure the quality and
performance of each station delivered.
MAINTENANCE
All wet well mounted pump station components are located for fast routine main-
tenance. The full opening fiberglass hood, as well as the manway access door, are
equipped with hasps for padlocks to prevent vandalism. Wet well mounted pump sta-
tions are equipped with hoist support arm to allow fast pump/seal service and mainte-
nance. Impellers are keyed to a tapered shaft for easy removal. Seal replacement can be
lpleted in less than one hour.
SmithDivision & Loveless
Main Plant: 14040 Santa Fe Trail Lenexa, KS 66215
Printed in U.S^.
rev£eed 5/S/92
Application for
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - P, ~. ~(~. OCT I 2 1992
city of Round
5341 Ra~ood Road, Round, l~l 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
Planning Commission Date:ii
city Council D.t.,_ J - -92 ondition.l ... P.rmit ..., .oo.0o
COpy to City Planner: lieJ.20,,gZ Zon£ng Sheet Completed:
Copy to City Engineer':
Copy to Public Works:
Others
Please type or print the following lnfor~etion:
Address of Subject Property
~ [ V~ 7~,v' a~ Day Phone
LEG~ DESCRIPTION OF SUBJE~ PROPERTg:
Addition
Zoninllstrict ~' ~
PID No.
Name of Proposed Use as Listed in the Zoning Code:
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the
vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, and
describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts.
If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing
reasonable guarantees for the completion of the proposed development. Estimated Development
Cost of the Project: $
Number of Structures: ~ Number of Dwelling Unite Per Structure: ]
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: oq ft Total Lot Area: sq ft
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use Dermit, or other
zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ~ no. If yes, list date(s) of application,
action taken, resolution number(8) and provide ~oples of resolutions.
Date
APPLICATION TO VACATE
CITY OF MOUND
i341 Maywood Road
MN 55364
472-0600, fax: 472-0620
12 1992_
Case No.~J_~_~Z
Date Filed
Application Fee: $150
Applicant's Name ~ ~~ ~~~T~ ~' Day Phone 9~' ~[~
Applicant's Address 9~0 ~~ ~V~, ~./~ V~. [ ~, _~,~7
LotLegal description of property owned by applicant:~
Addition PID No.
Street or Easement to be Vacated: ~H~~D ~~'~O ~O ~
Reason for Request & interest in Property:
s there a public need for the right-of-way to be retained for a public purpose?
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith
are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the
City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law.
Applicant's Signature :/~ ~~ Datel'~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Recommendations from Utilities: NSP Minnegasco
Recommendations from City Depts.: Public Works
Engineer~ Police Chief Other
GTE
Fire Chief
RECEIVED
OCl 1 $ ~2
revised 4/2/92
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 4?2-0600, Fax: 4?2-0620
()GT 1
Planning Commission Date:-~~_~__
City Council Date:
Site Visit Scheduled:
Application Fee: $50.00
Case No · ~- 0~3
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Copy to City Planner:
Copy to Public Works: .....
~¥ to City Engineer:
Please type or print the following information:
Address of Subject Property '
Owner's Name ~ ~~ ~~~. Day Phone
Owner's Address ~0 ~~
Applicant's Name (if other than owner)
'dres~ ~,~ ~~ ~i... j Day Phone
Block
Addition -- PID No.
Zoning District ~ Use of Property:.. ~~J~
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ~) no. If
yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and
provide copies of resolutions.
1. Detailed descripton of proposed con~truc_tio]a _or alteration (si~e_, number
of stories, type of use, etc.): ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~Q ~
]30
revised 4/2/92
Variance Application
Page 2
Case No.
2. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and
setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located?
Yes ~, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe
reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.)
SETBACKS: required requested
Front Yard: ( N S E W I~?~~~_ ft. ft.
Rear Yard: ( N S E W ft[ ft.
Lake Front: ( N S E W ) ~ ft ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft.
Lot Size: sq ft sq ft
Street Frontage ft. ft.
VARIANCE
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
sq ft
ft.
Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the
zoning district in which it is located? Yes ~), No ( ). If no,
specify each non-conforming use:
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent
its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning
district?
( ) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil
( ) too small ( ) drainage ( ) existing
( ) too shallow ( ) shape (X) other: specify
Please describe: ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~
Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having
property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted
(1982)? Yes (), No ~. If yes, explain
revised 4/2/92
Variance Application
Page 3
Case No.
Se
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as
relocation of a road? Yes ~, No (). If yes, explain ~~
the
e
Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar
only to the property described in this petition? Yes ~., No (). If
no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
8. Comments:
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in
any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate.
I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application
by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of
inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be
equired by law.
A~plicant's Signature ~ ~A~
? ~Z
t& I rY
S£G. 85, T. UY, B. 84
$ \ /
Gl. OK IOUND
I
II
LAKE
5/33
,,!
I,
Z
I
f
I
I
I
o
/
0
0
I
I//
, II il/ ~
/
o o o o o
I
/ I
?
Curlcx Blankets
SHOCK ABSORPTION VEGETATION PENETRATION
The dense mat o! curlex ftber~ end v~gmer,on growing through the curlex
plastic netting arre~rs the destructive ~1~ mailing help~ anchor tl~e mat in
Now you can prevent erosion, assist
in germination and protect seedlings
with AMXCO Curlex Blankets.
Curlex Blankets combine a dense
mat of curled and seasoned Aspen
wood excelsior with a tough, photo-
degradable plastic mesh. They are
designed to halt erosion and will
remain in place on even the roughest
terrain.
Hi-Velocity Curlex Blankets are spe-
cially made for use in situations of
high-velocity water flow on slopes and
in ditches.
Curlex Blankets provide the ideal
ground conditions for fast turf de-
velopment. When properly inslalled,
they retain moisture, control sur[ace
temperature fluctuations of the soil,
conform to the terrain, protect against
sun burnout and break up rain drops
to stop erosiom
Installation is uncomplicated and
Instructions are clear so that
inexperienced labor can epply Curlex
Blankets.
Uses and Application
Curlex Excelsior Blankets are
designed to prevent erosion on:
· Steep slopes
· Berms
· Median strips
· Mine tailing sites
· Ditches
· Strip mine sites
· Ski slopes
· Dam sites
· Dikes
· Landscape proje~s or any other
"hard to hold" problem area.
~loee up vlew~ of Cudex Blanket (left) amJ HI-Velocity Curlex Blanket.
Curlex Blankets
The Excelsior Curlex Blanket ia a machine-
produced mat of curled wood excels!or el 80%
s~x-inch or longer fiber length. II ha~
tent thickness, with the fiber evenly dlstribul-
ed over the entire area of the blankel. *Fha top
side of each blanket ia covered wllh a pho-
toclegredable extruded plastic mesh. The blan-
ket is smolder-res;stent without the usa of
chemical additives.
Installation Instructions
Properly prepare, fertilize and seed area to be
covered before blanket is applied, When the
blanket is unrolled, netting should be on top
and fibers in contact with the sell over the
entire area. In ditches, apply blankets in the
direction the'water flOWS, butting them el the
ends and Sides and then slapling On slopes,
apply blankets either horizontally or verlicelly
!o slope, butt ends and sides and than staple.
It is not .necessary to gig check slots, anchor
ditches or bury ends of blankets unless called
for in design ,,pacifications.
W~mmg roadside slope tftsM;larton.
ROLL SIZE
Width .48 in. (+/- 1 in.)
Length .................. 180 ft. average
Weight Per Roll ........ 78 lbs, (+/- 10o/0)
Square Yards Per Roll .... ..... 80 average
Stapling Instructions for
AMXCO tuflex Blankets
Use wire ~taples, .091" in diameter or greater,
"bt" aha)ed with legs 6' in length and a
crown. Size and gauge of staples u~ed will
v~ry with m~il COnditions. Drive staples vtrti-
rally into the ground. U~ four staples acrOSS
mt the ~tart of each roll. Fcr slope installation,
continue to ~,'taple along the length of the roll
al 6 fl. Intervals. For dllch liner, ~taple along
the length of the roll at 4 fl, Intervals. Another
mw of staples in the center of each blanket
should be alternately spaced between each
eicle for 'either ~ m' ditch. Uae a comrnml
row of ~es on a~joining blanket~.
Hi-Velocity Curlex Blankets
I Ill
Designed to control erosion in areas of high-
velocity water runoff, Ihs Excelsior Hi-Vel.ocity
Curlex Blanket is a machine-produced mat o!
curled wood excelsior of 80% six-inch or
longer fiber length, with consistent thickness
and fiber evenly dlstrlbuled over its entire area.
Each sloe is covered with black, extra heavy-
duty extruded plastic mesh netting designed
to last for years and reinforce the root system
after the excelsior mat h~s decomposed. They
are smOlder.resistant--no chemical addltlvos.
Installation Instructions
This blanket is designed to W~thstand high-
velocity water movements In ditches and on
slopes. In ditches, unroll blanket in direction
ol water flow. When using two blankets side
by side in a ditch, do not put the seams in the
center of the ditch. Offset by 6 Inches to 1 foot.
On slopes, start blanket 3 feet over crest of
slope or dig anchor ditches if specified.
Blankets may be installed horizontally or var.
tically, whichever is easier.
HI-VELOCITY ROLL SIZE
Width ................ 48 in. (~./- 1 in.)
Length .................. ,'.. 100 fi. min.
AreaCovemge , ,400sq ft... (44 + sq. yds.)
Weight .............. 72 lbs. (+/- 7 lbs.)
HI-Veloc~y clflch liner appl~c, ation In Midwest
//
Stapling Inmtruotions for
AMXCO HI-Veloolty Curlex Blankets
Use wire staples, .091" in diameter or greater,'
'U" shaped with legs B" long or longer and
1" to2" ~own. Size a~ gauge of ~tplee used
will vary with soil types. Use four staples
across at the start of each roll and continue
to staple along the length of b~e roll at 2 ft.
tnten/als. When blankets ere plaoed along-
side each other, staple so ee to catch the
edge of each roll. In addition to stapling the
edges of the blanket et the appropriate
Intervals (~ee drawing), place staples In the
center Of the blanket halfway between the
outer staples.
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPLICATION OF MAXINE
BEISSEL FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY AT
1720 DOVE LANE
WHEREAS, Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes authorizes the City
Council, with the aid and assistance of the City Planning Commission, to
carry out municipal planning activities which guide future development and
improvement of our community, and
WHEREAS, Section 462.358, Subd. 4 (b) of the Minnesota Statutes
prohibits the filing and recording of land conveyances of less than 20 acres
without platting or unless the City Council waives the platting ordinance,
and
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has adopted a comprehensive plan,
subdivision regulations, and a zoning ordinance establishing minimum lot
sizes and minimum lot widths, and establishing standards for the division
of property, and
WHEREAS, Maxine Beissel has applied for a minor subdivision and
variance to divide lands at 1720 Dove Lane, legally described as Lots 7, 8,
and 9, Block 12, Dreamwood, and
WHEREAS, the property owner owns three lots which front on Dove
Lane which is the only public street serving the properties, and said lots
have been combined since Lots 7 and 8 do not abut a public street and require
Lot 9 to provide frontage on a public street, and
WHEREAS, a residence is currently located on Lots 8 and 9 of said
properties, and
WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to divide the property in such a
manner that a neck lot would be created with 40 feet of frontage on Commons
along the easterly side of the proposed division, and then going back and
making an "L" shaped parcel, and the result would be two lots abutting
Commons which abut Lake Minnetonka but the configuration of the lots leaves
a very skinny building area along the east side which after providing for 10
foot setbacks would leave a 20 foot building envelope, and
WHEREAS, the City Planner, Planning Commission, and City Council
are concerned that this unusual configuration does provide two lake lots
but the division design probably would require future variances to make the
property buildable, and
WHEREAS, the existing house on the property would be non-
conforming if this division were to be allowed and the proposed division
would perpetuate and create a zoning situation which is in conflict with the
intent of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462; Section 330 of the City Code; and
the Comprehensive Plan, and
WHEREAS, the purpose section of the subdivision ordinance has as a
goal "orderly growth" and that subdivisions submitted "be conceived,
designed and developed in accordance with sound rules and proper standards"
and the Planner, Planning Commission, and City Council do not believe that a
division which creates a minimum building envelope and is a "neck lot" meets
those standards, and the division leaves a lot with 20 feet of frontage on a
public street and this restricts access for fire equipment and other safety
equipment, and
WHEREAS, the proposed artificial configuration creates an
undesirable "shoe horn" effect to try and get two parcels with frontage on
public commons and creates a "stacking" of houses which is undesirable,
over-utilizes the property, and creates a situation where there are no back
yards, and
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has enacted subdivision and zoning
ordinances which prohibit the division of lands which conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1992, the City Planning Commission
conducted a hearing on the matter and the Planning Commission voted to
recommend to the City Council that the request for a division be denied
because it would establish a "bottle neck" lot in Mound and there is no
reason that this parcel could not be split directly in half to create two
parcels and comply with the intent of the zoning ordinance. This would
provide uniform street frontage and two very nice buildable parcels which
would not need variances.
Mound:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
1. The application for a minor subdivision for property
located at 1720 Dove Lane (Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 12, Dreamwood) is hereby
denied for the following reasons:
ae
The division of the property which has 20 feet of
street frontage for one parcel does not comply
with the intent of the zoning and subdivision
codes of the City of Mound.
0
The applicant has proposed a lot division which
will result in an odd, "L" shaped lot with a
minimum building envelope which would provide for
a house with a maximum width of 20 feet.
The division of the parcel into what is called a
"bottle neck lot" would establish a precedent and
other property owners could request to develop
their rear yards using the same logic, and this
division would create two parcels with no back
yards.
If this particular parcel which has a deep back
yard is developed in this manner there is no
logical reason why other parcels throughout the
City which are narrow but long would not be
divided and this would result in helter-skelter
planning and properties being constructed in the
back yards of other properties and would restrict
the use of adjacent properties and would create
parcels with minimum public street frontage and a
stacking of parcels along public or private
commons.
ee
There are no unique circumstances or conditions
affecting this property such that the strict
application of the provisions of the zoning and
subdivision ordinances deprive the applicant of
the reasonable use of his land.
Denial of the proposed subdivision does not
preclude the property from being divided into
two lots. The applicant has available, other
ways to subdivide the subject property that
will result in the creation of two lots that
are consistent with the spirit and intent of
the Mound Zoning Code and Mound Subdivision
Ordinance.
g. The proposed subdivision and variance to the
zoning ordinance regulations to accommodate the
existing house even on a short basis are not
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.
2. The City Council has by adoption of subdivision and zoning
ordinances laid out a procedure for the development of the City in such a
manner that it will be done efficiently and will result in a minimal
expenditure of public monies to work around unusual developments. It
would be a bad precedent for the City and its management of properties under
the zoning and subdivision ordinance to allow this division. The
statements contained in the Whereas provisions of this Resolution shall be
considered as additional findings and reasons for not approving this
division.
3. The granting of this waiver of the subdivision ordinance
would be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the
community in that it would reduce and waive the zoning standards and the
subdivision standards of the community all of which are contrary to the
intent of the comprehensive plan of the zoning ordinance and the
subdivision ordinance.
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
December 1, 1992
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
City of Mound
53~1Ma3~wood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
DEC 3 1992
SUBJECT:
City of Mound, Minnesota
Proposed Storm Sewer Improvements
Cottonwood Lane/Dakota Rail
MFRA #10213
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
As requested, we are submitting a Preliminary Engineering Report for
proposed storm sewer improvements adjacent to Dakota Rail and westerly of
Cottonwood Lane.
If you have any questions or need additional information regarding anything
contained in this report, we will be pleased to discuss it further at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
JC:jmk
Enclosures
%~15~ An Equal Oppodunity Employer
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
Proposed Storm Sewer Improvements
Cottonwood Lane/Dakota Rail
Mound, Minnesota
December, 1992
GENERAL
The problem area, which consists of an open ditch, is located approximately
half on Dakota Rail's property and half on private property. This ditch, which
connects a small wetland to a 36" concrete pipe under Dakota Rail, is in very
poor condition with steep side slopes and numerous trees growing in the banks.
The ditch and culvert is the only outlet from the small wetland located on part
of Lot 34, Koehler's Second Addition to Mound, which is owned by the City of
Mound. The City acquired this property in 1974 as tax forfeit property from
the State of Minnesota, for use as a wetlands. A fairly large drainage area,
extending north of County Road 15, discharges into this wetland by means of a
24" storm sewer which was installed in 1978. The cost of that storm sewer
project was assessed to the benefitting properties in the watershed area.
The major portion of this small wetland is located below the 100-year flood
elevation of 935.0 for Lake Langdon, as identified on the National Flood
Insurance Map prepared by the Federal Government and adopted by the City of
Mound. The inverts of the 36" culvert under Dakota Rail are below the Ordinary
High Water (0HW) elevation of 932.1 for Lake Langdon, as set by the DNR. In
fact, the outlet end on the south side of the railroad tracks is over 2 feet
below the OHW; this results in the water standing in the culvert most of the
time.
Mr. and Mrs. Hahn, Owners of Lots 39 & 40, Lynwold Park, have requested
that something be done to eliminate the open ditch and standing water on their
property.
DESIGN
There are several possible solutions to the problem. One would be to
completely regrade the area, removing all the trees in the ditch bottom and
side slopes. This will not completely eliminate the standing water, because it
can still back-up from Lake Langdon. In order to improve the steep slopes
along both sides, the ditch would have to be widened onto private property.
- 1 -
/~e other solution would be to extend the 36" culvert westerly to the edge
of wetlands; thereby eliminating the need for a ditch. A manhole structure
with a catch basin inlet would need to be constructed over the end of the
existing 36" concrete pipe. ApProximately the last 200 feet of the west side
of Cottonwood Lane, as well as part of the Hahn property, including their
driveway, drains into the existing ditch. Because the area at the end of
Cottonwood Lane and the Hahn driveway is fairly flat, a catch basin inlet at
the new structure would collect runoff better than allowing overland drainage
all the ws.y to the wetland. We would recommend only minimal disturbance of the
wetland as necessary to install the storm sewer, because this area acts as a
natural filter for the storm water before it enters Lake Langdon. Permits from
agencies such as the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would need to be
obtained before construction could commence. The only viable solution to
eliminate the problem of standing water would be the installation of the storm
sewer. Either of the solutions would require an easement from the Hahn's and a
permit from Dakota Rail.
COSTS
For purposes of this report, a preliminary cost estimate was prepared only
for extension of the storm sewer as suggested. The estimated cost of the
proposed project in this estimate includes contingencies, engineering, legal,
fiscal and administrative costs, but does not cover any easement acquisition.
A detailed cost breakdown is included at the end of this report.
ASSESSMENTS
In the past, storm sewer improvements have been assessed to properties in
the drainage area on a square footage basis. As previously mentioned, the
total drainage area extends well north of County Road 15. Most of this area
was assessed under the storm sewer project completed in 1978. It would be very
difficult to assess these properties again for an improvement that does not
show a direct benefit. This leaves only one alternative, which is to assess
the properties which drain directly to the wetlands and ditch. Using this
method of assessment, the estimated cost of the project has been spread over a
-2-
drainage area of 19q,315 square feet, which results in a cost of $0.08 per
square foot. The City owns two parcels and the right-of-way for Cottonwood
Lane, which totals 86,040 square feet. This would put the City's share of the
project at $6,883.00, or 44.3%, with the remainder assessed to the properties
within the drainage area. Enclosed at the end of this report is a map which
shows the properties in the drainage area and a list of the proposed assessment
for each using property this method.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Technically, the proposed project is feasible in that it can be designed
and constructed using conventional methods. Economically, the project is very
questionable, due to the cost compared to the benefit received by the area
served; however, that is an issue better addressed by the City Council in its
determination of City Policy.
-3-
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
ITEM
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE
TOTAL
36" R.C.P.
Catch Basin Manhole
36" Concrete Apron
Rip Rap
Tree Removal
Oranular Material
Fill
Restoration
Contingencies
50 L.F. $ 60.00
1 EACH $3,300.00/EACH
1 EACH $ 800.00/EACH
6 C.Y. $ 50.00/C.Y.
! L.S. LUMP SUM
20 TON $ 8.00/TON
260 C. ¥. $ 5.00/C. Y.
! L.S. LUMP SUM
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
3,000.00
3,300.00
800.00
300.00
1,5oo.oo
16o.oo
13oo.oo
500.00
1,o9o.oo
11,950.00
Engineering, Legal, Fiscal and Administrative Cost
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
3,55o.o0
15,500.00
EXHIBIT A
Parcel No.
0020
0022
0023
0024
0025
0045
0016
0059
0020
oo21
0022
PROPOSED STORM SEWER ASSESSMENT
Area
Proposed Assessment
21,250 S.F.
10,000 S.F.
10,000 S.F.
55,640 S.F.
22,800 S.F.
20,750 S.F.
$ 1,700.00
800.00
800.00
4,451.20
1,824.00
1,660.00
3,750 S.F.
7,500 S.F.
9,375 S.F.
11,250 S.F.
14,400 S.F.
300.00
600.00
750.00
900.00
1,152.00
R/W
alley
Cottonwood Lane
2,600 S.F.
5,000 S.F.
208.00
400.00
TOTAL 194,315 S.F. $15,545.20
City owned property.
City Total = 86,040 S.F. @ O.08/S.F. = $6,883.20.
City share represents 44.3% of total project.
EXHIBIT B
HILLCREST RD
64.7 64.7 64.7 ~4.? ~4.7 64.7 :64.7 64.7 79.34
~ (~ (n) ~w~c~ (~.~ .,.~
9 ~ ~ ~ : :~:'"' ".
~) (~) (25) ~ (Zl) (~91(~5)---~ ........
_ _ z..., ~ (~)
RD: ' ~' m
)D', " ' ' ,
6 15 14 , ~ !~ ,
a) {~) {28)t116) , :!15} C
6 15 ~4 1'3 !~ ~ ~
31 ('50)(28)[.116) ~!15) (16)
,'., -:, ,r _~
I I . 17)
I) (al):(26)~! I (2o)
CZ'S, I (18)
~' (53) ~s
£
IZ7'. ~
I~ Z
(39) ;~ (28) ~(Z6)
'3
a (29)
(
(15)
(t6)
(V,t, CA~ 6-16-67)
(!1)
131. 5
S
s ,..o
Exhibit D
CITY, of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364- ! 687
(612) 472 0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CASE NO. 92-071
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERNIT FOR
A CLASS III RESTAURANT AND BAR FOR "HEADLINERS BAR & GRILL"
IN THE B-1 CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT
AT 5241 SHORELINE DRIVE~ MOUND
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of
Mound will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30
p.m. on Monday, January 12, 1993 to consider the issuance of a
Conditional Use Permit for Headliners Bar & Grill, Inc. to operate
a Class III Restaurant which is defined by the Mound Zoning
Ordinance as follows:
"Restaurants where food and intoxicating liquors are served and
consumed by customers while seated at a counter or table and/or
restaurants which contain entertainment, either live or prerecorded.
Food sales in such facilities shall account for a minimum of 50
percent of a restaurant's gross receipts on an annual basis."
This operation is proposed for the property at 5241 Shoreline Drive
(the old Jock Club), legally described as: Lots 7-20 and 26-35,
Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit F, PID #13-117-24 34 0072.
All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above
will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
Publish in "The Laker" 12-28-92 and mailed to property owners
within 350' by 12-30-92.
printed on recycled paper
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
NOTICE is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, will meet on Tuesday, January 12, 1993, at 7:30 P.M.
for the purpose of a public hearing to consider an application
for an "On-Sale" Intoxicating Liquor License for Mark Saliterman
"~and Bill Feehan, dba Headliners Bar & Grill, at 5241 Shoreline
Drive (formerly The Jock Club). The public hearing will be held
in the City Council Chambers at 5341Maywood Road. At this hearing,
opportunity shall be given any person to be heard for or against
the granting of the license.
F~'an~ene C[ ark, CMC, City Cler~
Publish in The Laker December 28, 1992
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO RENEGOTIATE THE AGREEMENT FOR
RECYCLING COLLECTION
WHEREAS, the City of Mound is currently under Contract
with Knutson Services, Inc. for recycling collection; and
WHEREAS, the city of Mound is part of the Lake Minnetonka
Recycling Group (LMRG) along with the cities of Shorewood,
Excelsior, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach and Wayzata; and
WHEREAS, Knutson Services, Inc., has approached LMRG with
some cost issues related to increased participation, product
processing, revenue sharing inequities and drop off center expense;
and
WHEREAS, LMRG made some concessions in the area of
revenue sharing and drop sites to improve the financial viability
of the recycling program; and
WHEREAS, LMRG has been approache~ again by Knutson
Services, Inc., to make additional concessions to maintain a
financially viable recycling program; and
WHEREAS, LMRG has reviewed the proposed concessions from
Knutson Services, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, LMRG understands the issues confronting Knutson
Services, Inc.,with regard to material revenue sharing and cost of
collection; and
WHEREAS, staff representing LMRG has agreed, by consensus
to recommend the following to their respective city Councils:
1. The revenue sharing clause (Section 4) of the contracts
be reevaluated and redefined by Knutson and the LMRG.
This task is to be completed by December 31, 1992.
2. That Knutson will make good on all outstanding revenue
sharing payments owed to LMRG cities prior to November 1,
1992.
3. The LMRG cities will declare a suspension of revenue
sharing payments for the months of November and December
1992.
4. That Knutson immediately bring up to date all outstanding
reports on tonnages collected and markets used as per
Section 4, part D of the contracts.
Se
If the previous items are accomplished by December 31,
1992, it be recommended that the per household collection
fee be increased by 10 cents in 1993 and 10 cents in
1994.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota hereby authorizes the Mayor and City
Manager to renegotiate the existing contract with Knutson Services,
Inc. incorporating the above recommendations.
The foregoing Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The foregoing Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
CITY OF WAYZATA
6(}0 RICE STREET, WAYZATA. MINN. 5539I
PHONE 473-0234
MEMO TO:
FROM:
DATE:
LMRG Members
Sonny Clark
November 23, 1992
The enclosed letter to Knutson was drafted as a result ora meeting held November 23, 1992 at
Wayzata. Present were .loyce Nelson, Dufry Day, Carl Ziemart, Paul Kroening, Sonny Clark and
Dave Frischmon.
If you will please respond to me ASAP we will move forward to send this letter on to Knutsons
or meet to amend this with the coordinators.
Please call 473-8113 or fax to 473-4178 ASAP.
CITY OF WAYZATA
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
600 RICE STREET. 9,7~YZATA. MINN. $$.191
PHONE 473-02.14
DRAFT
KNUTSON SERVICES INC.
The Lake Mirmetonka Recycling Group, including Paul Kroening from Hennepin County, met on
Monday, November 23rd, to consider your recent proposal to place a moratorium on the revenue
, sharing and a per household rate increase for 1993 and 1994.
It is fair to say that a variety of opinions arose ranging from "a contract is a contract and should
be adhered to" to "there is credence in Knutson's request as compared to other existing contracts
in Hennepin Countyn.
As a consensus the LMRG would be willing to recommend to their various City Councils that:
1. The revenue sharing clause (Section 4) of the contracts be reevaluated and redefined by
Knutson and the LMRG. This task is to be completed by December 31, 1992.
2. That Knutson will make good on all outstanding revenue sharing payments owed to
LMR. G cities prior to November I, 1992.
3. The LMRG cities will declare a suspension ofr6venue sharing payments for the months
of November and December 1992.
4. That Knutson immediately bring up to date all outstanding reports on tonnages
collected and markets used as per Section 4, part D of the contracts.
5. If the previous items are accomplished by December 31, 1992, it be recommended that
the per household collection fee be increased by 10 cents in 1993 and 10 cents in 1994.
5150
Novembe~'.10, 1992
Ms. Joyce Nelson
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Dear Ms. Nelson,
Two years ago, Knutson Services, Inc. responded to a RFP from a consortium of Hennepin County cities
which included Shorewood, Mound, Excelsior, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, and Wayzata. As a result
of our proposal, KSI was awarded a contract for a three year period commencing January 1, 1991. We
requested (and received) an extension for one year based on the collection of glossy papers (i.e.
magazines and catalogs); thus our existing contract with your community extends through December,
1994.
A review of the recycling history in these communities reveal varied results from failed collection business to
international conglomerate domination to our unprecedented success. Knutson Services is proud of our
assistance in the lal.t~! The current system presented and utilized by the cities has truly been a
benchmark for the other Hennepin County communities. The pricing, revenue sharing, and products
collected by KSI was innovative ......unfortunately only hind-sight proves certain aspects to be ill fated. No
amount of foresite could have predicted the economics of recycling. One year ago, KSI approached the
communities with the recycling concerns of the "penalization" from increased participation, product
processing, revenue sharing inequities, and drop off center expense. Concessions were granted in the
areas of revenue sharing and two communities which eliminated their drop sites. Although very welcomed,
it is clearly evident that these did not go far enough towards assisting KSI in maintaining a financially viable
program.
KSI is requesting that your community grant the following concessions to the original RFP/service contract:
1)
Material Revenue Sharing
Knutson Services reaffirms our belief in the concept of revenue sharing with the community;
however, based on the complexities of processing/marketing materials and the formula negotiated,
it has been a detriment to Knutson Services. It is our request that a moritorium on revenue sharing
be implemented retroactive to November 1, 1992. The resumption of Material Revenue
Sharing would be implemented upon the value of recycled products "coming back" and a fair
equitable formula be developed.
2)
Cost of Collection
Now, not only are more residents recycling... "all recyclers are recycling all they can"! The enclosed
graph of your communities tonnages illustrate that we are in essence being financially "penalized"
SOLID WASTE
RECYCLING SYSTEMS ·
Since 1961
Printed on recycled paper
STREET S WEEPING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
NOTICE is heralder_hat the City Council of the Citv of Mound.
~n~'~ta,-~m~~ on,~ues~ay, January 12, 1993, at 7~30 P.M.
~ne pu~o~se._o~ ~ public nearin to conside
¢~ /~. ,,~ o~,, ~_~ ..... g r an application
~/~,~__~-oa~e ~n~oxlcatlng Liquor License
and Bill . -
/Bi Feehan, d~a Headliners Bar & Grill, at 5241 Shoreline
Dri~ (formerly TJfe Jock Club). The public hearing will be held
in rge City C0u~di1 Chambers at 5341Maywood Road. At this hearing,
opportunity sJ~fll be given any person to be heard for or against
the gr~of the license.
FY'an~ene C[ ark, CMC, City Clerk
Publish in The Laker December 28, 1992
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NAYOR AND CITY NANAGER
TO RENEGOTIATE THE AGREENENT FOR
RECYCLING COLLECTION
WHEREAS, the city of Mound is currently under Contract
with Knutson Services, Inc. for recycling collection; and
WHEREAS, the city of Mound is part of the Lake Minnetonka
Recycling Group (LMRG) along with the cities of Shorewood,
Excelsior, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach and Wayzata; and
WHEREAS, Knutson Services, Inc., has approached LMRG with
some cost issues related to increased participation, product
processing, revenue sharing inequities and drop off center expense;
and
WHEREAS, LMRG made some concessions in the area of
revenue sharing and drop sites to improve the financial viability
of the recycling program; and
WHEREAS, LMRG has been approached again
Services, Inc., to make additional concessions to
financially viable recycling program; and
by Knutson
maintain a
WHEREAS, LMRG has reviewed the proposed concessions from
Knutson Services, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, LMRG understands the issues confronting Knutson
Services, Inc.,with regard to material revenue sharing and cost of
collection; and
WHEREAS, staff representing LMRG has agreed, by consensus
to recommend the following to their respective city Councils:
The revenue sharing clause (Section 4) of the contracts
be reevaluated and redefined by Knutson and the LMRG.
This task is to be completed by December 31, 1992.
That Knutson will make good on all outstanding revenue
sharing payments owed to LMRG cities prior to November 1,
1992.
The LMRG cities will declare a suspension of revenue
sharing payments for the months of November and December
1992.
That Knutson immediately bring up to date all outstanding
reports on tonnages collected and markets used as per
Section 4, part D of the contracts.
Se
If the previous items are accomplished by December 31,
1992, it be recommended that the per household collection
fee be increased by 10 cents in 1993 and 10 cents in
1994.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota hereby authorizes the Mayor and City
Manager to renegotiate the existing contract with Knutson Services,
, Inc. incorporating the above recommendations.
/.~ ., ug'Z/ I_)h q/. 1~.~ ,- . _ ', ' .~'7~--~ ~~
Attest City Clerk
CITY OF WAYZATA
600 RICE STREET, WAYZATA, MINN. S5.191
PHONE 473-02.t4
MEMO TO:
FKOM:
DATE:
LMRG Members
Sonny Clark
November 23, 1992
The enclosed letter to Knutson was drafted as a result ora meeting held November 23, 1992 at
Wayzata. Present were $oyce Nelson, Duffy Day, Carl Zieman, Paul Kroening, Sonny Clark and
Dave Frischmon.
If you will please respond to me ASAP we will move forward to send this letter on to Knutsons
or meet to amend this with the coordinators.
Please call 473-8113 or fax to 473-4178 ASAP.
CITY OF WAYZATA
600 RICE STREET, WAYZATA, MINN. 55391
PHONE 47.t-0234
KNUTSON SERVICES INC.
The Lake Mirmetonka Recycling Group, including Paul Kroening fi.om Hermepin County, met on
Monday, November 23rd, to consider your recent proposal to place a moratorium on the revenue
. sharing and a per household rate increase for 1993 and 1994.
It is fair to say that a variety of opinions arose ranging fi.om "a contract is a contract and should
be adhered to" to "there is credence in Knutson's request as compared to other existing contracts
in Hermepin County".
As a consensus the LM2R. G would be willing to recommend to their various City Councils that:
1. The revenue sharing clause (Section 4) of the contracts be reevaluated and redefined by
Knutson and the LMRG. This task is to be completed by December 31, 1992.
2. That Knutson will make good on all outstanding revenue sharing payments owed to
LMRG cities prior to November 1, 1992.
3. The LMRG cities will declare a suspension ofr6venue sharing payments for the months
of November and December 1992.
4. That Knutson immediately bring up to date all outstanding reports on tonnages
collected and markets used as per Section 4, pan D of the contracts.
5. If the previous items are accomplished by December 31, 1992, it be recommended that
the per household collection fee be increased by 10 cents in 1993 and 10 cents in 1994.
5150
Novembe, P! 0, 1~99~
Ms. Joyce Nelson
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Dear Ms. Nelson,
Two years ago, Knutson Services, Inc. responded to a RFP from a consortium of Hennepin County cities
which included Shorewood, Mound, Excelsior, Spring Park, Minnelonka Beach, and Wayzata. As a result
of our proposal, KSI was awarded a contract for a three year period commencing January 1, 1991. We
requested (and received) an extension for one year based on the collection of glossy papers (i.e.
magazines and catalogs); thus our existing contract with your community extends through December,
1994.
A review of the recycling history in these communities reveal varied results from failed collection business to
intemational conglomerate domination to our unprecedented success. Knutson Services is proud of our
assistance in the latter! The current system presented and utilized by the cities has truly been a
benchmark for the other Hennepin County communities. The pdcing, revenue sharing, and products
collected by KSI was innovative ...... unfortunately only hind-sight proves certain aspects to be ill fated. No
amount of foresite could have predicted the economics of recycling. One year ago, KS1 approached the
communities with the recycling concerns of the "penalization" from increased participation, product
processing, revenue shadng inequities, and drop off center expense. Concessions were granted in the
areas of revenue sharing and two communities which eliminated their drop sites. Although very welcomed,
it is clearly evident that these did not go far enough towards assisting KSI in maintaining a financially viable
program.
KSI is requesting that your community grant the following concessions to the original RFP/service contract:
1)
Material Revenue Sharing
Knutson Services reaffirms our belief in the concept of revenue sharing with the community;
however, based on the complexities of processing/marketing materials and the formula negotiated,
it has been a detriment to Knutson Services. It is our request that a moritorium on revenue sharing
be implemented retroactive to November 1, 1992. The resumption of Material Revenue
Sharing would be implemented upon the value of recycled products "coming back" and a fair
equitable formula be developed.
2)
Cost of Collection
Now, not only are more residents recycling... "all recyclers are recycling all they can"! The enclosed
graph of your communities tonnages illustrate that we are in essence being financially "penalized"
SOLID WASTE
RECYCLING SYSTEMS ·
Since 1961
Printed on recycled paper
STREET SWEEPING
for our successes. The off set of our increased collection costs were to be borne by improving
product markets; these have not materialized yet. The true costs of transportation and processing
are being clearly reflected by lhe bids submilfed in neighboring Hennepin County communities
(please refer to exhibit B). It is our request that Knutson Services be granted a per house collection
increase of $. 17per month for 1993 and $. 15 per month for 1994.
T
0
N
S
O
R
E
C
Y
C
L
A
B
L
E
S
90 MOUND TONNAGES
72
63_
45
1991 1992
~, ACTUAL
Knutson Services has kept your community apprised of developments within the infant industry of ~~
recycling. It is only out of absolute necessity which we approach you with this request. We would be readily
available to discuss these matters and will provide additional information as requested. In advance, thank
you for your positive considerations.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark Heieren
Sales Manager
cc: Paul Kroening - Hennepin County Recycling
~J
J
J
- iltll I I I I I
.~e ., · · > ~ ~ ~1~ ~c c c
_ =.-= ~ ~
o ; o o ~=~ o
, ..... · ~1~ ..............
~.~ O~e.o~,x~ ~ ~ .~.~j.~ 0 ~= ut~,~ o'= J~
'13 0
e.c ~ .e:
e...., .,., ~
al L"'
~.g
T
0
N
S
0
F
R
E
C
Y
C
L
A
B
L
E
S
for our successes. The off set of our increased collection costs were to be borne by improving
product markets; these have not materialized yet. The true costs of transportation and processing
are being clearly reflected by the bids submitted in neighboring Hennepin County communities
(please refer to exhibit B). It is our request that Knutson Services be granted a per house collection
increase of $. 17 per month for 1993 and $. 15 per month for 1994.
90 MOUND TONNAGES
1991 1992
ACTUAL
Knutson Services has kept your community appdsed of developments within the infant industry of
recycling. It is only out of absolute necessity which we approach you with this request. We would be readily
available to discuss these matters and will provide additional information as requested. In advance, thank
you for your positive considerations.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark Heieren
Sales Manager
cc: Paul Kroening - Hennepin County Recycling
..CITY of MOUND
534! MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND MINNESOTA 55364-!687
(6!2l 472 0600
FAXf612) 472 0620
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CASE NO. 92-072
~NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
A R~UEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF WINDSOR ROAD
NOTICE IS ~E~BY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City.of
Mound will meet i~%~e Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7.30
p.m. on Tuesday, JanUary 12, 1993 to consider a request to vacate
a portion of Windsor'Road which abuts 3233 Tuxedo Blvd., Lots 15,
16 and 17, Block 13,\,,Whipple, PID $25-117-24 21 0141 (see map
below). The request iDvolves approximately 139 feet of Windsor
Road. ,,.
Ail persons appearinq at said hearing with reference to the above
will be given t~e opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
/
Ffan6ene -C'.- Clark, City blerk
Publish in "The Laker" 12-21-92 & 12-28-92. Mailed to property
owners within 350' by 12-30-92. Posted 12-23-92.
printed on recycled paper
December $, 1992
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
RESOLUTION APPROVING A GAMBLING PERMIT APPLICATION
FOR OUR LADY OF THE LAKE SCHOOL - 2-6-93
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, approves the Exempting from Lawful Gambling
License application for Our Lady of the Lake School, 2411 Commerce
Blvd., Mound, MN. 55364, for a raffle and pull-tabs, February 6,
1993.
For December 8, 1992 Council Meeting
NEW LICENSE APPLICATIONS
THE FOLLOWING LICENSES EXPIRE APRIL 30, 1993. Approval
is contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being
turned in.
Teen Club (Bradfer, Inc. dba Someplace Else)
2313 Commerce Blvd.
2 - Games of Skill
1 - Pool Table
4 - Amusement Devices (Video Games)
They have also applied for a Public Dance Permit which would
expire 1 year from the date of issuance. Approval is
contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being
turned in.
Temporary On-Sale Non-Intxociating Malt Liquor Permit -
for Our Lady of the Lake School - February 6, 1993 -
Las Vegas Nite
BILLS
December 8, 1992
BATCH 2113
BATCH 2114
TOTAL
BILLS
$161,816.71
71,240.57
$233,057.28
C~)-.
I
Z
0
~C
0
0
0
0
O~
,-4
~4
o000
000
00o
CITY of MOUND
53c~ ?IAYWOOD ROAD
MOL:ND. MINNESOTA 553E, 4 1687
~612 472 0630
~AX ,612', 472 3620
December 4, 1992
TO:
Ed Shukle, City Manager
FROM:
Fran Clark, City Clerk
RE:
November Monthly Report
There were two regular City Council Meetings in November. There
was agenda preparation, packets, minutes, resolutions and follow-up
items from each meeting. Thank you to Linda for taking the 2nd
Council Meeting when I was in New Orleans at the IIMC Board
Meeting. This was a very good Board Meeting. We had a goal
setting/team building session prior to the Board Meeting. I have
attached something that I thought was very good.
The General Election was November 3rd and brought out 89% of the
registered voters in Mound. There were 1121 new registrations on
election day. There were 313 absentee ballots cast. Total number
voting was 5392. Then we had the recount which cost $1310.00 when
all the preparation time, staff time, attorney costs and supplies
were figured out.
Two cemetery lots were sold in November and several stake outs were
done by Public Works.
There were the usual calls and questions from residents on various
items.
fc
pr~nted on recycled paper
The Goose Story
Ne~t fall, when you see Geese heading South for the Winter flying along in V
. forrnation...you might consider what Science has discovered as to Why they fly
'that ~ray: ' ~
As each bird flaps its Wings, it creates an Uplift for the bird immedi-
ately Following.
By flying in ~r formation the Whole Flock adds at least 71%
greater Flying Range, than if each bird Flew on its Own.
PEOPLE WHO SHARE A COMMON D~ON AND SF~NSE
OF COMMUNITY CAN GET WHERE THEY_ ARE GOING MORE
QUICKLY AND EASILY BECAUSE ~ ARE TRAVI~I,ING
ON ~ THRUST OF ONE ANOTHK.~
When a goose Falls out of Formation it suddenly feels the
Drag and Resistance of trying to go it alone and quickly gets
back into Formation to take Advantage of the Lifting Power
of the bird in front.
IF WE HAVE AS MUCH SENSE AS A GOOSE WE Wu J,
STAY IN FORMATION WITH THOSE WHO ARE HEADED
THE SAME WAY WE ARE.
When the Head Goose gets tired it rotates back in the Wing
and another goose flies Point.
IT IS SENSIBLE TO TAKE TUi~NS DOING DEI~iANDING JOBS
WITH PEOPLE OR WITH GEESE FLYING SOUTH.
Geese honk from behind to Encourage those up .Pront to keep up their
Speed°
WHAT DO WE SAy WHEN WE HONK FROM BEHIND?
Finally and this is Important when a goose gets Sick or is wounded by Gun-
shots and falls out of Formation, two other Geese fall out with that Goose and
follow it down to lend Help and Protection. They stay with the Fallen Goose until
it is able to Fly or until it Dies, and only then do they launch out to catch up
with their Group.
IF WE HAVE ~ SENSE OF A GOOSE WE WILL STAND BY EACH OTHER.
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
MOUND, MINNESOTA
FOR MONTH OF NOVEMBER1992
FIRE FIGHTERS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE
L1/9 11/16 · ~ tlRS HIMS ~%%E ....
1 a~-~' ANDERSI~,I X X 2 '1~ .00 35 &~nn
2 GREG ANDERSON X X 2 19.00 ~O 6_m
3 J lil~RY BABB }{ X 2 19.00 21 &.rio
4 DAVID BOYD (~% × 1 q.50 lq ~,. tlq 114_tltl
5 DON BRYCE X X 2 19.OO 32 6.50 9o8.(lo
6 scozr BR'/CS ~ X ] ~.$o ~ ~.m
7 DAVE CARLSON ~ X 1 q. 50 30 6.00 1
8 JIM CASEY X ~E") I 9.50 25 6.00
9 S'n~VE COLLINES X X 2 19.00 20 6.00 120.00
to ~ sm~ x X 2 ~9.oo z<) 6.00
11 STEVE ERICKSON X X 2 19.00 31 6.00 186.00 _
12 PHIL FISK X ~ 1 9.50 11 6.09. 66.00
t3 GmUiLD GARVA~S X X 2 19,00 1I} 6.0O ~O8.00
14 DAN GRADY ~E~ X 1 ~.50 33 6.00 198.00
15 KEVIN GRADY X X 2 19.00 32 6.00 192.00
16 CRAIG RFN~km.~a~ X X 2 19.00 32 6.00 192.00
17 pN1L wF3~Y X X 2 19.00 26 6.00 156.00
18 RRAD IAN13.qMAN X X 2 19.00 31 6.00 186.00.
19 RON MA~.e/m~m X X 2 19.00 28 6.25 175.00
20 jO~ ~m].~ '~) X 1 9.50 20 6.00 120.00
21 JANES Im;3.qON X X 2 19.00 14 6.00 84.0r'
22 liARV lm:3.qON X X Z 19.00 28 6.00 168,k
23 BP. Er ~CCt~ X X 2 19.00 22 6.00 132.00
24 G~X} P~ X. X Z 19.00 29 6.00 174.00
25 Mn(Z PADI X X 2 19.00 33 6.00 198.00
26 Tm ?Ah'l X X 2 19.00 35 6.00 210.00
27 ~ ~D~SO~ X X. 2 19.00 29 6.00 174.00
28 TONY RASI, fUSSEN X X 2 19.00 27 6.00 162.00
29 Mn~ SAVAGE X X 2 19.00 26 6.00 156.00
30 EEVIN SIPPRELL X X 2 19.00 36 6.00 216.00
31 RO~ STA]J.Z~ ~_~ X 1 9.50 15 6.00 90.00
32 ~ SW]mSON X X 2 19.00 24 6.0O
33 W~ SW~SON ~) X 1 '- 9.50 21 6.00 126.00
34 ~ VA~-~ X X 2 19.00 37 6,00 222.00
~ RICK ~U~L~S X X 2 19.00 25 6.00 ~50.00
36 TI~ WII.I.TAI~'IM X X 2 19.00 11 6.00 66.00
37 DI!ltNIS I~3YrCKE X X 2 19.00 23 6.00 138.00
30 35 65 617.50 946 5,699.00
~ 75 87! 162½ 617.50 946 ~ 5,699.0u
~ __1,167.0(
~ 7,48.
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
D R I L L
REPORT
Date
pline and Teamwork
Critique of fires
Pre-plan and Inspections
Tools and Apparatus Identify
Hand Extinguisher Operation
Wearing Protective Clothing
Fi]ms
First aid and Rescue Operation
Use of Self-Contained Masks
X
Pumper Operation
Fire Streams & Friction Loss
House Burnings
Natural/Propane Gas demos.
Ladder Evolutions
Salvage Operations
Radio Operations
House Evolutions
Nozzles & Hose Appliance
Hours Training Paid :
(~) Excused
X Unexecused O Present / Not Paid
:ellaneous :
PERSONNEL
2t/~J.Andersen
~G.Anderson
d.Babb
D.Boyd
D.Bryce
S.Bryce
~:Carlson
Casey
~7~_S.Collins
t~.Englehart
.Erickson
X P.Fisk
~Y~ J.Garvais
D .Grady
K .Grady
C. Henderson
P.Henry
B. Landsman
R.Marschke
J .Nafus
J.Nelson
M.Nelson
B.Niccum
~_~_G. Palm
~-~'~__. Pa I m
~///~T.Palm
~-~G.Pederson
.Rassmusen
.Savage
Sipprell
RiStallman
TSwenson
WiSwenson
E.Vanecek
~.'~R.Williams
~-T.Williams
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
Discipline and Teamwork
Critique of fires
Pre-plan and Inspections
Tools and Apparatus Identify
Hand Extinguisher Operation
Wearing Protective Clothing
Films
First aid and Rescue Operation
Use of Self-Contained Masks
DRILL
X
REPORT
Pumper Operation
Fire Streams & Friction Loss
House Burnings
Natural/Propane Gas demos.
Ladder Evolutions
Salvage Operations
Radio Operations
House Evolutions
Nozzles & Hose Appliance
Hours Training Paid :
~ Excused
X Unexecused
O Present / Not Paid
Miscellaneous :
PERSONNEL
~J.Andersen
,G.Anderson
J.Babb
.~_~_~D. Boyd
D. Bryce9~
(~ S. Bryce
~//z-J.Garvais
~i! Grady
Grady
Henderson
~RBi Henry
Landsman
Marschke
T.Palm
G.Pederson
T.Rassmusen
M.Savage
K.Sipprell
(~) R.Stallman
~.~D. Ca r I son
J.Casey
~_~.Collins
.Englehart
~ S.Erickson~
P.Fisk
~_~J.Nafus
J.Nelson
M.NeIson
B.Niccum
G.Pa]m~
;.)T.Swenson
W.Swenson
E.Vanecek
R.Williams
T.Williams
.Woytcke
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
MONTH MONIH TO DATE TO DATE
MONI~ OF biOVrSmm 1997
NO. OF CALLS
43 32 436 417
FIRE 7 11 91 75,
MOUND
I~-II~GI~CY 17 9 147 158
FIRE 2 4 13 12
MINNETONKA BEACH ,.
M~RGENCY O O 4 8
FIRE 1 0 16 24
MINNETRISTA
i~GENCY 5 2 36 31
FIRE 2 2 22 26
ORONO ' '
I~IRGENCY 2 2 20 16
FIRE 1 0 3 1
SHOREWOOD
I~iERGENOY 0 0 1 1
FIRE 2 2 28 29
SPRING PARK ..
I~-RGI~CY 4 0 51 34
FIRE O 0 4 2
MUTUAL AID
M'I~GENL~ 0 0 0 0
TOTAL FIRE CALLS 15 19 177 172
TOTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 28 13 259 245
COM~I~CIAL 0 3 12 6
RESIDENTIAL 9 3 66 60
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 1 2
GRASS & MISCELLANEOUS 2 4 36 42
Al/R) 0 3 13 7
FALSE ALAP. M / FIRE ALARMS 4 6 49 53
NO. OF HOURS FIRE 246 190 2365 2037
- MOUND I~GENCY 308 183 2858 3083
TOTAL 554 373 5223 5120
FIRE 38 75 216 287
- MTKA BEACH 19~I~RGENCY O 0 90 145
IOTAL 38 75 306 432
FIRE 13 0 429 687
- M' TR I STA I~I[RGENCY 93 50 670 583
TOTAL 106 50 1099 1280
FIRE 35 45 427 554
- ORONO I~GENCY 51 34 425 ~O8
TOTAL 86 79 852 862
FIRE 8 0 134 8
- SHOREWOOD I~ERGENCY 0 0 16 15
TOTAL 8 0 150 23
FIRE 53 26 580 690
- SP. PARK I~IERGI~qCY 101 0 1073 486
TOTAL 154 26 1653 1176
FIRE 0 0 220 40
- I~TUAL AID f~RGfIqCY 0 0 0 0
TOTAL O 0 220 40
TOTAL DRILL HOURS 162~ 160 1875 1812%
TOTAL FIRE HOURS 393 336 4371 4313
TOTAL EMERGENCY HOURS 553 267 ~132 4620
TOTAL FIRE & EMERG~ I~S 946 603 9503 8933
MUTUAL AID RECEIVED O O 3 4
MUTUAL AID GIVEN O O
CITY of MOUND
PARKS DEPARTME
NOVEMBER 1992 MONTHI,y REPORT
53.:' MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND ,., NNESOTA 55364 1687
6! 2i 472-0600
FAX ,612i 472-0620
parks
This November has been a lot easier than last year, no record snow falls
and only one plowable accumulation of snow to-date. The weather has not
been cold enough to begin flooding the ice rinks. We also have to wait
until we have enough snow to build berms around the areas to be flooded.
The rinks will again be located at Three Points Park, Philbrook Park and
Highland Park.
Dock Program
The 1993 application forms were put together for approval by the Park
and Open Space Commission and City Council, and now will be compiled
into next year's mailing.
Tom McCaffrey, Dock Inspector, has been coming in on Mondays to work on
some of the problems of dock storage or poles left in the lake. His
time will increase as we end this year due to him having to work on the
1993 dock application mailing. This mailing to all current dock holders
will go out on December 30th.
Trees
There has been only one call for a downed tree on City property for
removal.
Cemetery
Hopefully this year will be a common winter so we will have enough frost
in the ground to support equipment for winter burials. Last Spring we
had a lot of repair work before Memorial Day.
The biggest noticeable change at the Cemetery has been the storage of
the compost pile and the wood chips from the recycling program in the
back lots.
JF:pj
printed on recycled paper
CITY of MOUND
December 3,1992
To:
From:
Subject:
Ed Shukle
City Manager
areg Skinner
Sewer & Water Supt.
November Activity Report
WATER DEPARTMENT
This month we pumped 22,149,000 gallons of water. We had
2 water main breaks, one on the 24th and one on Thanksgiving
Day. We spent most of the month locating service line, shut-
off's, and gatevalves as well has working on the stuck meter
list. We dug an repaired 2 water standpipes.
SEWER DEPARTMENT
Our lift station upgrades are now about 99.9% complete.
We completed the road repairs on Three Points Blvd from our
sewer force main break.
eprinted on recycled paper
CITY of MOUND
/ MOUND MINNESOTA 55364 1687
,6~2) 472-C600
CAX(612 472 9620
December 1, 1992
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MAYORt CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
JOEL F, RUMM, LIQUOR STORE MANAGER
NOVEMBER 1992 MONTHLY REPORT
The stockings have been hung and the halls have been decked.
It is difficult to imagine that the holidays are just around the
corner. But none the less, they are and we are prepared. I had
one of my part time employees go out and shop for new Christmas
Decorations. The ones we had been using were almost 20 years old
and had lost their appeal. We also put up our liquor and wine
table just before Thanksgiving to give our customers an early idea
of what is available. Although every year there seems to be less
and less of a demand for those items, thus we have been scaling
down our selection the last few years.
You may have seen some commotion outside the store the first
part of November. One of the cement sidewalk blocks that sat
outside the corner of the store was busted. It had a huge crack in
it that presented somewhat of a danger for our pedestrians. Our
landlord was out here in October and I showed him the problem. We
agreed that it would be beneficial for both him and the City to get
it repaired as soon as possible.
JK:ls
$1 ,7
(D prmted on recycled paper
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
MOUND POLIC
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Telephone 472-0621
Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ed Shukle
Len Harrell
Monthly Report for November 1992
STATISTICS
The police department responded to 801 calls for
service during the month of November. There were 29
Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included 1
criminal sexual conduct, 1 robbery, 7 burglaries, and
20 larcenies.
There were 57 Part II offenses reported. Those
offenses included 5 child abuse/neglect, 5 forgery/NSF
checks, 3 narcotics, 14 damage to property, 5 liquor
law violations, 4 DUI's, 2 simple assaults, 6 domestics
(3 with assaults), 7 harassments, 3 juvenile status
offense, and 3 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 109 adult citations and 0
juvenile citations. Parking violations accounted for
an additional 13 tickets. Warnings were issued to 77
individuals for a variety of violations.
There were 2 adults and 4 juveniles arrested for
felonies. There were 17 adults and 5 juveniles
arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 10
warrant arrests.
The department assisted in 2 vehicular accidents. There
were 24 medical emergencies and 24 animal complaints.
Mound assisted other agencies on 2 occasions in
November and requested assistance 9 times.
Property valued at $19,452 was stolen and $14,145 was
recovered in November.
1
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - NOVEMBER 1992
II.
III.
IV.
INVESTIGATION
The investigators worked on two criminal sexual conduct
cases and 6 child protection matters that required 59
hours of their time in November. Other cases that were
investigated included assault, harassing
communications, theft, burglary, forgery, NSF checks,
robbery, damage to property, and driving after
revocation.
Formal complaints were issued for DUI, minor
consumption, marijuana in a motor vehicle, and no
insurance.
Personnel/Staffinq
The department used approximately 51 hours of overtime
during the month of November. Officers used 27 hours
of comp-time, 33 hours of vacation, 41 hours of sick
time, and 22 holidays. Officers earned 62 hours of
comp-time.
Troy Denneson started in November and replaced the
position vacated when Ron ~ostrom retired. Troy is 22
years old and lives in Maple Plain.
Training
The department held an in-service firearms training in
November and officer Huggett continued in the Wilson
Leadership Series.
Police Reserves
The Reserves donated 469 hours during the month of
November.
2
OFFENSES
REPORTED
CLEARED
UNFOUNDED
EXCEPT.
CLEARED
NOVEMBER 1992
CLEARED BY
ARREST
ARRESTED
ADULT JUVEN I LE
PART I CRIMES
Homicide 0 0 0 0
Criminal Sexual Conduct 1 0 0 0
Robbery 1 0 0 0
Aggravated Assau[t 0 0 0 0
Burglary 7 0 1 0
Larceny 20 0 1 5
Vehicle Theft 0 0 0 0
Arson 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
TOTAL 29 0 2 5 2
PART Il CRIMES
Child Abuse/Neglect 5 1 3 0 0
Forgery/NSF Checks 5 0 0 0 1
Criminal Damage to Property 14 0 2 1 0
Weapons 0 0 0 0 0
Narcotics 3 0 0 3 3
Liquor Laws 5 0 0 4 4
D~I 4 0 0 4 4
Simple Assault 2 1 1 0 0
Domestic Assault 3 0 2 1 1
Domestic (No Assault) 3 0 0 0 0
Harassment 7 1 2 1 2
Juvenile Status Offenses 3 0 1 2 0
Public Peace 0 0 0 0 2
Trespassing 0 0 0 0 0
At[ Other Offenses 3 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 57 3 11 16 17
PART III & PART IV
Property Da~age Accidents 2
Persona[ Injury Accidents 0
Fatal Accidents 0
Medicals 24
Animal Complaints 24
Mutual Aid 9
Other Genera[ Investigations 674
TOTAL 7D9
Hennepin Co~ty Child Protection 6
TOTAL 801
13
21
19
1'71
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
NOVEMBER 1992
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
Illegal Passing
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
Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
MV/ATV
Miscellaneous Tags
TOTAL
ADULT JUV
4 0
4 0
0 0
6 0
2 0
52 0
0 0
1 0
18 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
13 0
0 0
7 0
3 0
9 0
0 0
3 0
122 0
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
NOVEMBER 1992
WARNINGS
No Insurance
Traffic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony Warrant
Misdemeanor Warrants
ADULT
15
13
12
0
1
13
0
0
0
15
69
2
8
JUV
4
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
0
0
172_
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT
NOVEMBER 1992
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
THIS
MONTH
Hazardous Citations 65
Non-Hazardous Citations 37
Hazardous Warnings 18
Non-Hazardous Warnings 52
Verbal Warnings 96
Parking Citations 12
DWI 4
Over .10 4
Property Damage Accidents 2
Personal Injury Accidents 0
Fatal Accidents 0
Adult Felony Arrests 4
Adult Misdemeanor Arrests 25
Adult Misdemeanor Citations 5
Juvenile Felony Arrests 4
Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests 5
Juvenile Misdemeanor Citations 2
Part I Offenses 29
Part II Offenses 57
Medicals 24
Animmal Complaints 54
Other Public Contacts 674
YEAR TO
DATE
675
287
129
398
1,045
462
58
41
70
18
0
49
385
113
47
93
44
312
671
252
819
6,300
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
795
262
29
299
1,071
369
72
47
87
32
0
54
292
72
23
60
47
327
653
285
1,048
5,876
TOTAL 1,173
Assists 25
Follow-Ups 25
Henn. County Child Protection 6
Mutual Aid Given 2
Mutual Aid Requested 9
12,268
756
268
54
129
49
11,800
563
138
116
116
41
RUN:
PRO03
PROP
TYPE
AUTO/TK
BIKE
BIKE
BIKE
CAMERA
CAMERA
CLOTH
CONSUM
CONSUN
CONSUM
CONSUM
APPLNC
APPLNC
OFF EQP
RADIO
RADIO
RADIO
RADIO
CURNCY
NV PRTS
NV PRTS
EQP TLS
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
1-DEC-92
PROP
DESC
B I CYCL
BICYCL
BICYCL
CAMERA
CLOTHI
VACUUN
TELEVI
BILLFO
INCIDENT SEQ TYPE
NUNBER NO NO
92001807 1 1
92001834 1 1
920018~9 1 1
92001889 1 2
92001918 1 4
92001918 1 6
92001983 1 1
92001853 1 1
92001870 1 1
92001924 1 1
92001928 1 1
92001918 1 5
92001918 1 3
92001918 1 7
92001890 1 2
92001898 1 1
92001900 1 1
92001918 I 1
92001918 1. 2
92001920 1 2
92001952 1 1
92001919 1 1
92001890 1 1
92001902 1 1
92001937 1 1
92001848 1 1
92001858 1 1
92001874 1 1
92001918 1 8
92001920 1 1
92001924 1 2
92001940 1 1
92001966 1 1
92001917 1 1
INSTALLATION NAME -- HOUND POLICE DEPARTNENT
ENFORS
PROPERTY - STOLEN/RECOVERED
10/26/92 THRU 11/25/92
DATE STOLEN DATE RECOVERED
STOLEN VALUE RECOVERED VALUE
10/24/92
10/26/92
11/04/92
11/04/92
11/10/92
11/10/92
11/23/92
10/30/92
10/31/92
11/14/92
11/13/92
11/10/92
11/10/92
11/10/92
11/04/92
11/05/92
11/06/92
11/10/92
11/10/92
11/10/92
11/18/92
11/10/92
11/04/92
11/07/92
11/15/92
10/28/92
10/30/92
11/03/92
11/10/92
11/10/92
11/14/92
11/16/92
11/20/92
11/10/92
S14,000 10/28/92
$5O
S50
S1,100
S300
S150
$2 10/30/92
S20 10/31/92
$20
$3 11 / 13/92
$440
$299
$300
$65 11/24/92
S250
S600
$150
S200
$50
$16
$10
$50
S130
S20
S57
$5 11/03/92
S820
$3O
S21
S50 11/16/92
$29
$10
$14,000
$2
$20
$3
$65
$5
$50
PAGE
TOTALS: $19,452
S14,145
Run: 1-0ec-92 l&:O~
OFF01
Primary ISN~s only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/92 - 11/25/92
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: Att
Activity codes: Att
Officers/Badges: Att
Grids: Att
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
ACT ACTIVITY
CODE DESCRIPTION
A5351 ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM
AS35& ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANOS-CHLD-FAM
A5355 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ
A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BOO[LY HARM-NO ~EAP-ADLT-ACQ
B126~ BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN ~EAP-COH THEFT
B~]]& BURG ~-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK ~EAP-COH THEFT
B]36~ BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-N-UNK ~EAP-CON THEFT
B3434 BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT
B4&30 BURG 4oUNOCC RES NO FRC-O-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
B&990 BURG &-AT FRC RES-U-UNK ~EAP-UNK ACT
C3211 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON
C3212 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE*CHECK-BUSINESS
D8500 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION
DCSO0 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK
13060 CRIM AGNST FAN-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILO
J~500 TRAF-ACCIO-MS-DRIVE UHOER INFLUENCE OF LIOUOR
L1073 CSC 1-UNK ACT-ACQUAINT-l~-lS-F
143001 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER
1~199 LIOUOR - OTHER
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COHMLINICATIONS
P1110 PROP OAHAGE-FE-PRIVATE-UNK iNTENT
P~110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING
0 3 0
1 1 0
0 I 0
1 0 0
0 1 0
0 1 1
1 0 1 1
1 0 1 1
1 0 I 1
2 0 2 2
1 0 1 1
1 0 1 1
1 0 1 0
2 0 2 0
3 0 3 1
4 0 4 0
I 0 1 1
2 0 2 1
3 0 3 0
3 0 3 0
7 0 7 &
2 0 2 1
10 0 10 8
Page 1
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEAREO
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
66.6
100.0
0.0
50.0
100.0
100.o
42.~
50.0
2 20.0
Run: 1-Dec-92 1~:0~ OFF01
Primary ISN's on[y: No
range: 10/26/92 - 11/25/92
each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Oispositions: Atl
Activity codes: Att
Officers/Badges: Alt
Grids: Alt
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE 8Y EX- PERCENT
COOE DESCRIPTION
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPT]ON TOTAL CLEAREO
R3152 ROBB'SIMPLE-HIGHWAY-STRONGARM-ADULT-ACQ
T4099 THEFT-S250 LESS-MS-FRM SELF SRV GAS-OTH PROP
TB159 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
TF029 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-BUILD]NG-OTH PROP
TGO02 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-UNKNC~N-SERV]CES
TG019 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-FRM PERSON-OTH PROP
TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-GH-BUILDING-MONEY
tTHEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDZNG-OTH PROP
TG069 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-HA]LS-OTH PROP
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
U3018
U328~
U3498
THEFT-NS-BY CHECK-200 OR LESS
THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS
THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS
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
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
? I 6 5 0 1 0 1 16.6
3 0 3 1 2 0 0 2 66.6
2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 100.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
**** Report Totals:
78
3 75 41 15 6
13
34 45.3
Run: 1-Dec-92 10:43 CFS08 Page 1
Primary ISN's
Date Reported range: 10/26/92 - 11/25/92
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Hou Received: Att
Activity Resutted:
Dispositions: Att
Officers/Badges: Att
Grids: Att
Patrot Areas: At[
Days of the week: Att
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Carts For Service
INClOENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
9000 SPEEDING 52
9004 RESTRICTED D/L 1
9010 BAC OVER .10 4
9012 OPEN BOTTLE 2
~014 STOP SIGN 1
9024 ILLEGAL/UNSAFE TURNS 1
~034 STOP ARM VIOLATION 2
9040 NO SEATBELT 9
9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 5
9140 NO PARKING/WINTER HOURS 8
9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 7
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 17
9240 CHANGE OF DONICILE 1
9309 FOUND/RUNAWAY 2
9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 6
9313 FOUND PROPERTY 5
9315 UNCLAINE DESTROYED ANIMALS 2
9420 DERELICT AUTO 3
9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 2
9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS 7
9710 MEDICAL/ASU 1
97'50 MEDICALS 18
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
Ru~: 1 -Dec-92 10:43 CFS08
Primary ISN~s on[y: No
range: 10/26/92 - 11/25/92
each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Hou Received: AIl
Activity Resu[ ted:
Oispositio~: AIl
Officers/Badges: A[
Grids: AIl
Patrol Areas: AIl
Oays of the ueek: AIl
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Ca[Is For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIV[TY CCX)E
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
97~1
98OO
9801
99O0
9904
993O
MEDICALS/DX
ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED
DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT
ALL HCCP CASES
OPEN DOOR/ALARmS
HANDGUN APPLICATION
PROt4LER
SUSPICIOUS PERSON
INFO/INT
9945
995O
9980 ~ARRANTS
mO MISC. VIOLATIONS
9992 HUTUAL AID/8100
9993 MUTUAL AID/6500
~4 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER
A5351 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRH-HANDS-ADLT-FAM
A5354 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM
A5355
A5502
81264
ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ
ASLT 5'TNRT BOOILY HARM-NO ~EAP-ADLT-ACQ
BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN ~EAP-CON THEFT
3-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK ~IEAP-CON THEFT
BURG ]-UNOCC RES FRC'N-UNK ~tEAP-COH THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK ~EAP-CON THEFT
5
3
3
6
10
3
1
1
1
10
2
6
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
83364
83434
Page
Run: 1 -Dec-92 10:43 CFS08
Primary ISN~; only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/92 - 11/25/92
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Hou Received: ALL
Activity ResuLted: ALL
Oispositions: ALL
Officers/Badges: Att
Grids: AIL
Patrol Areas: AIL
Oays of the week: At[
ACTIVITY COOE
DESCRIPTION
MOUND POL]CE DEPARTMENT
Enfors CaLLs For Service
[NCIOENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
NUMBER OF
INCIDENTS
B4430 BURG 4-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK ~EAP-UNK ACT 1
B4(~O BURG 4-AT FRC RES-U-UNK ~EAP-UNK ACT 2
C3211 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON 1
C3212 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-BUSINESS 1
D8500 DRUGS-SHALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION 1
DCSO0 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 2
I3060 CRIM AGNST FAH-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 3
J3500 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 4
LIOT5 CSC 1-UNK ACT-ACQUAINT-13-15-F 1
M3001 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER 2
M4199 LIQUOR - OTHER 3
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 3
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS 7
Pl110 PROP DAHAGE-FE-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 2
P3110 PROP DAHAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 12
R~152 ROBB-SIMPLE-HIGH~AY-STRONGARM-ADULT-ACQ 1
T4099 THEFT-S250 LESS-MS-FRM SELF SRV GAS-OTH PROP 1
TB159 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 1
iF029 THEFT-201-5OO-GN-BUILDING-OTH PROP 1
TGO02 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-UNKN(TdN-SERVICES 1
TG019 THEFT-LESS 200-OM-FRM PERSON-OTH PROP 1
TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-HOMEY 2
Page
Run: 1-Dec-92 10:43 CFS08
Primary ISN's onty: No
Reported range: 10/26/92 - 11/2~/92
· ange each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received:
Activity Resulted:
Oispositio~s: Att
Officers/Badges:
Grids: Att
Patrot Areas:
Days of the ueek: At[
HOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Ca]Is For Service
]NC]DENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUHBER OF
DESCR]PT[ON ]NC]DENTS
TG029 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-OTH PROP
TG069 THEFT-LESS 200-GM'HAILS-OTH PROP
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
U3018
U3288
U~98
THEFT-MS-BY CHECK-200 OR LESS
THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS
THEFT-NS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS
1
1
7
2
2
Page
Totats:
290
51 o
MOUND POLICE RESERVES
MONTHLY REPORT
NOVEMBER 1992
DETAILS
NAME EMER RES CO~ H/F TRAIN INSTR RIDE MEET-
C/O SQUAB SERV BALL ING TION ALONG ABMIN ING TOTAL
' - 15.0 - 18.0
Fox, dim 3.0 .....
Geyen ....... 15.0 1.0 16.0
Fox, K 2.0 - - - 12.0 - - 15.0 1.0 30.0
Norton 1.5 12.0 2.5 .... 15.0 1.0 33.0
Liljeberg 5.5 76.5 3.0 - 13.5 - 3.5 15.0 1.5 118.5
Lyng ......... 0
Allee ......... 0
Berent 2.0 ..... 5.5 - - 7.5
Cole ......... 0
Fleming - 4.5 .... 9.0 - ~ 13.5
Haarstad - 8.0 6.0 - 3.0 .... 17.0
Maas - 6.0 - - - 22.0 21.5 1.0 50.5
Nassett .... 10.0 - 20.0 - 1.0 31.0
Nelson, S. - 9.0 .... 8.5 - 1.5 19.0
Qunell 2.0 11.5 7.0 - 17.0 - 51.0 15.0 1.5 105,0
Ranum 3.0 ........ 3,0
Swenson 1.0 6.0 ....... 7.0
Erdman ......... 0
Ringate ......... 0
TOTAL 20.0 127.5 24.5 - 55.0 22.0 119.0 90.0 10.5 469.0
MONTHLY ACTIVITIES ACTIVE RESERVES
Ride Alongs R19 Fleming
Meetings R1 Fox, d.
Transports R3 Fox, K.
Reserve Squad R54 Erdman, T.
First Aid Training RIO Nelson, S.
Christmas Tree Lighting Rll Qunell, D.
Pond Arena - First Aid R4 Liljeberg,
CPR Training R57 Lyng, L.
Lines Down
R22 Haarstad, P.
R24 Maas, d.
R2 Geyen, T.
R53 Swenson, J,
R59 Berent, T.
R17 Cole, P.
R56 Hilger(Ranum)
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWQOD ROAD
MOUND M/NNESOTA553E,: :687
'612) 472 0600
FAX (612~ 472-0620
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
December 3, 1992
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official _~$~
NOVEMBER 1992 MON~r.¥ REPOR~
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
In November, 21 building permits were issued for a total valuation of $169,168,
this brings our year-to-date value to $4,368,518, about 13 percent ahead of last
year.
There were 19 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous permits for a total of 40
permits issued this month, and 658 permits issued so far this year.
PLANNING AND ZONING
The proposed zoning code modifications and shoreland management ordinance review
has been continued by the City Council. Another public hearing is scheduled for
January 26, 1993.
One minor subdivision request was denied for the property at 1720 Dove Lane and
a minor lot line modification was approved for the property at 4725 Bedford Road.
The City Council also approved an Operations Permit for Drop Ship Express, two
variances requests, and a construction on public lands permit.
The Planning Commission reviewed a major subdivision request which was presented
by Neil Weber for Teal Pointe Development Co. and they recommended approval with
conditions. This request will be heard by the City Council on December 8, 1992.
Mr. Bruce Chamberlain of Hoisington Koegler Group made an exciting presentation
to the Planning Commission on the Mound Visions Proposal for a Development Model
for downtown. This report was prepared by "Mound Visions" a subcommittee of the
Economic Development Commission. Mr. Chamberlain also discussed a preliminary
Mound Promotional Packet being developed to distribute to prospective businesses
or interested parties. All in all it was an excellent presentation.
JS:pj
(~ printed on recycled paper
NEW RESIDENTIAL
GONSTRUGTK)N
NEW RESIDENTIAL
To~ Ho~-F~dly
NEW NOFFRE$1OENTIAL
(Comm~c~Vlnd4
CITY OF HOUND
5.541 Haywood ROad
Hound, MN 55364
BUILDING AGTIVITY REPORT
16,581
82,6/*9
86,969
169,618
T~II NM~.Reil~enli~l
TOTAL MONTH AHD
YEA~ TO DATE
CO~.LECTION$
Fences/walls
TOTAl.
21 329
11 135
2,316,1&1
2,316,141
67&,756
1,735,260
91,&69
66,065
317,117
&,368,518
Pt/J
December 2, 1992
CITY of MOUND
534" k,,~z. ,'WOOD q Z ::- Z
:{~'2 4-2 062_[
FAX,~'2 472 062~
To:
From:
Subject:
Ed Shulke
City Manager
Oeno Hoff
Street Supt.
November Activity Report
We were out 3 times this month with our snow and ice
control equipment. On November 2, we received about 8" of wet
snow. We started plowing at 4:00 A.M. and finished at 11:00
A.M. We were out twice sanding(on the 12th and the 29th).
Sidewalks were cleaned on the 6th of November.
Joyce hired a company to bring in a grinder for the pile
of brush at Lost Lake. When they were finished we spent a
couple of days hauling the chips up to the Cemetery.
On November 12, we started to hang the Christmas
Ornaments and getting ready for the lighting on the 17th.
Would you believe everything was working fine at 3:30 when we
closed the shop. At 6:00 P.M. I received a call from Mr.
Dodds that the lights on the tree didn't work. A fuse had
blown out. We replaced the fuse and everything worked fine.
They had a big turnout and it looked like everyone had a good
time.
Sign work: 2 stop, 3 street, 4 no parking, and replaced
5 sign post.
Cemetery work: staked out 2 graves and 4 stones.
printed on recycled paper
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
NOV ,3 0 1992
CALL TO ORDER
BOARD Of DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:30 PM - Regular Meeting
Wednesday, December 2, 1992
Tonka Bay City Hall
4901 Manitou Road (County Rd 19)
ROLL CALL
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Cochran
READING OF MINUTES - 10/28/92 Board Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS - From persons in attendance on subjects not on agenda
COMMITTEE REPORTS
WATER STRUCTURES, Chair Babcock
A. Approval of minutes, meeting of 11/14/92
B. Dr. Glen Nelson, Stubbs Bay, Orono, New Multiple Dock License
application for 9 boat storage units; recommending approval
(subject to a City of Orono Joint Use Dock permit and a DNR
multiple dock permit being approved)
C. Proposed Ordinance prohibiting use of non-encased polystyrene
foam in floating structures; recommending that an ordinance be
drafted by the LMCD attorney per 11/14/92 committee minutes
D. Deicing License renewal application, Sailor's World Marina,
Smith's Bay, Orono; recommending approval
E. Proposed Code amendments, recommending the LMGD attorney draft
ordinances for the following changes:
1) Sect. 1.07, Subd.3, Length Variance; change navigable water
depth from 3' to 4' at the outer ends of the dock
2) Sect. 2.01, Subd.3, Common Use of Adjacent Dock Use Areas;
allowing combined sites with a single common dock to 100'
length, provided shoreline frontage allows it and setbacks
are met
Amendment to 10/28/92 Board Action on multiple dock license
renewal due dates for application fees; recommending:
1) change late fee date from 3/1/93 to 2/28/93
2) change due date for balance of application fee from 4/1/93
to 3/31/93;
Chapman Place Marina Variance application denial, Draft
Findings and Order; recommending approval as amended by
committee
Lakeside Marina, Maxwell Bay, Orono, new as-built survey;
recommending approval per committee minutes of 10/10/92
Multiple Dock Fee Study Subcommittee; review and adopt purpose
outline and consider meeting date
Additional business recommended by committee
LMCD Board of Directors Agenda, 12/2/92, Page 2
LAKE USE AND RECREATION, Chair Poster
A. Approval of minutes, meeting of 11/23/92
B. Subcommittee on Decibel Levels; update report
C. First Reading of Ordinance Establishlng a Quiet Waters Area
Halsted's Bay, amending Code Sect. 3.02; recommending approval
D. Special Event Deposit Refunds @ $100 each-recommending approval
1) Excelslor Chamber of Commerce Pireworks, 7/4/92
2) Consolidated Race Schedule, 5/5/92 - 10/24/92
3) Lake Masters Swim Club, 5-Mile Swim, 7/25/92
E. Boat & Water Safety Education Program, draft of brochure for
presentation to probation officers at Ridgedale Courthouse
F. Save the Lake Dinner date; recommending Thursday, 2/11/93
G. Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Report
H. Additional buslness recommended by committee
ENVIRONMENT
A. Environment Committee, Chair Hurt
1) Approval of minutes, meeting of 11/10/92
2) Trash Container proposal recommending a one-year trial period
for all agencies to eliminate contail~ers at public accesses,
accompanied by an educational campaign regarding proper
waste disposal
3) Independent Evaluation of EWM Program, contractor Bob Pierce
4) Polystyrene foam material in docks; recom,nendlng allowing
only where fully encased, requiring replacement upon damage
to encasement causing loss of foam contents, concurring with
City of Orono time for replacement
5) Additional business recommended by committee
B. Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force, Chair Penn
1) Approval of minutes, meeting of 11/20/92
2) Proposed Sonar treatment on St. Alban's Bay, continued
pending position and recommendations of DNR
3) Additional business recommended by the Task Force
LMCD LAKE ACCESS COMMITTEE, Chair Grathwol
A. Approval of minutes, meeting of 11/23/92
B. Parking Standards for Lake Minnetonka Publlc Accesses;
recommending approval as adopted by Lake Access Task Force
10/21/92
C. Inventory of car/trailer parking spaces; recommending approval
subject to a favorable review by the Lake Access Task Force
D. Agreements with all cities/agencies for securing public access
car/trailer parking spaces, goal of four to be completed by
4/15/93; recommending approval
E. Appoint subcommittee to draft a model car/trailer parking
agreement by December 9, as a concept for the Lake Access Task
Force
F. Additional business recommended by committee
FINANCIAL REPORTS, Treasurer Carlson A. October Statement of Cash Transactions
B. Audit of Vouchers for Payment
LMCD Board of Directors Agenda, 12/2/92, Page 3
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT, Strommen A. Personnel - Selection of part-time clerical position
B. New Staff Progress
C. Administrative' Highlights
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS A. Committee chair appointments; Chair Cochran
B. 1993 Meeting Calendar, for approval
C. Newspaper Designation for 1993
D. Set Date for Officers' Meeting
ADJOURNMENT
REC'O NOV 3 0 1992
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Regular Meeting
7:30 PM, Wednesday, October 28, 1992
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chair Cochran at 7:30 PM.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: David Cochran, Chair, Greenwood: Bert Foster,
Deephaven; James Grathwol, Excelsior: Wm. Johnstone, Minnetonka;
Mike Bloom, Minnetonka Beach: Scott Carlson, Treasurer, Minne-
trista; Thomas Reese, Vice Chair, Mound: JoEllen Hurt. Orono;
Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Douglas Babcock, Secretary, Spring
Park; Tom Penn, Tonka Bay; George Owen, Victoria: Duane Markus,
Wayzata; Robert Slocum, Woodland. Also present: Charles LeFe-
vere, Counsel; Sgt. Wm. Chandler, Sheriff's Water Patrol; Rachel
Thibault, Administrative Technician: Eugene Strommen, Executive
Director.
Members Absent: None
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Cochran had no announcements.
READING OF MINUTES
Reese moved, Johnstone seconded, to approve the minutes of
the 9/23/92 Board meeting as submitted. Motion carried unani-
mously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from persons in attend-
ance not on the agenda.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. WATER STRUCTURES, Chair Babcock
A. Minutes Babcock moved, Hurr seconded, to approve the
minutes of the 10/10/92 Water Structures Committee meetin~ as
submitted with the following change:
Page 6, Paragraph 7, Third sentence, to read: Just because
a 32' s4½p dock is approved does not mean that a 32' boat has to
be placed in it.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. 1993 License Fee Review
Chair Babcock turned the meeting over to Treasurer Carlson
for a discussion of the 1993 Multiple Dock License (MDL) fees.
Carlson presented the following proposed recommendations of
the Water Structures Committee.
- continued
ottl 'poJoPiSUO3 oq plnoqs lu~o!lddu oql ~u!l~!lsoAu! jo lso3
Oq3 'SOSaOO!l ~U[JOp!suO3 al. 'UO!SlOa g66I '~q ol*JodJoD Iud
-13!{ln~ 'os!luol3 l~SO1 u moJj ~u!aOllOJ oql polonb iJoql[9
· o!l~moln~ lSOml~ s! l~OUOJ oql luomSpnf s!q uI 'o~J~qo
AJ!lsn[ ol sio~j ou oJ~ oxoql pu~ lU~OuoJ osuo.!l u Joj ~oop
000'15 lnoqu Su!SJuq~ s! ODNq oql p!~s oH 'oo!axos ~u!suoo!l
Op!AOad ol I~uJlUOO Ol ~U!lI!~ oq plnoa o~uq *ql punox~
jo ~oqmnu Xuu luom~pn[ s!q uI 'sisoo looJ!p ol Ol~lOJ
~aop Jod 00g$ ol 00~$ so~o!Ioq o~ 'XlUO slso~ l~oJlp
ol po~ollU s! lo!lls!O oql s~s ~I oq£ 'slSo~ l~nia~ oql
olulo~ lou soop Il!iS IlS oq£ 'J~Ola si ~1 oql s~ ~J~ssolou
s! l! so~O!loq oq 'lUXOuo9 Xouloilv oql ~u!qa~oJdd~ jo uoilsol~ns
oql uo ~u!luotumoa 'Joao~o~ .injdloq uo~oJd s,q siUO!la s[q pu~
ODIq? o{il uoo$loq podolo^op ~u!oq on~oI~!p oql p!~s o~ 'oolilmmoD
-!~!JO otl3 mo~j luomoAom o~l ol~!ao~dd~ XoHi p!~s 'soosu~a!l ~oop
.Id!llnm jo Joqmnu ~ ~u!luoso~d.J ZouJollu 'l~oql!O som~£
lUAOHOO XOlllOllV ~IOSOUH!I~ Oq3 luql poison,ns uooq s~q lI 'sisoo
olquuosuoJ oJ~ 1~ jo uo!i~ioldJolu! u! ~uol~jj!p
u s! olo~3 ,uo!ssnos!p jo iu!od Joqi~nJ * s~ 'p!~s UOSlX~9
'~661 Joj 'I l!Jd¥ ~q
oOUUlUq oql ql!~ 'I Joqmo3oO £q pied oq ooj I~ouoJ oql jo %0g jo
l!sodop ~ ~u!~olI~ poison,ns uosIJ.D 'soosuoall oql pJ.~ol lI!~
-poo~ jo o~nlso~ . sV 'oiup l~ql JolJ~ I!lun owoou! OA!O~O~ O1
U!80q iOU op saOploq ?GN oql s~ uopJnq I~!au~u!J ~ s! luom~d ooj
llnJ ql!a UOlleO!ldd~ ~ui~um ~oj o3~p I Joqmoaoo oql 3~ql s~odd~
ii 'saoploq ~G~ oql jo omos qi!~ uolssnos!p ~u!~OllOJ 'o~m ol
O~!l plno~ oq uoii~puommoooJ oJom ouo s! ogoql p!~s
· UUld luomo~u~N ~uolouu!N oM~? poldop~
oql Jod soaJnos onuo~o~ oa!l~uJoll~ JoJ MJo~ ol onu!luo0 '9
· sooj osuoo!l
o~nlnj ssnas!p ol sJoqmom pJ~ofl pu~ slol~Jodo
Maop old!llnm opnliu! ol ooll!mmoo ~ ~s!Iq~is~
'flS,~/I$ uuql oJOm ou o1 ploq oq ll~qs sos~oJiu!
l~nuu~ 'onoq~ ,,'~,, ~q pou!mJolop s~ sos~o=au!
olq~oilu jo Ssolp~oJ l~ql ~3!lod ooj ~ puommo3oa 'q
'~u!
-~Jl lsoo g~no~gl pou!m~olop s~ si!mil olq~oII~
o~l pooaxo lou ll~S sooj osuoo!l ~3op Old!3ln~
:~i!lod ~Ul~OIlOJ
o~3 ol ~u!pJoaa~ luomoldm! 'sos~oJou! oJninj ~u!pJ~o~
'sosuodxo jo ~u!~a~Ji POI!~lop
oJom ~oi|~ ol oJ~ljos ~u!lunoia~ poz!Joindmo3 jo osn
o~l ~noJ~l soJnpoooJd ~u!iunoaa~ ol~!IdoJdd~ luomoldmI
000'ggI 000'g~l soo~ i!mJod pu~ osuoa!? I~3o& ~
~CL'g~ $ ~L'gl $ uoli~.OllV pun~ OA~OSO~ g Ou!~
:s~OllOJ S~ sooJ osuoa!l moJJ onuoAoJ poioo[oJd u!
os~oJaop ~ ~u!l.OljOJ lo~pno oiN? ~66I po!j!pom ~ 2dop¥
DS~/ll$ +
ol r661Joj ooj osuoa!I Maop old!llnm oql os~oJooO 'I
[661 'Sg Joqoloo S~O,L~IQ &O Q~¥O~
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
expenses'in connection with the issuing of the authorization, the
cost of all supervision connected with ensuring that the license
fee conforms to the rules and regulations plus all other charges
reasonably relating to activities here." Gilbert continued by
stating there is no investigation involved in renewing a license
as it is the same people year after year and there are no public
issues involved. As far as expenses involved in issuing the
authorization, there is the expense of mailing out the bill for
renewal. He stated if this matter should go into litigation the
court would look at the direct and indirect expenses with some
over-head allocation. It is his belief that the LMCD is using
licensing to generate revenue. Gilbert said that at $11/WSU he
estimates the charge is almost $900 per dock. It is his sugges-
tion that the licensing should be contracted out to a municipali-
ty that has had experience in administrating this type of pro-
gram. He has talked to the City of Mound, which has a history of
administrating docks, and it is its opinion that the fees charged
by the LMCD are exorbitant. The City of Mound would like to take
on that portion itself. There may be other municipalities on tile
Lake which have the licensing experience.
Gilbert said the Board has heard his oral arguments and he
has submitted written conclusions. He feels the consideration
should be for $8/WSU as a compromise and then proceed to estab-
lish a formula.
LeFevere said there seems to be a difference of opinion as
to direct costs and reasonable costs. He is not sure what Gil-
bert means by direct cost. LeFevere is not sure how to define
any limitation between direct costs and indirect costs. The
costs as outlined by Gilbert are permissible costs. There might
be disagreement about other kinds of costs such as the cost of
studies that the Board uses to determine what the regulatory
scheme for multiple docks ought to be. Other reasonable expenses
are those related to regulating issuing and renewing Multiple
Dock Licenses. LeFevere said he does not know of any legal
principle that says costs to be permissible have to be direct.
Gilbert responded that studies of general Lake use are not a
proper item to be allocated to a license renewal. You do not
need a scientific mathematical formula but you do have to have a
basis of fact. In his opinion that breaks down to an hourly
analysis of what it takes to administer the program. It is a
cost accounting item.
Penn questioned how Gilbert arrived at $1,000 per dock. He
said, according to his figures, under the proposal, a license
with six 10' x 20' slips would pay $116. He said comparing L~ICD
license fees with what the cities charge is comparing apples and
oranges. Thibault noted that a marina with 200 slips will pay
considerably more. Carlson added that historically cities subsi-
dize their license fees.
Gilbert questioned including studies of tile ~lanagement Plan
in determining the cost of a license. Carlson responded that
there was consideration of the cost of the lake density study as
applicable to multiple docks. He said a lot of the density is
coming from the multiple docks.
5170
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28~ 1992
LeFevere questioned what Gilbert meant by lake use studies.
If he is talking about water ski studies, he would agree that is
not an applicable cost to allocate to multiple docks.
B~.bcock addressed the subject of the change in the due dates
of the license renewal fees. He said issuing a license before
the full fee is collected is not advisable. Carlson responded
that it is a method of working with the licensees. When the
deposit is accepted the LMCD knows what the plans are for the
next year.
Rascop asked for an explanation of the $I limit on increases
in the WSU fee for the following years. Carlson said it is in-
tended as a policy to limit the increase to a maximum of $1 in
one year. He noted that the Board cannot bind a future Board
decision. Cochran said there is the possibility that with in-
creased efficiencies the fees may go down. Bloom questioned what
would happen if the cost analysis shows the fee increase would
have to be more than $1. Carlson said he does not believe the
LMCD has ever come close to meeting the cost of administrating
the program, so he doesn't see a problem with continuing to
subsidize the difference.
Carlson asked for comments on the suggestion of asking the
Attorney General for an opinion on what costs may be included.
Gilbert said it is his opinion that the Attorney General would
issue an opinion only on a legal matter. LeFevere agreed with
Gilbert that the Attorney General will not rule on fact issues.
The Attorney General will not say that $11/WSU is a reasonable
fee. He believes that if LMCD can describe the various
activities and costs that went into that fee. the Attorney Gener-
al will opine as to whether those are permissible expenses which
can be reimbursed by fees. There is guidance that the Attorney
General may be able to provide which will be helpful, short of
saying that $I1 is permissible.
MOTION: Hurt moved, Johnstone seconded, to approve the Water
Structure Committee recommendations for the 1993 season, adding a
#7 to the recommendation for a 20% deposit of the renewal fee
due December 1, 1992, the balance due by April 1. 1993.
DISCUSSION: The executive director asked at what point in time a
late fee is to be charged.
LeFevere said the proposed action would require an amendment
to the fee resolution. That could come back to the Board for
approval.
Slocum said he believes the costs are probably closer to $1l
or $12/WSU, or as high as $15/WSU. He does not really k~ow. nor
does he think any of the Board members know since no one knows
the right answer.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Slocum moved, Markus seconded, to amend the
motion by changing Item 1. to read: Decrease the multiple dock
license fee for 1993 to $50 + $10/WSU.
DISCUSSION: Markus asked the executive director if L~ICD can live
on $10/WSU. The executive director responded that the fee struc-
ture is related to the cost as set in the original fee schedule
(presented 9/23/92). The original fees were based on the best
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
known cost of operating the multiple dock license program. The
$11 fee meets the requirements with an amended budget. It would
be necessary to draw more from the Reserve Fund to provide the
operating funds at $10/WSU.
Markus asked Gilbert, if the Board were to recess for five
minutes would he be willing to meet with his clients to discuss
the motions before the Board to see if his clients would accept
$10/WSU as a settlement to avoid litigation.
Mark Breneman, North Shore Drive Marina, used the applica-
tion of Dr. Nelson, the subject of a Public Hearing earlier in
the evening, as an example of how little time the multiple dock
licensees contend is spent on granting licenses. He noted the
Public Hearing lasted 5 minutes and he would estimate no more
than 1 hour was spent on administration. He said Nelson paid
$171. as a license fee and will be charged the same amount next
year for a renewal with less time spent on administration.
Jim Rivers, Windward Marine, said it seems to him that just
a few people, the multiple dock licensees, are being asked to
fund the LMCD. In his opinion the people living on and using the
Lake are not paying enough. Carlson responded that that is
something to discuss at budget time.
Rascop said he is against the $10/WSU fee suggested in the
amendment. It will require a further use of Reserve Funds.
Reserve Funds will be needed to carry the operating costs of the
LMCD from January 1, 1993 until April 1, 1993 until the full
license fees are paid.
MOTION: Foster moved, Bloom seconded, to table the discussion of
the 1993 License Fees to give Attorney Gilbert and his clients an
opportunity to discuss the amendment to the motion. The Board
will continue with the agenda items until Gilbert advises they
are ready to resume discussion.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
C. Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association, Carman's Bay,
Orono - New Multiple Dock License Application.
Babcock presented thc Water Structures Committee recommenda-
tion for approval of a new multiple dock license application for
Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association, Carman's Bay, Orono for 6
boat storage units; subject to Orono's approval of a joint use
dock license, subject to back-licensing to 1992 and contingent on
continuing approval of the neighbor to the south to waive the
setback requirement.
MOTION: Babcock moved, Foster seconded, to approve the new dock
license application of Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association, Car-
man's Bay, Orono, subject to Orono's approval of a .joint use dock
license, subject to back-licensing to 1992, and contingent on
continuing approval of the neighbor to the south to waive the
setback requirement.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
5
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
D. Minnetonka Dock Services, Inc., for Chapman Place Mari-
na, Cooks Bay, Mound - dock length variance application.
The Board received the recommendation of the Water Struc-
tures Committee that the dock length variance for an additional
26 feet, for a total dock length of 155 feet into the Lake for
the Chapman Place Marina dock be denied. The committee found
that the situation is not unique, a reasonable use is not being
denied, and any hardship was created by the applicant. The
committee said the applicant could reconfigure the (locks for
further consideration.
MOTION: Babcock moved, Rascop seconded, to direct preparation of
Findings and Order denying the application for a variance re-
ceived from Minnetonka Dock Service, Inc. for the Chapman Place
Marina.
DISCUSSION: Reese spoke against the motion. He said Chapman
Place Marina is one of a kind, a marina operated independent of
the Chapman Place Homeowner's Association. The new owner of the
docks, Vince McClellan, is operating the marina as a credit to
the Lake. McClellan has offered to build a make-ready dock at
the City of Mound public access boat launch adjacent to Chapman
Place. In building the make-ready dock it would serve 73
car/trailer parking spaces available to the public. Reese said
he has driven his boat into the shallow water and believes the
variance request could be reduced from 26 feet to 15 feet.
Reese said he realizes the LMCD Code does not allow attaching
amenities to a variance, but feels that the Board should be
flexible in this case.
Cochran stated that a mistake was made in 1989 when tile
former Surfside Supper Club docks were converted to Chapman Place
during a low water year. A site plan was submitted that is
unusable during normal water levels. He added that the ~innehaha
Creek Watershed District says 5' was lost when rip rap was in-
stalled, not 10' as stated at the committee meeting. Cochran
noted that it was suggested to McClellan to try to revise the
dock plan by reducing slip sizes, but he has not submitted an
alternate plan. Reese responded that an alternate plan is not
possible. Historically the Surfside docks encroached on the
neighboring property. Reese said there should not be a concern
about setting a precedent because Chapman Place is a one-of-a-
kind situation on the Lake. Reese added that durin~ the Iow
water there was a temporary low water permit which placed tile
dock 300' into the Lake and it did not interfere with navigation.
Carlson expressed his concern that the application does ~ot
meet the criteria established for reviewing a variance.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to table the varia,~ce
application to the Water Structures Committee.
VOTE: Motion failed, Markus. Hurt, Babcock. Carlson. Johnstone.
Cochran. Penn, Rascop and Bloom voting nay.
DISCUSSION: Babcock said one reason for his vote to deny tile
variance was that the 32' shore based docks on the original site
plan weren't necessarily intended for 32' long boats. In addi-
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
checklist in that the hardship was created by the applicant.
albeit not by this applicant, McClellan. The dock use area of the
applicant has been filled, already extending beyond 100', and the
additional length creates a greater variance.
Hurr questioned whether a Special Density License is needed.
LeFevere responded that this marina was grandfathered in when the
Surfside transient slips were eliminated. At that time the Board
agreed to a reconfiguration. Hurr stated that such a variance
would be a modification of a grandfathered situation.
Foster asked where the make-ready dock would be built.
Reese responded that there is room next to the Mound beach. The
City of Mound would have to agree to the construction and mainte-
nance. Babcock said if this were a new dock license the situa-
tion would be different. In this case there is no precedent for
tying amenities to a variance.
Cochran suggested that the applicant might be able reduce
the 32' slips to 24' and reduce the variance to 15' or 18'.
Babcock responded that McClellan does not want to give up the 32'
slips. The executive director said the applicant felt there were
no other acceptable dock configuration options and no reason for
him to come back in. Babcock said the applicant could reconfig-
ure the marina with different size slips.
MOTION: Cochran moved, Markus seconded, to table the application
of the Chapman Place Marina to the Water Structures Committee.
VOTE: The motion failed, Carlson, Hurr, Babcock, Johnstone,
Penn, Rascop, Slocum and Bloom voting nay.
DISCUSSION: Markus asked for the thoughts of the executive
director. He responded that staff saw no interference with
navigation. The committee cited valid reasons for denial and
their judgment is reasonable.
VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION: Motion carried, Grathwol, Reese,
Foster, Owen, and Cochran voting nay.
MOTION: Hurr moved, Rascop seconded, to removed the tabled item
1. B., 1993 License Fee Review, from the table,
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Gilbert reported his clients have discussed the $10/WSU
proposal and will accept it for 1993 with the understanding that
they are not stipulating that it is a reasonable charge. His
clients want to have two members participate in the committee
establishing the fees for the next year. They also reserve the
right to begin litigation within the next year, not to challenge
the $10/WSU fee but to go before the court in six to nine months
if agreement cannot be reached on what is to be included in
determining the costs of issuing Multiple Dock Licenses. He said
his clients were not in total agreement but it was decided this
was the best method of deciding the issue at this time.
Markus asked if the six to nine months could be changed to
one year. Carlson said the new budget will be proposed in May.
It is Carlson's thought that something would be worked out before
then. Foster said he is concerned with a January to May time
frame because an entire year is needed to accurately do the cost
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
accounting. He cannot see how it can be determined in less than
a year. Carlson agreed with Foster in that multiple dock activi-
ties continue throughout the year.
VOTE ON MOTION TO AMEND THE RECOMMENDED FEE TO $10/WSU: Motion
carried, Rascop and Babcock voting nay.
DISCUSSION: Grathwol suggested the original motion include that
this is a compromise for 1993 only.
The Board continued to discuss the other terms of tile pro-
posal.
Item 2. Budget Modification. Hurr and Johnstone agreed to
accept a change in Item 2 to read: Adopt a modified 1993 LMCD
Budget reflecting a decrease in projected revenue from license
fees as follows:
Line 1 Reserve Fund Allocation $ 43,432
Line 2 Total License and Permit Fees 117.300
Item 7. Renewal Fee and Penalty. Hurr and Johnstone agreed
to accept a change in Item 7 to read:
Deposit of 20% of the fee (minimum $100) due on or before
12/1/92.
If the application is received after 12/1/92 a late fee of
10% of the required 20% deposit amount must be added.
If the application is received after 12/31/92 a late fee of
20% of the required 20% deposit amount must be added
If the application is received after 3/1/93 a late fee of
30% of the required 20% deposit amount must be added
If the application is received after 4/1/93 a late fce of
30% of the full license fee amount must be added.
This fee structure to be for 1993 only.
Line 4b. Future Increases.
Bloom expressed concern about a policy that would place a
"cap" on future increases in WSU charges. He said he is opposed
to it at this time because the Board does not have information as
to the actual costs, either direct, indirect or what is reasona-
ble. It might be determined that the $15 is reasonable.
Foster said he supports the $1 cap as a compromise with the
marina owners.
Babcock said the $1 increase cap does sound more permanent
than just for 1993.
Penn suggested striking 4b from tile proposal.
Hurt and Johnstone accepted an amendment to the mot ion to
strike 4b from the Water Structures Committee recommendations as
amended.
REPIIRASED MOTION: Hurr moved, Johnstone seconded, to al~prove tile
following Multiple Dock License fee schedule for 1993:
1. Decrease the multiple dock license fee for 1993 to $50 +
$10/WSU
2. Adopt a modified 1993 LMCD Budget reflecting a decrease
projected revenue from license fees as follows:
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
Line 2 Reserve Fund Allocation
Line 4 Total License and Permits Fees
$43.432
$117.300
VOTE:
Implement appropriate accounting procedures through the use
of computerized accounting software to allow more detailed
tracking of expenses.
Regarding future increases, implement according to the fol-
lowing policy:
a. Multiple dock license fees shall not exceed the allow-
able limits as determined through cost tracking.
Establish a committee to include multiple dock owners and
operators to discuss future license fees.
Continue to work for alternative revenue sources per the
adopted Lake Minnetonka Management Plan.
Renewal Fee for 1993 to be due on or before 12/i/q2 or the
following at the option of the licensee:
Deposit of 20% of the fee (minimum $100) due on or before
12/1/92 to avoid late fee.
If the application is received after 12/1/92 a late fee of
10% of the required 20% deposit amount must be added.
If the application is received after 12/31/92 a late fee of
20% of the required 20% deposit amount must be added.
If the application is received after 3/1/93 a late fee of
30% of the required 20% deposit amount must be added.
If the application is received after 4/1/93 a late fee of
30% of the full license fee amount must be added.
Motion carried unanimously.
The committee to discuss future fees was announced to be
comprised of Carlson as Chair, Johnstone, Babcock, Hurr, Cochran
and Foster. The marina owners and operators will appoint an
appropriate number, at least two, to serve on the committee.
Cochran commended Carlson for the effort he made in reaching
this agreement.
E. Clay Cliffe Homeowners Association, Old Channel Bay,
Tonka Bay, Amended Site Plan
The Board received the committee recommendation for approval
of an amended site plan for the Clay Cliffe Homeowners Associa-
tion, dated 9/17/92. All setbacks are met and there are no
problems with boat density.
MOTION: Babcock moved, Grathwol seconded, to approve the amended
site plan dated 9/17/92 as submitted by the Clay Cliffe Homeown-
ers Association.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
F. Second Reading of Draft Ordinance Relating to Deicing
Equipment Amending Code Sect. 2.09
The Board received the amendment to tile Deicine Equipment
Ordinance as recommended by tile committee.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, 1992
MOTION: Babcock moved, Hurr seconded, to waive the third reading
and to adopt Ordinance No. 119, An Ordinance Relating to Deicin~
Equipment on Lake Minnetonka: Amending LMCD Code Section 2.09.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
G. First Reading of Draft Ordinance Relating to t'ermanent
and Seasonal Docks Amending Sect. 1.02.
The Board received the Ordinance relating to permanent and
seasonal docks as amended by the committee by adding a chan~ed
wording for "non-mechanized" LeFevere said the amendment is
consistent with the DNR's definition although not identical.
MOTION: Babcock moved. Slocum seconded, to waive tile second and
third reading and to adopt Ordinance No. 120, An Ordinance Relat-
ing to Permanent Docks in Lake Minnetonka: Amending LMCD Code
Section 1.02, Subdivision 35 and Adding New LMCD Code Section
1.02, Subdivision 46.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
2. LAKE USE AND RECREATION, Chair Foster
A. Approval of Minutes. Foster moved. Reese seconded,
approval of the Lake Use and Recreation Committee minutes of
9/21/92 and 10/19/92 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Quiet Waters Area in Halsted's Bay Cove near King's
Point Access
The Board received the committee recommendation for accept-
ance of the Public Hearing Report and Findings of 9/23/92.
Foster called attention to a memo from .Denis Bailey. tlennepin
County Lake Improvements, with a third buoy location shown as "C"
on the 10/27/92 drawing. Foster noted the recommendation to
place the buoys in a straight line from Kings Point to Sheehans
Point is for a trial basis and only as long as the Kings Point
access is open. Foster said he would have .no trouble with
proving the "B" location as recommended by the committee.
MOTION: Foster moved, Johnstone seconded to approve the "B"
location on a trial basis for slow buoys in ltalsted's Bay as
recommended by the Committee.
DISCUSSION: LeFevere asked whether the Board wanted to place a
"sunset" date in the Quiet Water Ordinance which would require
republishing, or whether it would rather amend the Ordinance when
the Kings Point access is closed. Rascop asked if the sunset
provision could be when the Kings Point access is closed. LeFe-
vere responded, that would place the Ordinance in the hands of
another agency. LeFevere also said the Ordinance should give a
buoy location so the buoys can be observed at a Riven location.
Babcock said he is opposed to placement of additional slow
buoys. It is his belief the use of slow buoys should be for
safety purposes only. He does not believe a safety riced has I)t. en
demonstrated.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, 1992
Reese said he is opposed to designating this a slow buoy
area. He said there are many other locations on the Lake deserv-
ing of that designation.
Carlson said this is an opportunity to respond to some
residents who have been treated shabbily in the past and this
~pp.rov. al ~oul.d demonstrate.that the LMCD cares.
VOTE: Motion carried, Cochran, Slocum, Babcock. Reese and Bloom
voting nay.
C. Special Events
1) New Event: Excelsior Park Tavern, Winter Fest, Excelsior
Bay, Excelsior
MOTION: Babcock moved, Grathwol seconded, approval of a Special
Event License for the Excelsior Park Tavern, Winter Fest, Excel-
sior Bay, Excelsior, January 14-24, 1993, subject to the stipula-
tions prepared by the LMCD Staff.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
2) Deposit Refunds
MOTION: Foster moved, Carlson seconded, approval of the follow-
ing deposit refunds of $100 each:
a) Don Shelby US Invitational Bass Tournament, 9/10-9/13/92
b) Morrison Wedding Fireworks, 9/26/92
c) Viking Bassmasters Invitational, 10/4/92
d) IN Bass Tournament, 9/20/92
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
D. Joint & Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County for
Sheriff's Water Patrol Services
MOTION: Foster moved, Rascop seconded, approval of the Joint and
Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County for the Sheriff's
Water Patrol Services renewal for 1993 along with the letter
drafted by staff to Inspector Michael Postle with program recom-
mendations.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
E. Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Report
Sgt. Chandler had one addition to the Water Patrol report of
10/19. The South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department appre-
hended two adult males and one female breaking into boats at the
Tonka Bay Marina. They entered the area by land.
Chandler reported 58 of the 60 BWI arrests were on Lake
Minnetonka. There has been a reduction in the BWl arrests due to
the weather, the Water Patrol check points, the desienated driver
use and the law is being taken more seriously.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, 1992
3. ENVIRONMENT, Chair Hurr
A. Minutes. Hurr moved, Owen seconded, approval of the
minutes of the Environment Committee meeting of 10/13/92. Motion
carried unanimously.
1) Water Quality Objective Based Upon LMCD Management Plan.
Hurr said she would like to see more LMCD representatives at
the Environment Committee meetings. The Minnehaha Creek Water-
shed District will participate in the Lake Watch. Iturr reported
there were 27 bay representatives at the Lake Watch Training
Session 10/10/92. Rascop and Reese attended the session along
with herself. There was good newspaper coverage. This is a
project of the District, the Freshwater Foundation and the Lake
Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners Association.
The Environment Committee continues to meet monthly, tlurr
thanked the executive director for the fine letter he wrote to
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
B. Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force, Chair Penn
1) Minutes. Penn moved, Cochran seconded, to approve the
minutes of the Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force meeting of
10/16/92. Motion carried unanimously.
a. Operations:
Penn pointed out that modifications have been made to all of
the harvesting machines. Penn reported staff is investigating
the use of auxiliary gas tanks to increase operating time.
b. Diamond Reef
Penn reported there are no plans to treat Diamond Reef with
2.4D in 1993 upon the recommendations of the DNR.
c. EWM Operations Evaluation
Penn said Consultant Bob Pierce will submit his report at
the November Task Force meeting.
d. SONAR
Penn said it appears that the EWM problem is not yet eoing
to be solved by SONAR treatments. In reviewine aerial
photographs of Libb's Lake it now appears to be fully reinfested
with EWM after treatment with SONAR. Another problem is that
there is disagreement between the DNR Fisheries Division and
Ecological Services on how to treat EWbt. The DNR has not yet
given a recommendation on the use of SONAR.
Rascop asked about the press reports on a Weevil to control
EWM. Penn said no one really knows. That is in the early exper-
imental stage.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, 1992
Johnstone said the LMCD must continue to be up front on the
EWM problem. The water quality of the Lake is as important as
anything. He does not have confidence that the DNR will ever
take the lead. He hopes the LMCD continues to push on investi-
gating methods of control and pushing the bureaucracy. If tile
LMCD does not ~t does not ao0oar anyone will.
Reese said if St Alban's BaY cannOt be used as a SONAR test
site because it is not a closed system there [las to be some other
method of testing found. Babcock said it may be necessary to
treat a system that is not closed. Testing in other Lakes will
not reflect the Lake Minnetonka eco-system.
The executive director reported that there was a meeting on
10/26 of a sub-committee of scientists in town for a national
symposium. Dr. Sallie Sheldon spoke on her three year study in
Vermont on the weevil.
The executive director also reported that a staff person
from the University of Minnesota said a Corps of Engineers report
finds that SONAR has to be in contact with the infestation from
30 to 60 days to be effective. Dr. Douglas Pullman reported on
10/1/92 that after a week the effect of SONAR is finished. The
subsequent introduction of EWM fragments regenerates new plants
in the same season. Babcock said that if LMCD does not pursue
the test in St. Alban's Bay, it will not know SONAR's effect.
Penn said the DNR is testing on other closed lakes. The execu-
tive director said this does not mean the testing will not be
done, it might .just be postponed for a year or two. Penn said it
is disappointing that there is so much conflicting information.
Bloom asked if there was much water movement through the
channel into St. Alban's Bay. Cochran responded that there is
movement but not much. Babcock said the problem is the traffic
carrying EWM in and out. Penn reiterated that the Task Force is
not saying they will not do the test of St. Alban's Bay, but that
they must examine more information and get a DNR recommendation.
4. LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE, Chair Grathwol
Grathwol submitted a report of the Lake Minnetonka Public
Access Task Force Meeting of 10/21/92 along with a chronoloev of
the 1992 Lake Access study.
Grathwol high-lighted the report, noting tile Task Force
accomplished a number of important things. The parkine standards
for Lake Minnetonka were adopted with significant changes from
the 1986 standards. The distance for car/trailer parking spaces
was changed from 1500' to 2000' from a public access point.
There will be 700 car/trailer parking spaces for weekends with at
least 50% of the car/trailer spaces available weekdays. Oil-
street parking spaces will be counted at 75% unless the parking
is signed "Car/Trailer Only" Car only spaces in access lots
will be counted up to 10% of the total car/trailer parking spaces
per lot. Grathwol said there was some discussion of handicapped
spaces, passenger cars and car-top hoatin.e. Rascop sai~l car-top
boating should be encouraged as an activity as it will allow more
credit for parking spaces.
LbiCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, IO92
Grathwol said there will be another Task Force meetin~o on
12/ 9/92. The first item on the agenda will be the car/trailer
parking inventory. He reported 755 spaces are available. One
hundred forty-eight are in lots. Three hundred are within 2000'
of an access, with some requiring negotiations with responsible
agencies and in some case a make-ready dock will be needed. One
hundred twenty new spaces are planned at Gray's Bay access and
Hennepin Regional Park. There will be 32 "take-aways" at Kin~'s
Point and Gray's Bay Dam. There are 219 spaces requiring more
extensive negotiations.
Grathwol said a meeting of the LblCD Lake Access committee
will be scheduled for 6 P~4, 11/23 to discuss the relationship of
the items being discussed by the Task Force and the requirements
of the ~anagement Plan.
Johnstone called attention to the Environmental Impact
Statement on the Gray's Bay causeway. Orathwol said he will eet
more information on it. That is something to be discussed with
the LbiCD directors at the committee meeting.
Hurt has some questions from Orono's City Council on the
organization of the Lake Access Task Force. She said she wi il
develop her thoughts for discussion before the 11/23 meeting.
Carlson said he wishes all of the cities represented by the
LNCD would be represented on the Task Force. He said it is
important to maintain local control.
FINANCIAL REPORTS, Treasurer Carlson
A. The Board received the September statement of cash
transactions and ordered it filed.
B. Audit of Vouchers for Payment
Carlson asked rot an identification o£ Steve Prestin, Check
#8879. The executive director said he is consultant, under
contract, for preparation of the Shoreland Rules.
Babcock asked for an explanation of Check #8851 for a cal, i-
tal improvement item. The executive director said that is for a
replacement fax machine. This is a plain paper copy replacement
with improved features and the cost per copy will be less. It is
used frequently.
NOTION: Carlson moved, Penn seconded, to approve payment of
bills in the amount of $40,955.50, Checks # 8827 through 8895.
VOTE: ~otion carried unanimously.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT~Strommen
A. Accept staff resignations due to retirement.
1) Strommen reported Joan Mansk. Administrative Secre-
tary, will retire effective 12/31/92. She will complete work
12/2/92, to take earned vacation. She is eligible for a buy-back
of unused sick leave per the Personnel Policy allowance of 40% of
her 648 accumulated hours for a total of $3,042. The sick leave
severance has been provided for in the annual audit as an accrued
liability.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, 1992
Strommen said Joan Mansk has been a valued employee for 18
years and an asset to the District.
Strommen said there will be an over-lap of a month with the
employment of a new administrative secretary/bookkeeper.
..... ldOTION:. P. en.n moved, Babcock seconded, to accept the resignation
of Joan I~ansk, effective-12/31/92,' aP'Proving her use of accrued
vacation time beginning 12/2/92 and payment of $3.04'2 for 40% of
her accrued sick leave.
VOTE: ~lotion carried unanimously.
2) Strommen reported Muriel Stewart, part-time bookkeeper
will retire effective 10/30/92. There will be no over-lap with
the new employee. Stewart has agreed to continue as an independ-
ent contractor according to an Agreement distributed to the
Board. She will provide technical bookkeepin~/accountin~ service
and training for the new employee as needed. It is estimated
this will be 20 to 50 hours until the end of the year.
MOTION: Hurr moved, Rascop seconded, to accept the resignation
of lquriel Stewart effective 10/30/92 and to approve the Independ-
ent Contract Agreement with Iquriel Stewart as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. Employment of New Administrative Secretary/Bookkeeper
Strommen distributed a new .job description for an adminis-
trative secretary/bookkeeper. He said there were twenty-five
applicants for the position. Strommen and Carlson recommended
employing Lisa A. Bird, effective 11/2/92, at $9.75 per hour plus
benefits as provided in the Personnel Policy with a six month
probationary period.
MOTION: Johnstone moved, Carlson seconded, to approve the recom-
mendation of the executive director for the employment of Lisa A.
Bird as administrative secretary/bookkeeper, under the terms and
conditions set by the executive director.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
C. Equipment Purchase - Computer
Strommen requested authorization to purchase a computer for
the administrative secretary/bookkeeper's station, encumbering
1993 funds. Carlson said it is necessary to upgrade the account-
lng system and this will be valuable in tracking time.
Babcock said at some point in the future the whole system
should be tied together.
MOTION: Hurt moved, Penn seconded, to authorize purchase of a
computer system, not to exceed $2,500. using 1993 budget funds.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
D. bteet lng Schedule
Strommen provided the meeting schedule for November and
December. The LMCD La}re Access Committee meeting for 6
. LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 28, 1992
November 23 is to be added. That meeting is to follow immediate-
ly after the Lake Use and Recreation Committee meeting.
Carlson said he would like to get started on studying the
general accounting procedures and to set up a meeting with tile
marina owners and operators.
Cochran asked the Board members to prepare their suggested
"to do" lists so they can be prioritized.
Johnstone suggested holding more meetings consecutively.
such as the November 23rd meetings.
Bloom suggested holding meetings on a Monday through Friday
schedule, after work hours. He finds it is difficult for sonic
members to attend meetings during the day. Hurr noted that some
of the committees, such as the Environment Committee, have staff
members from other agencies requiring daytime hours. In those
cases the members prefer meeting during their normal working
hours.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
There was no unfinished business.
Carlson, Chair of the Nominating Committee, which consisted
of himself, Slocum. Rascop and Foster, presented a slate of
nominees for officers for the 1992-93 program years.
FOR ClIAIR - David Cochran. Greenwood - Tom Reese, Mound
Carlson called for nominations from the floor. There were
none and nominations were closed.
Carlson invited the nominees to speak to their qualifica-
tions.
Reese said it would be a honor to serve as Chair. tie noted
there are a number of new members who could serve in years to
come. He has been on the Board since 1987. He feels he has the
right kind of experience to serve as Chair. lie chaired the Mound
Planning Commission for two years. He worked with a number of
agencies when the Management Plan was being developed. He
chaired the EWM Task Force and worked with the agencies involved
in that. He feels his name has been associated with marly posi-
tive things. The city he represents, Mound, has always supported
the LMCD. He would be honored to serve. He said he will not
serve again when this term is up.
Cochran said it would be an honor to serve as Chair. tie
realizes being Chair takes a lot of time. He has lived on l. ake
Minnetonka since 1950. He is happy the Management Plan has been
approved and accepts its philosophy. He feels a primary concern
is lake access.
Ballots were distributed to the ~oard members. LeFevere and
Thibault were appointed tally clerks.
LeFevere announced the vote as: Cochran 8 votes
Reese 6 votes
L6
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28. 1992
Cochran was declared elected to the Chair of the LMCD Board
of Directors for the 1992-93 year.
FOR VICE CHAIR
- Jim Grathwol. Excelsior
Tom Penn, Tonka Bay
Carlson called for nominations f'rom the floor. There were
none. Nominations were closed.
Grathwol said he would be honored to serve as Vice Chair and
would appreciate the support of his fellow members.
Penn said he appreciated the opportunity to be nominated.
If elected he would try to be as active as possible and support
Chair Cochran.
Ballots were distributed and counted by tally clerks LeFe-
vere and Thibault.
LeFevere announced the vote for Vice Chair as:
Penn 8 votes
Grathwol 6 votes
Penn was declared elected Vice Chair of the LMCD Board of
Directors for the 1992-93 year.
FOR SECRETARY - Douglas Babcock, Spring Park
Carlson called for nominations from the floor. There were
none. Nominations were declared closed.
Hurr moved, Grathwol seconded, to declare Babcock elected
Secretary of the LMCD Board of Directors for the 1992-93 year by
acclimation. Motion carried unanimously.
FOR TREASURER - Scott Carlson, Minnetrista
Carlson called for nominations from the floor. There were
none. Nominations were declared closed.
Hurt moved, Foster seconded, to declare Carlson elected
Treasurer of the LMCD Board of Directors for the 1992-93 year by
acclimation. Motion carried unanimously.
Carlson said the nominating committee is suggesting the
Board consider staggering terms to avoid having all of the mem-
bers appointed at one time. He suggested a process of voluntary
resignations or by attrition such as moving from the area. It
was recommended the terms be set so the appointments would be
staggered five, five and four. Bloom, Babcock, Foster and Rascop
said their cities would be willing to go to staggered terms.
Carlson asked that the members contact their cit les and
bring the information to the December 2 Board meetine. ^n at-
tempt will be made to resolve the matter of staggered terms at
that time.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
October 28, 1992
2. Installation of officers
LeFevere administered the oath of office to the newly elect-
ed officers of the LMCD Board of Directors.
3. Resolution regarding Depository
MOTION: Cochran moved, Foster seconded, to adopt Resolution No.
85, Resolution Approving Depository of LMCD Funds.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Cochran declared the meeting adjourned at 10:30 PM
David Cochran. Chair
Douglas Babcock, Secretary
NOV 3 0 1992
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT ~x~'{[~d~'~D~l~F~
Action Report: Water Structures Committee
Meeting: 7:30 AH.. Saturday, November 14, 1992
Norwest Bank, Wayzata. Community Room
Members Present: Douglas Babcock, Chair, Spring Park: David
Cochran. Greenwood: Scott Carlson, Minnetrista: Tom Penn. Tonka
Bay; Robert Slocum, Woodland. James Grathwol. Excelsior, and
Robert Rascop, Shorewood, arrived as noted. Also present:
Rachel Thibault. Administrative Technician, Eugene Strommen,
Executive Director.
I. Public Hearing Report and Findings: Dr. Glen Nelson, Stubbs
Bay, Orono, New Multiple Dock License Application.
The committee received the report of the 10/28/92 Public
Hearing and Findings regarding a new multiple dock license appli-
cation from Dr. Glen Nelson, 500 Tonkawa Road, Stubbs Bay, Orono.
for nine boat storage units on a combined dock with two ad.iacent
properties.
Bob Bauer, representing the applicant, said the dock is
shared by three families, Dr. Nelson, Mr. and Mrs. Edwin Gage and
Mr. and Mrs. Curtis Carlson, all adjacent property owners. The
combined shoreline frontage is 1,242 feet. They could build
three separate docks but prefer combining them in one location.
MOTION: Slocum moved, Penn seconded, to recommend the Board
approve the application for a new Multiple Dock I. icense for Dr.
Glen Nelson as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
2. Public Hearing Report and Findings: Proposed Ordinance Pro-
hibiting Use of Non-encased Molded Polystyrene as a Dock Flota-
tion Device.
The committee received the report of a Public Hearing and
the Findings of 10/28/92 to consider a proposed ordinance prohib-
iting the use of non-encased molded polystyrene as a dock flota-
tion device.
Babcock introduced the subject by stating the committee
needs to resolve what kind of polystyrene can be used on Lake
Minnetonka and circumstances under which it can be used.
The executive director said the expanded bead polystyrene
foam is the problem on Lake Minnetonka at the present time.
Encasing the foam is a desirable way of protectine the product
from disintegration. Additional consideration could be eiven to
extruded closed cell polystyrene foam which does not break down
into small beads.
Cochran said it was his recollection that the brand name
Styrofoam is for the closed cell type which does not tend to fall
apart but it does take on water and disintegrate over a lone
period of time. It is also susceptible to breaking off when hit
by another object, and to deterioration from gas or oil spills.
He would favor finding wording that says flotation devices that
disintegrate will not be permitted. The challenee would be to
water Structures Committee November 14, 1992
find a definition. Babcock noted that the Corps of Engineers has
an approved product. Perhaps the District could tie into their
definition. Cochran said another idea would be to set up staf~d-
ards and then approve product by product.
Carlson said the foam products do not biodegrade in nature.
In any approval, the District has to guard against allowing a~y-
thing that will float around in the Lake. One method would be to
prohibit any man-made material that is not encased. Coch~'an
replied that even the encased product can be broken if the casing
is broken.
The executive director distributed a copy of the State of
Oregon Flotation Encapsulation Rules. It allows for a hole ot' a
certain size for fastening the products together. It also de-
scribes the type of encapsulation. Babcock said he was not
looking toward anything as technical as the Oregon Ordinance. He
would like to find some way of handling the two cases on the Lake
which are presenting a problem. There could be a time limit
given for them to correct the fragmentation. Penn said that
could be handled with a sunset provision on current materials in
use and an ordinance prohibiting new installations.
Carlson believes there is an additional problem of the
products leaching into the Lake. He is concerned about limiting
options if something environmentally safe can be found. Babcock
said there are flotation devices that work. He mentioned the use
of barrels at Rockvam Boat Yards. Penn concurred that there are
enough environmentally sound options that unencased polystyrene
is not needed.
Slocum asked if mooring buoys are going to be included in
any prohibition. Babcock recommended all uses of floating mate-
rial should be considered with a time limit for discontinuin~ the
use. The executive director said consideration should be given
to the conditions under which buoys would have to be replaced.
He noted Hennepin County would find it costly to replace each
buoy immediately as a casing is damaged during the summer.
chran observed that there are some private buoys on the Lake m;tde
from a product that is resilient, that does not disintegrate.
Babcock a~ked if the District wants to say it does not want
any new floating docks or structures. Penn said there could be a
provision regulating replacement. The executive director said
the City of Orono Ordinance allows two years for replaceme~t.
That raised the question as to which Ordinance would take prece-
dence. Babcock said the most strict law prevails. Carlson ob-
served that the City of ~innetrista has been advised it can of~ly
control lakes entirely within its boundary. Carlson suggested
the users of the polystyrene product could ask for a variance to
continue its use.
Babcock noted the Orono Ordinance could be made more ~ener-
lc. Orono is expected to change the word "Styrofoam" as its
reference to polystyrene foam.
Babcock observed from the discussion up to this point that
there is agreement that there should be no new installations of
unencased polystyrene, the products now in use should be encased
and there should be a time frame for replacement. This should
Water Structures Committee
November 14, 1992
apply to all water structures, not just docks. Cochran sue~ested
a requirement that any fragmentation has to be cleaned up
affected lakeshore. Carlson would like to see any ordina~ce
address the kind of materials which are acceptable for docks.
Grathwol arrived.
Babcock noted that, despite problems at two marinas, Wind-
ward Marina, using the closed-cell extruded product, has nt~t had
a disintegration problem.
Penn suggested users could spray it with somethin~ to encase
it rather than replace it. He also suggested approaching any
suitable product on a variance basis.
Babcock said that it would be difficult to find a hardship
for a variance other than financial.
Grathwol observed that rather than using the variance ap-
proach, an exemption could be created for the applicant who can
prove there is no environmental hazard or break-up.
Babcock asked if there is any way a portion of an exist in~
product can be replaced. Carlson agreed to al lowing a smal 1
portion to be replaced, but he would not support additional mate-
rial installation without using a different material. Babcock
added it would have to be encased.
Thibault mentioned she understands thai the ~mlystyrcnc i,~;tm
used at the Lakeside Marina gas dock is disinteerating. ,She
voiced the opinion that two years is a lonz time for that to
continue at the gas dock. It was suggested that the situation be
discussed with the marina owner.
~OTION: Babcock moved, Carlson seconded, to recommend
preparation of an Ordinance which would prohibit any new instal-
lations of non-encased polystyrene foam or other man-made materi-
als subject to deter/oration for floating structures oll the I,ake
with a sunset provision to December 31. 1994, except moorin~
buoys less than 2' in diameter to be allowed to December 31,
1997, unless there is any sign of deteriortation. Operators of
any existing floating structures are responsible ['or shoreline
clean up of any fragmentation that may occur.
VOTE: Motion carried, Grathwol abstainin~o.
Rascop arrived.
~. Non-restricted Watercraft and Off-lake Storage at Multi~le
Docks.
Babcock presented observations of the Committee Chair and
staff on the LMCD Code relating to "restricted" watercraft. The
summation included comments and explanation of the 1.~1(~1)
along with examples of anomalies on the I,ake. Babcock inclu~led
issues for the committee to discuss.
Slocum suggested the sub-committee look at the subject
restricted and non-restricted watercraft one more time. lie w~ul(I
suggest exempting, across the board, all non-restricted water-
craft from being counted toward density. Ilis reason would be
Water Structures Committee November 14, 19~t2
that the small boats are probably localized in their use a,ld do
not create a density problem on the Lake as a whole, i~abcock re-
sponded that this would open the door to allowing rental of sp;~ce
on land at multiple dock sites for an unlimited number of
rarely owned lunrestricted) watercraft.
Grathwol said a distinction could be made between marinas
which offer boat launching service to the public and licensees
not offering boat launching service to the public. ^dditi~,r~al
rules could be placed on these marinas. The same standards wot~ld
not have to apply, for instance, to a licensed lakeshore resident
who has five restricted boats.
Babcock suggested having no restrictio~s on no~-restricted
watercraft at a home owners association, but at a licensed mari-
na, require these boats to be stored at a designated boat storage
locat ion.
Penn observed that all non-restricted watercraft are in one
category. He feels there is a different impact from a 16' fish-
lng boat than from a canoe. Babcock said it would be possible to
create a third category of watercraft. Non-powered ones could be
exempt when licensed by the DblR for non-motorized used.
Grathwol said that if the District wants a multiple dock
licensee to provide an amenity that makes non-restricted boats
available to the public, an exemption could be granted. Babcock
said the sub-committee should define how the exemption would be
handled. Guidelines should be developed for what kif~d of water-
craft would be considered for an exemption. The definition could
be left as it is. 6rathwol said exemptions have to be spelled
out in the ordinance ahead of time.
Rascop suggested using the categories the DNR uses. If a
watercraft is not motorized it does not have license numbers, it
just has the state sticker.
Cochran raised a related issue which may cause a de~sity
problem in the future. The issue of marinas storing boats off
the Lake and off site has to be addressed. This i~lvolves using
public ramps for commercial launching from off-lake sites.
The discussion will be referred to the sub-committee for its
further review.
4. Deicing Application Renewal - Sailor's World Marina
Thibault reported that Sailor's World blarina, t'ormerly
Shoreline Drive t, tarina, was denied a deicing refund for the I~1-
1992 season due to non-compliance, requiring repeated insp(,c-
tions. Before a deicing renewal , as a result of the
compliance, can be granted it will have to be approved by the
Board. Thibault said the bubblers were deicing beyond the fence
and the fence fell down. The owner had to wait for the water to
freeze before the fence could be repaired. She made five differ-
ent inspections.
John Vogt, Sailor's World. said the present owners had
control last year, as they were not the owners then. Ilaving
taken over the marina once again, they never had a problem in the
five years they operated the marina. The previous ow~er did not
Water Structures Committee
November 14, 1992
have anyone to check the deicing on a day to day basis. Vo~t
said he is one of the owners, and the manager, and will check
the deicing daily.
Thibault called attention to the winter access next to the
marina. The owners need to be careful on the south side because
of this access. Vogt said they would use water curtains in tl~at
area.
NOTION: Babcock moved, Grathwol seconded, to recommend approval
of a deicing renewal for Sailor's World ~arina.
VOTE: ~otion carried unanimously.
5. Dock Use Area Variance Issues
Babcock opened a discussion of dock use area (DUA) variance
issues as follows:
a. Dock use area length and width
b. Review of the 3' navigable water depth al lowance
Babcock explained a situation where there is a 60' lot with
a sailboat at the end of the dock beyond the DUA. tie asked if
the committee would be comfortable allowing 100' of dock length
to reach 3' of water to accommodate a sailboat. Babcock asked if
an option would be a mooring buoy and whether a buoy for the
sailboat beyond the DUA would be more acceptable.
Rascop said the District should not be in the position of
dictating the kind of boat that can be placed on a particular
kind of property. The District would then be giving special
consideration to the owner of small lakeshore. A variance would
not work because the problem is caused by tile applicant ownin~ a
property with a small shoreline frontage.
Carlson said a lakeshore owner has to keep his heats within
his Dock Use Area. People buy small lots and try to cram too
much into the area, increasing the watercraft density on the
Lake. Cochran responded that he believes there are many cases of
this type on the Lake, and violations of the dock leneth re.~ula-
tions do exist. He added if there are no complaints tile l)istrict
does not take action. The District lacks staff to check every
dock on the Lake. Babcock agreed there are probably a si~.,ni I'i-
cant number of length problems. In most cases people do not ask
for a variance because of the cost involved, particularly it' the
neighbors do not object.
Orathwol said the 3' depth is a good st,nl~tlard. 'that
vides a minimum access to the l, ake. At tile same time tl~,~re
should be a provision for boats that have different (trafts, with
a limit to the amount of draft. Grathwoi warned about usine I:~n(!
terminology and how the word variance is used. That has a
tation connected to land and the District is working with watc'r.
Rascop agreed that using the word variance o_ives the
that the District is dealing with private ownership, whereas ~l~e
water belongs to the public. It is necessary for l.,~(CI) to rt,,u-
late to a higher standard rather than a lesser, due to the 1,ake
being publicly owned.
Carlson would like to review the variance c'ritcri;~ usc~l at
the last meetin~ for a variance appl icat ion. IIc would Iikc to
work towards consistency in the District actions.
Water Structures Committee November 14, 1992
The executive director said that oil the subject of tile 3'
navigable depth, the DNR rules consider 4'a navigable depth to
which a dock can be extended. The 4' depth would give an allow-
ance for a drop to 3' when lower August water level occurs.
Babcock said the 4' would be figured from the 929.40HWL. He
would favor being consistent with the DNR in view of the lack of
a designation of a normal low water level for the Lake.
Rascop asked what water level was used in ~ranting permis-
sion for the long docks over the wetlands. Babcock said the dock
length was based on reaching a 3' water depth at the outside edge
of the wetlands.
Kent Carlson, 21650 Fairview Street, Greenwood, was present
to address the problem he is having which has a direct relation
to the subject being discussed. K. Carlson purchased his home
during the low water and there was a dock in place beyond the
DUA. He was not aware from the seller that the property had been
granted a Temporary Low Water Variance. Last summer his (lock
contained a power boat with a canopy, and a 24' sailboat out of
the water on a lift at the end beyond the DUA.
Before he put the dock in this past spring he discussed his
dock plans with neighbors who had no objections. Subsequently
one of the neighbors did file a complaint with the L~tCD. As a
result, he changed the dock three times over the summer, bringing
it in 30'.
It was noted this area is a cove with shallow water. There
was lengthy discussion with the affected property owners when the
temporary low water variance was granted to Ms. Bowers. 21~,00
Fairview Street. At that time, the angles of the neighborhood
Dock Use Areas were adjusted. This variance gave everyone an
opportunity to go out to the depth necessary to reach navieable
water. K. Carlson explained the water in that area is low duc to
sand being washed in. Cochran suggested the Board entertain an
action, coming from the neighborhood as group, to formally re-
instate the angles established in the Bowers temporary low water
variance. He believes this will allow the affected parties to
fit their docks and boats into the assigned Dock Use Areas.
Canopies and large boats on lifts cause a problem with the lake
view of the neighbors. There has to be neighborhood acceptance
for these uses.
Babcock suggested neighboring property owners combine DUAs.
That would not change the length they can go out. Thibault read
the Code, Sec. 2.01, Subd. 3, on common use of ad.jacent DIIAs.
The Code addresses the side setbacks but does not appear to
address the dock length. That will have to be reviewed.
Penn was excused.
Kent Carlson had several other observations to make as they
applied to his situation, lie questioned the policy that .just one
complaint in a neighborhood could affect the grantin~ ol' a vari-
ance. He does not believe that is right. He cannot put out a
buoy and stay within his side setbacks. Thibault noted the
Ordinance requires moorings to be in the DU^ or under permit by
the Water Patrol. (The Water Patrol permit regulations require
Water Structures Committee
November 14, 1992
that the buoy area must not exceed 100' from shore, includinc the
swing of the boat moored to it, nor at a depth exceedin~ 1.5'
more than the watercraft draft.)
Cochran suggested allowing the neighborhood to apply t'or an
amendment to Bower's variance, keeping tile adjusted l.)tJAs and
giving variances for a certain distance beyond their DUAs but not
a low water variance. Babcock suggested the decision would be
whether to allow going out to 100~ as an absolute or to allow
going out to a 3' or 4' depth. In the case of Kent Carlson. the
committee needs a variance application before any l'urther discus-
sion takes place.
It was suggested that the committee consider allowin~ com-
bined DUAs to have docks to 100' The executive director cau-
tioned against allowing 100~ in a cove area where extended lot
lines converge.
Babcock advised Kent Carlson that if docks are combined to
service more than 4 boats the neighbors will need a multiple dock
license.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Cochran seconded, to refer this discussion
to the Board for its consideration and if agreeable to have an
Ordinance prepared to:
1} Amend the water depth for a dock length variance (Code
1.07, Subd. 3) to 4' from 929.40HWL rather than 3'
2) Allow combined Dock Use Areas to eo out to 100' provided
the shoreline (frontage and configuration) supports it and it
meets the side setback requirements.
DISCUSSION: Carlson asked about the effect this recommendation
would have on low water variances. Does this automatically allow
them to 4' depth? Babcock believes this would be for normal
years.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
The committee asked to see the standards used by the Water
Patrol in buoy placement outside the Dock Use Area. (Attached)
6. Subcommittee to Review Multiple Dock Related Expenses
The committee received a proposed Statement of Purpose, and
identification of multiple dock related activities (btDI(A) for the
fee study subcommittee, as prepared by the executive director.
Carlson said there has been a communication from the licen-
sees' attorney but there has been no communication from the
licensees themselves. Their attorney and the LMCI) attorney are
still not in agreement on what are reasonable related costs,
associated with MDRA. If this cannot be resolved, Carlson sees
that a problem will exist. The sub-committee needs more input
from the LMCD Directors on how to resolve i t. lie asked meml~c, rs
to call him.
Rascop said all of the LMCD special density activities
should be included with the MDRA. The executive director pointed
out that Special Density Licenses have a separate appl ica( ion
fee. Carlson said the District does not necessarily h;tvc to bill
each individual license applicant what it costs l'or that par(itu-
Water Structures Committee
November 14, 1992
lar function. All of the functions can be taken together and a
determination made how to spread the cost. That is an I,MCD
decision. If it is decided to include special density licenses
it can be done. The fee schedule can be set at any level as long
as it does not exceed the cost. The fee can change from year to
year.
Referring to the 11/14/92 committee proposal, Grathwol
recommended moving #7, "Enforcement of Code requirements to
assure all dock installations comply with multiple dock license
provisions", higher on the list. Grathwol added that the pros-
pect of regulating off-lake storage will be directly relatcd to
multiple dock licensing.
The committee agreed the PURPOSE section of the proposed
statement should be changed so the first sentence reads "This
subcommittee will serve to identify tasks and activities associ-
ated with multiple dock licensing." The following is to be
added: Multiple Dock related activities are recognized as a
function of the District in order to manage and control the Lake
density and Lake use issues.
Carlson suggested reaching a decision on the fees by budeet
time for 1994. Another need is getting the cost accounting
started.
The sub-committee to study the accountin~ procedures will
meet after complying with the open meeting law requirements t'or
notice.
7. Staff Recommendation to Revise Fees for New Multiple Dock
License Applications.
Thibault presented a memo recommendine that in lieht of the
recent revision to the multiple dock license renewal fees and to
the variance application fees, that the fees for new multi~le
dock license application be revised.
The staff recommends that the $500 base fee plus $15 per
Watercraft Storage Unit (WSU) be changed to $250 + $250 deposit,
plus $10/WSU or whatever the current rate per WSU is for that
year.
Thibault detailed the steps used in processin~ a new li-
cense. The application is received and reviewed. Public Hearing
notices are prepared and the notices are published and mailed. A
Public Hearing is held. Following the Public Hearing, a report
is prepared along with the findings. The Water Structures Com-
mittee reviews the Public Hearing report and findings, and
makes a recommendation to the Board for a decision at the next
Board meeting. In some cases an Order is required. Thibault
believes $250 will cover the general administrative and publish-
ing costs. The additional $250 deposit would cover any extra
legal costs such as an Order. To arrive at these figures she
compared them to the fees charged for a variance application.
Carlson said he would prefer leavina the fee at $500 until
the cost accounting issue is resolved. Carlson said the varia,ce
fee comparison might not be logical because variance fees are
less to encourage people to apply for them. Orathwol is con-
8
Water Structures Committee
November 14, 1992
cerned about a high fee for a homeowner with five boats, lie
would like to see the cost accounting completed.
Carlson said he could support a 2-tier system of a $250 fee
for up to 10 boats and $500 for over 10 boats.
The committee tabled the discussion to a future agenda to
give a further look at the 2-tier system to separate the license
applications by number of slips.
8. New Multiple Dock License Renewal Applications
The executive director submitted a copy of tile reels;ed
application for renewals. He pointed out that the Board. at its
October 28 meeting, established 4/1/93 as tile date for addin~,z a
late fee to the ful I license fee amount. In preparing tile new
form the date was changed to 3/31/93 to conform to the other
month endings for adding the late fee.
Rascop suggested adding (s) to g) under Type of facility to
have it read g) private residence(s) to cover combined Dock Use
Areas.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Carlson seconded, to recommend amend
the Board action of 10/28/92 to change 4/1/93 to 3/31/q3 for the
date after which a late fee of 30% of the full license fee amount
must be added.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
9. Findings and Order Re Application of Chapman Place Marina
The committee received the Findings and Order denyin~ the
variance application of Chapman Place tqarina.
The committee discussed the shore slips #1 - 6, notine the
32' slips could be reduced in size to give additional room.
MOTION: Carlson moved, Cochran seconded, to recommend apl,~'~,val
of the Findings and Order denying the variance al)pi icat ion of
Chapman Place Marina, adding the followin~ to the I:inclin~s:
Denial of the variances does not preclude use of tile marina as
currently licensed for 27 BSUs.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
10. Lakeside Marina License
The executive director reported tile multiple dock Iicense
has been issued to Lakeside Marina. Tile applicant has said he
understands that he cannot put two boats on the ends of each of
the two eastern dock wings, per the 4/22/81 Order granted t'or
this license.
11. Hennepin Regional Park
Carlson reported a transient multiple dock is bein~ ~lis-
cussed for the Hennepin Regional Park with 18 spaces, meeting-' tile
1:50' rule. Agreement is getting closer for the car/trai let
parking in the park. A public information meeting will be I~cld
with the City and Hennepin Parks officials in early l)eceml~cr.
This will be the public's first opportunity to view the dr, ok
plan.
Water Structures Committee November 14, 1992
12. Adjournment
Chair Babcock declared the meeting adjourned at 10:45 A. ~.
FOR THE COMMITTEE:
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director Douglas Babcock. Chair
TEMPOJtAR¥ STRUCTURE PERM1T REGULATIOI~
for
~OORI NG BUOYS
nce you receive your Mooring Buoy Permit, it wil] be t~ effect for
years. Durt~%g that three year pcrJod, you need %0 rencw your
permit if one or more of the ~'ollowlng occurs:
A. When your address or the location of t~e buoy
changes, or
B. when your permission from the adjacent land owner
revoked.
You will be notified by mai] on or near your t[~ree year ror~ewal date.
The water Patrol takes great care that the buoy~; are ~ coal)] ~a~%cc with
the following regulations.
1. The permit number must be visibly displayed l~ 2" ~;ize
numerals on the upper half of the buoy.
2. The buoy must be white in color and el]circled by ~ 3"
blue band.
3. The buoy must extend at least eight inches above tl,e water
line and be no greater than 20" in width.
4. The buoy must have at least 15 square inches of w]~J te
reflectorization, part of which must be visible ~'rom any
direction-
The buoy area must not exceed 100 foot ~rom shore, ~nclu(']~ng
the swing of the boat moored to it. During low water
the Sheriff ' s Water Patrol may grant tempora~ extensions
beyond 100 feet ~,h~]e the lo%' water exist[;. The mooring
be required to be moved back within 100 feet from r;horc
the water table allows.
6. It must not be a navigational hazard or ~mpai~'
recreat ~ onal uses.
7. On Dec. 15th of each year the buoy must be rem()ved ~;() as not
to create a hazard for winter recreatSon or the buoy
must be put under the surface of the icc.
8. If you move your b~oy at a~]yt~me from lt~ origin,al location,
you must inform the Sheriff's water Patrol.
9.Water depth at your mooring site should not exceod ]-1/2
more than your watercraft draft.
10. Any object used for anchoring your mooring buoy must ~,~ c:lc. an
and non-polluting. All anchoring must bo retriovabl(' ~ rom
the lake. Eng i ;~e blocks shall not be u~;od for
buoys.
MOOR. WTR
NOV 3 0 'lgg2
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
In Re: Application of Chapman Place Marina
FINDINGS
On August 26, 1992 at 7 o'clock p .m., pursuant to due notice, a public hearing
was held to consider the application of Chapman Place Marina for a dock length
variance. Chapman Place Marina is located in Cook's Bay in the city of Mound at 2670
Commerce Boulevard, LMCD Area No. 3.
In 1989, the Chapman Place Marina was granted an amended multiple dock
license for 27 boat storage units in a configuration approved on February 22, 1989.
The total dock length of the configuration approved at that time was 129 feet. The
Applicant seeks a dock use area length variance of an additional 26 feet for a total
distance into the lake of 155 feet.
At the time the license was granted in 1989, the water level was approximately
926 feet in elevation and a temporary low water variance was granted for a 145 foot
extension, for a total dock length of 274 feet. The low water variance was renewed
in subsequent years, until the 1992 season when the water level returned to above
929.4 feet. The variance application is sought at this time because 1992 is the first
season during which the docks were constructed at the licensed dock length of 129
~ feet.
The Applicant has alleged that a hardship results from two factors. The first
is that the shoreline at Chapman Place Marina was improved by the addition of rip-
rap to prevent shoreline erosion. The addition of the rip-rap moved the slips closest
to shore out approximately 8 feet further into the lake. This had an adverse affect
on the ability to maneuver boats between slips 1-6 and slips 7-12.
The second factor is that the Applicant has discovered that at the 929.4 foot
water elevation, there is barely enough water for slips 1-6 and 27. If the water level
drops below elevation 929.4, the water depth is inadequate at these slips.
~LL~4677
LKll0-4
The board finds that the dock use area at the subject parcel is not unusually
shallow; it is regular in shape; and no other hardship resulting from physical
characteristics of the dock use area was found. Therefore, the alleged hardships
are found to have been created not by factors peculiar to the dock use area, but
rather to a combination of the self-created hardships of the addition of rip-rap to the
shoreline and decisions by the applicant about the number, size, and configuration
of slips. Therefore, the board finds that there is no hardship within the meaning
of LMCD Code Section 1.07 which would justify a variance in this case. Denial of the
variance does not preclude use of the marina as currently licensed for 9.7 boat
storage units.
ORDER
By reason of the foregoing, it is ordered that the variance application of
Chapman Place Marina is denied.
By order of the Board of Directors of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District this .. day of , 199m.
ATTEST:
David H. Cochran, Chairman
Douglas E. Babcock, Secretary
LKI10-4
NOV .9 0 1992
Action Report:
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Lake Use and Recreation (~ommittee
D AFT
Meeting:
Monday. November 23, 1992. 4:30 p.m.
Norwest Bank Building. Wayzata. Room 135
Members Present: Tom Penn, Acting Chair. Tonka Bay: Hike
Bloom, Minnetonka Beach; David Cochran. Greenwood: James Grath-
wol, Excelsior: JoEllen Hurt. Orono; Robert Rascop, Shorewood las
noted); Thomas Reese, Mound. Also present: Rachel Thibault.
Administrative Technician; Eugene Strommen. Executive Director.
1. Subcommittee on Decibel Levels
A. Report of ~eeting on 10/26/92
Acting Chair Penn reviewed the minutes of the Decibel Level
Subcommittee meeting held on 10/26/92. He said the consensus of
the subcommittee was that there is a need to educate the members
about what noise pollution is and what decibels are. Questions
were raised about the impact of reducing the LMCD Ordinance from
82 decibels to 79 decibels. From the information presented at
the 10/26 meeting it appears that a reduction of three decibels
would not necessarily reduce the noise impact.
Penn introduced Brian Timerson. Pollution Control Agency
(PCA} Noise Control Specialist, who was present to educate the
committee on noise pollution. One question was whether the prob-
lem is the decibel level of boat motors or whether the problem is
one of enforcement. Penn said it is important that tile problem
is determined before any proposal for correction is made.
Timerson distributed a packet on Hotorboat Noise Enforce-
ment.
Timerson proceeded to impart the following information to
the committee:
* Sound is a measure of power. It takes more power to
increase intensity of the noise.
* A three decibel increase or decrease is the "ver~e of
perception" A person can barely perceive the difference between
80 and 83 decibels. However, a ten decibel increase would sound
twice as loud.
* Adding two like noise sources together ,makes a three
decibel level difference.
* When the distance is doubled from a point source the
sound level drops six decibels.
Bloom asked how the Water Patrol measures decibels. Timer-
son said the DNR has two measuring methods, stationary and pass-
by tests. The Water Patrol uses both methods, usually using the
stationary test. The Water Patrol does not issue a citation
unless a reading is more than five decibels over tile limit.
Rascop arrived.
Lake Use and Recreation Committee
November 23, 1992
Penn said he sees two types of problems: The boat with I00
decibel motor and the fishing tournament that collectively sous~ds
loud. Cochran added that fishing contests take place in the
morning when it is quiet. Sound is more noticeable when the
background is quiet.
Timerson suggested going after individuals who are creatin~
the problem. He said to check whether the exhausts have been
modified. Bloom observed that there must be a laree number of
boats on the lake that are close to the decibel limit.
Timerson said all watercraft must be made to comply with DNR
standards. The National Marine Manufacturers ^ssociation
prohibits manufacturing boats that violate Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE) standards, which are approximately the same as
the DNR standards. Timerson said that every boat sold has to
have a muffling system on it. Every boat. regardless of aee.
must meet DNR standards.
Penn said that any change in the decibel limit must be plus
or minus five decibels to be noticeable. Timerson advised that
there is a limit to how low the LMCD can set the decibel limit on
the lake.
Penn commented that Sgt. Chandler of the Water Patrol has
said that the Sheriff's first priority is public safety. Noise
pollution is a comfort issue rather than a safety issue. Cochran
believes the Water Patrol will be devotin~ more time to noise
enforcement when public safety priorities are met.
Grathwol asked if there is a method of comparin~ noises, lot
instance, a motor boat to a leaf blower or airplane. Time~qon
said decibels are the only acceptable method or measuremc,t.
Cochran observed that there are other variables such as a c~,n-
stant on and off and the duration of the sound. Timerson s;~id
pitch also has to be considered. He called attention to mate~ iai
in his hand-out regarding weighting networks. Bloom said it
would be helpful to understand the concept of noise. Timerson
said he could furnish the committee with a demonstration of
various sounds, if that would be helpful.
Bloom said that all of the legislation is aimed at the
individual boat. He noted complaints about the noise from lish-
lng tournament starts. Hurt said that the LMCD can regulate
fishing tournaments. She finds that noise from snowmobiles can
be worse than motorboats. Timerson said that is because sound
carries further in the winter because of the cold air. icy sur-
face and no leaves.
ACTION: The discussion was referred back to the Decibel I:cvel
Subcommittee with instructions to work with Timerson and the
Water Patrol to set up the criteria for and develop a testin~
program to take place in early spring after the ice ~oes out.
Suggestions were to have demonstrations of what different boats
sound like, and to demonstrate at full throttle as well as at
idle.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION: There were comments from members that
there are noise problems from other sources on the Lake. Ultra-
light aircraft were mentioned because they are not under t. AA
jurisdiction.. That raised questions as to whether the I,[4CD
Lake Use and Recreation Committee
November 23, 1992
would have control over them because the I.'AA does not. The execu-
tive director is to ask the LMCD Counsel for an opinion on wheth-
er the LMCD has any jurisdiction over tile area above the water
surface, specifically as it relates to regulating noise.
2. Draft Ordinance Regarding Quiet Water Area in part of llalst-
ed's Bay
The committee received An Ordinance Estal>lishine Ilalstcd's
Bay as a Quiet Waters Area: Adding New Subdivision 13 to Section
3.02 of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Code of Ordi-
nances.
MOTION: Grathwol moved. Rascop seconded, to recommend Board
approval of the draft ordinance re Halsted's Bay Quiet Waters as
submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
3. Special Events
A. List of 1992 Special Events for Discussion of Water
Patrol Responsibility in Issuing Licenses
The committee received a list of the 1992 special events and
discussed the Water Patrol being tile responsible agency for
issuing them. The executive director explained that renewals are
approved by staff and new applications go to the Board for ap-
proval.
Cochran asked about the amount of staff time involved in
issuing Special Event Licenses. Thibault said tile fee char~ed
covers the time spent. She said there is extra time spent on new
applications preparing for committee and Board review.
Penn said the question is whether special event licenses
should be handled by staff or the Water Patrol. with only those
events that present some problem or exception brought to the
committee and Board. A set criteria would need to be established
that Special Event Licenses would have to meet. Penn believes it
is not necessary to bring all of them to the full I, blCD Board
agenda.
Hurr does not believe LMCD should relinquish control of
Special Event Licenses to the Water Patrol. It is the responsi-
bility of the Board to be aware of tile issues and activities on
the Lake. The LMCD is the controlling agency. She would support
staff issuing renewals. When it comes to new events, tile Board
or individual city representatives may have thoughts anti ol)serva-
tions beyond what the staff would have.
Cochran suggested preparing a set of criteria for issuing
Special Event Licenses. If the applicant meets the criteria tile
Board could be informed of the issuance of tile license. Anything
controversial would have to be referred to the committee and
Board.
Hurr would want new events brought to the Board. The
members have to be informed and the members' cities might be
interested.
.5
Lake Use and Recreation Committee
November 23, 1992
The executive director said one thine staff experiences is
the time factor when applications are received and cannot be
processed through the full approval procedures before the event.
Cochran observed that the proposal to delel2ate full event
review to the Water Patrol was a suggestion of Committee Uhair
Foster. It was Foster's thought that this would help get the
Board ~ out of routine tasks.
Bloom would support all renewals eoine to the staff for
approval. First time events should go to the Board.
Rascop said fishing contests, as an example, are controver-
sial to many people living on the lake. There was discussion of
limiting the number of fishing contests and al lowine new ones
only when one does not renew.
The executive director suggested that the staff could bring
the application to the respective Board members whose cities are
involved for a decision as to whether the license mieht be issued
by staff or brought to the Board.
ACTION: The committee agreed to request that Thibault and the
executive director develop criteria for new Special Event l,i-
censes that could be approved by the LI~tCD staff.
B. Deposit Re funds
~OTION: Bloom moved. Hurr seconded, to approve Special Event
deposit refunds of $100 each to:
11 Excelsior Chamber of Commerce 4th of July Fire
works, 7/4/92.
2} Consolidated Race Schedule. 5/5/92-10/24/q2
3} Lake Masters Swim Club. 5-Mile Swim. 7/25/92
with the understanding Thibault checks with the Water Patrol to
determine all requirements were met.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
4. Boat and Water Safety Education Program
The committee received a draft of a proposed Ltqt'D Boat and
Water Safety Educat ion Proeram brochure. '1 he brochure wi I I be
distributed to the probation officers at the Rideedale Court-
house.
Thibault said the purpose is have the probation officers
recommend the Program to the judges when sentencing BWl and
repeat unsafe boating violators.
Rascop objected to the express ion "R__e.d_u_c_e_~[
tion in the last sentence of paragraph 2 of Thibault's report. It
was agreed This could be an educational s_u~pp_le_tned~__t would be, a
better choice of words.
Grathwol said this is a program which the probation officers
will have to sell to the ,judges. The executive director ex-
plained that the approval of the probation officers is needed if
the program is to be implemented. Then the program would be
given to the judges as a sentencing supplement. Grathwol aereed
that the idea is a good one.
Lake Use and Recreation Committee November 23, 1992
Thibault asked for approval of the dral't so it can be print-
ed. She would like suggestions before the Board meeting so a
final draft can be presented to the Board. Steve Tal len, LMCD
Prosecuting Attorney, would like to have a meetin~ with the
probation officers to discuss the program with them.
Hurt expressed concern about the staff time if the I,~ICl) is
going to be the coordinating agency. It was explained there will
be very little involved beyond some telephone time to advise of
program schedules.
5. Water Patrol Report
The executive director reported for the Water Patrol that in
October there was one property damage accident in Cook's Bay.
6. "Save the Lake" Dinner
The committee recommended that the "Save the Lake" Recogni-
tion Banquet be held on Thursday, February I1, 1993 at l,ord
Fletcher's. Penn and Hurr volunteered to help with the arranee-
merits.
7. Adjournment
Cochran moved, Grathwol seconded, that the meetina be
journed. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
FOR THE COMMITTEE:
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director
Bert Foster. Chair
I ¢0 HOV 0199
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Lake Access Committee
Report
6:10 pm, Monday, November 23, 1992
Norwest Bank Bldg. Conference Room
Present:
Committee Chair Jim Grathwol, ~o~rd memb~
Bloom, Minnetonka Beach; Scott Carlson,
Minnetrista; Dave Cochran, Greenwood; Bert
Foster, Deephaven; JoEllen Hurt, Orono; Tom
Tonka Bay; Bob Rascop, Shorewood; Tom
Mound; guests, Gordon Kimball, MN DNR; Don
Germanson, LMLOA; Gabriel Jabbour, Oro~o;
BACKGROUND REVIEW. Grathwol stated that he had di~c~r~ed
from talking to board members and others after the 10/21 Lake
Access Task Force meeting that clarification was needed on
some of the issues coming up. He referred to the 1/22/92
board meeting when the board approved a multi-agency
cooperative effort to address land use issues and acces~ to
the lake, which went on to become the Lake Access T~s~ Force.
An LMCD Lake Access Committee had previously bee~ established
to address Management Plan access objectives, but a~ a result
of the Lake Access Task Force formation the committee h~d ~o~
yet met.
Grathwol then explained a conversation he h~d with L~CD
counsel LeFevere regarding open meeting law require~t~.
Lefevere counseled that three board members of an L~C~
committee, three being a quorum per LMCD by-l~w~,
a public meeting, subject to the open meeting law. Three
LMCD board members attending a multi-agency Lake Acce~ Task
Force meeting is not an official meeting ~f the LMCD. S~ch
a meeting is a cooperative governmental agency mee~inq, ~ot a
meeting of a single agency.
The months since January have been concentrated on getti~g
the Lake Access Task Force (Task Force) focused on ~ecific
topics. Other topics have been suggested, such as the s~fety
of ramps, which are an objective of the M~n~gement Fl~n.
Grathwol does not see this as a part of the Ta~k F~ce
concern. He sees this as a priority of the LMCD L~l~e ^~e~
Committee using its experience on lake m~er~. The L~CD
will have a different agenda, and not nece~arilly competing,
rather parallel to the Task Force.
Foster asked if this Committee is to take i~ recomm~nd~ion~
to the Task Force and how does the Task Force ~et it~ ~r~r~m
Grathwol responded, asking for committee o~±d~n~e ,~1~_~, thnt
he sees the Task Force as a broad public body ~itl~ publi~
membership, and LMCD is represented on it by ,h~ T~,: Foz~e ~~
LMCD Lake Access Committee Report, 11/23/0~, P. 2
chair. The cities are represented by thei~ designee, and all
other agencies/groups are represented by thr~r designee.
Grathwol then invited discussion on how the Task Fei'ce agenda
is set, where the ideas come from and who cn~ries them out.
Foster supports the idea of bringing access concepts L,~, the
Task Force, such as happened when hours of ;.,ccess ope]at[on
were raised by the fishing groups. Once ,~J~:ed, n~, ng~eement
was reached meeting needs of both sides, £.[n~lly approved.
Penn recommends subcommittees be appointed
from among the groups participating in tho T~]~k Fei-ce. They
then make recommendations to the Task
Carlson recommends the Task Force be kept. .,,, it~
achieving the 700 car/trailer parking spacep, e~tering
agreements for them with the cities. Development of the
ramps, trash containers and the other th~n9~ will folJ. ow.
He believes the subcommittee (Data Gathe~ inc~ and
Subcommittee) came out with a good product in develop.i.r,c3 thc
Parking Standards and a preliminary car/t,'q~ler pn, ki,,g
inventory. This was all done in an open ,,,~.et. ing
Bloom suggested the Task Force serves mai,,ly as a public
forum to enable groups to be heard on the access issue~.
Grathwol responded that he sees the Task Fo, ce as a means to
involve LMCD and groups in addition to L%1CD0 more t~han .3
public forum. Grathwol then asked if the ,,,~,:,l,er~.~ thougl~t the
Task Force should be terminated.
Kimball offered a response, pointing out thnt the DIIR
for the Task Force as a way to address th,. i~'~Gu~s Lh:~t we]-e
raised concerning the Maxwell Bay access. Il,, also noted tha~
not all cities have approached the Task F,,,ce with the
sense of urgency.
[Three actions were recommended by the DNR ~,, it..~
of 1/16/92 which was sent as a reference
for this meeting. This Proposal wes accepted by the LMCD and
the City of Orono es the basis for starting the T~sk Force.
A summation of the three actions is:
1) The DNR will exercise its Straley purchu?e opt~o~.
2) A cooperative effort between Orono, L;ICD and the [,~R will
study the feasibility of purchasing and developing
Gayle's Marina, Lakeside Marina and residential property
between the two marinas, in addition to the Straley site,
for a combination of uses in case of a lazger site. If
decided feasible, cooperators will jointly s-uppo~t
obtain funding. DNR meanwhile agreer to postpo~c
development of Straley site until thi~
LMCD Lake Access Committee Report, 11/23/92, P. 3
3)
cooperative effort is completed or is found infeasible.
A Task Force is established consisting of all affected
interests to implement the public access siting process
as called for in the LMCD Management Plan. The Task
Force will proceed immediately to meet the plan's
objectives.
LMCD was then suggested by the DNR to lead and provide the
framework for completion of parts 2 and 3 of this proposal.
This is consistent with the LMCD's role as coordinator (lead
agency) of public access issues as described in the
Management Plan.
Cochran agreed that LMCD's role is one to cooperate and lead
to make the access goals happen. This has been the LMCD's
role since the Task Force study of 1983. In all fairness to
the City of Orono, the Task Force cannot solve the Maxwell
Bay issue without looking at the rest of the lake. Grathwol
added that the DNR purchase of the Orono site precipitated
the actions now required of the Task Force and the LMCD
Access Committee as already identified in the Management
Plan.
Jabbour commented that he believes LMCD has been reacLive
rather than proactive on the access issue and that the
governor asked the DNR to form the Task Force. It was then
clarified by Grathwol that DNR Commissior~er Sando wrote a
letter on the subject to Orono Mayor Peterson. [This letter
was in response to Orono's request for confirmation of D~R's
position on the proposed access on Maxwell Bay. ~do ~tated
in his 3/11/92 letter that "the DNR is committed to the t~sk
force that will evaluate the larger sites that have been
proposed. It is for this reason that we are willi~g to
postpone development of the optioned property until the ta~k
force has met its goal. If the optioned property is deemed
extraneous to a mutually agreed upon access proposal that is
funded and is able to proceed, the DNR will seek authority to
dispose of it through sale or other me~s that will s~rve the
legal responsibility it has."
Jabbour went on to say he believes the LMCD is a year behind
in dealing with its lake access responsibilities.
Cochran pointed out that the Management Plan objectives show
LMCD is actually moving ahead of the objectives timetable on
lake access issues. [The Management Plan was adopted i~ by
the Board in October, 1991, and approved by the Met Council
in ~ecember, 1991. The Maxwell Bay acces~ purchase proposal
was first made known to the LMCD in November, 1991. The
Management Plan objectives on lake acce~ re~ponsibiliti~
specify implementation dates that begin with January, 1993
and extend to 1995.]
LMCD Lake Access Committee, Report, 11/23/9~, P. 4
Jabbour also stated that city planning cof~mi~ion off~.cial~
and citizens are asking why Orono is being o~l?d to co~,~ider
an access when other cities have zero acc~?~.
Grathwol responded that some lake zones havi,~g
reliable car/trailer parking spaces is a prio~ity for thi~
committee and the Task Force which they mu~'t .~till resolve.
Jabbour and Hurr left the meeting at this
A general discussion continued on the work accomplished by
the subcommittees of the Task Force ~oncer~g tile
development of the car/trailer parking inve~tory and tl~e
Parking Standards. The inventory was scheduled for Ta~l.~
Force review 10/21 but was held over to th~ 12/9 Tasl~ Fox-ce
meeting. The Parking Standards were actually adopted by
concensus of the Task Force on 10/21.
Recognizing the Parking Standards as having been so acted
upon by the Task Force, Cochran moved, C~r].~o, seconded that
the committee recommend Board approval of the Parking
Standards for Lake Minnetonka Public Acce~ which w~'e
adopted by the Lake Access Task Force, and that the LMCD
Access Committee be instructed to work on their
implementation. Motion carried unanimousl}'.
Grathwol moved on to background the committee on th~ ef£ort
put into developing the parking inventory ~hich p~'~ently
identifies 755 car/trailer (c/t) parking ~l~acc~ --- oil of
which do not yet meet the Parking Standard~. IL i~
Grathwol's judgement that some of the citi~ ,,~y b~ ~ble Lo
readily identify significant numbers of c/~ sp~ces ~hicl~ will
meet the Parking Standards.
A subcommittee to look into other access sit._- ~cqu~.~'[~l~.,~,s,
other than Maxwell Bay, appears necessary at this tim~ u~der
the direction of the Task Force. Grathwol )~.cogni.-.~_d the~'e
is a need for having some procedures for
prospective access sites. He gave an examl~]
who asked that the Task Force buy his hou~:- ~,~,_1 tl~:_~t t'~o of
his neighbors were also interested because tl~_.ir t~::~..~ were
too high. When they identified their home? be~.~g ]~ O~ o~c,,
Grathwol referred them to Council member
The committee then di~cussed how the numbe~ o£
spaces by zone came to be identified in th~ 17~3 Ta:~l: Fc~e
Report. The thinking was expressed that a .-.o~e ~hou].d not
necessarilly drive where an access should be ]ocated. IL
also involves consideration of street acce~:, ~d
impacts. [The '83 Report does contain critc~i~n
~ new access site which the DNR used in it~ ev~lu~tio~ ~£ tile,
Straley site on Maxwell Bay. ] Cochran note~! tl,e -_c.~,~.
LMCD Lake Access Committee, Report, 11/23,'9£, F. 5
were an attempt by the '83 Task Force to l,,volve
fairness to the distribution of c/t parking and accesses
around the lake. The access standards were included in the
Report to delineate how an access should be placed.
Carlson expressed his concern that some of the cities think
that the access needs of the lake are not t~,a'ir p~oblem and
it does not involve them.
Cochran suggested that the cities which think of tl,emselves
as "non-participants" in the access needs of the lake be
approached to contribute in some way. For e:.:ample they could
contribute financially to a make-ready dock at an access in n
nearby community, or provide a fishing pie~. There must be a
way to spread the responsibility around.
Tom Reese left at this time.
Cochran further noted he believes there m~y be c/t sp~ce in
private lots near accesses which could be m~de available on
weekends, the peak use time. Securing these could alleviate
the need for a continued search for additionol public acces~
locations. It may be that another public access is ~till
needed at this time.
Penn questioned how equitable distribution ef acc.:~re~ ,'-~n be
achieved. He sees it as a matter of upgr~di,~g the gu_~lity cf
the c/t parking spaces which are out therq.
Cochran moved, Carlson seconded that the comtnittee ar~'t.:ept
recommend Board approval of the inventory u£ c/t
spaces taken by the Lake Access Task Force D;)t8 and Stn~d~rds
Subcommittee and that the Lake Access Task Fo~c,~ ;.~
move forward on making as many as possib],' c/[
reliable [by meeting the Parking StandaI,J~
agreement of the respective city or agency]
the 700 c/t parking Management Plan objec{:~.v~', subject to
favorable inventory review by the Lake Ac~,'s~
Motion carried unanimously.
Cochran added in connection with this motic, n that =_act~ bc, a~d
member should sit down with their elected ~eF~er.~t~tlv¢~ and
staff officials to help pin down their c/t
Carlson pointed out the need for agreement.3 being rca,£hed
with cities wherever possible before the
Rascop expressed his concern about parki~,g
too restrictive on the cities. Exceptions?
need to be dealt with.
Discussion also followed on parking sp~c_~r bci~o "out the~e"
LMCD Access Committee, Report, 11/23/92,
which do not meet the standards, yet they a~e available,.
Kimball, DNR, responded that these type of ,~F~,~e~ d~o r~ot
constitute public access parking if they d~, ~,.,!. m~e~ the
Parking Standards.
Grathwol added that the prospect of marinar~
public c/t parking through agreement with ci~iez, cc, u~ty or
DNR is still a possibility.
Discussion focused on how the agreement$ with the ciki~
should be approached -- either through the
Committee or through the Task Force. It w~z r~oted that the
Management Plan identifies the LMCD as the l~d ~ge~cy to get
the objective accomplished. Grathwol urged
to the Task Force role in this process. G~,~,,?~, L~L~A,
offered that each city and agency should b~
access process in the most open public fort,~,. Each body
should be present at the discussions and ha'.'c
Penn agreed the number of Task Force partici~.",,tz m~t
managed in numbers, with each group working
before hand and bringing their position to ~_1~ T~:I~ ro~c~.
through their representative. Strommen re~.[,~w.~
procedure which was presented at the 10/21Tm=:~
by facilitator Don Buckhout providing for ~:~. ~epr~e~,tative
from each participating group. It was mugger'.cd
Board members sit with their city represent~ti'.'~, mt
meeting table.
The Procedure for Handling Offers and Inquirie~ Conce~ing
Potential Public Access Sites was offered f~r di~cu~io~ by
Grathwol. It met with general agreement, ~d wa~ zugg~ted
for forwarding to the Task Force. Rascop ~'l~,d Jf
condemnation was an option used by the D~R? ~i~,ball
responded that while the law does allow it, by po]icy t~,e D~R
deals only with willing sellers.
Carlson reiterated the need to promptly
of the c/t access agreements moving among ,'~ti~/a~¢~~
with milestones (target dates) for
Carlson moved, Grathwol seconded that the cummlttee x'ecommend
Board approval that all cities and agencteo with
public accemses be approached to enact agrc~.~,entm for
securing their public access car/trailer p~.,~:i~g
the goal of four cities/agencies entering ],~.t, :,g~t:~.~nc~,~t hy
4/15/93. Motion carried unanimously.
The content of the c/t parking agreement w~? i,J_~tifi~_d u~z
being the next need in this process.
LMCD Lake Access Committee, Report, 11~o~'72,~._.., , F. 7
Carlson moved, Cochran seconded that a subcommittee of the
Lake Access Committee meet in early December to dra£t a
concept model car/trailer parking agreement to be presented
to the Lake Access Task Force as a new bu~iness item at its
12/9/92 meeting. Motion carried unanimou~ly.
The Procedure for Handling Offers and Inquiries Co~cernir,g
Potential Public Access Sites on Lake Minnetonka ~na{ o£fered
for further considered.
Bloom moved, Rascop seconded that the Proccdu~'e for ll:mdlinU
Offers and Inquiries Concerning Potential Public Acce~:;s ~it~
on Lake Minnetonka be presented as a concept to the
Force. Motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business, the meeti~g was adjovzned at
8:12 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
CABLEVISION
1504 2nd St. S.E., P.O. Box 110, Waseca, MN 56093
5071835.5975 FAX 507-835-4567
REC'O DEC 1 '1992
November 30, 1992
Mayor Skip Johnson
Mound City Hall
5341 Maywood Rd.
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mayor Johnson and Council Members:
Effective January 1, 1993, the monthly rate for Basic
cable service will remain at $14.69 and Expanded Basic
service will be adjusted to $8.30 for a combined total
of $22.99 per month. In addition, the monthly rate
for Showtime will be adjusted to $11.99 and the 1st
additional outlet will be $3.95 per month. The House
Rate, which allows you to have up to 4 additional
outlets, will remain at $4.95 per month.
Triax Cablevision strives to keep cable cost
reasonable while providing quality pictures and
prompt, courteous service. If you have any questions
or comments about your cable service, please write or
call our office. We welcome your comments and
appreciate the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
Richard 3'. Finch
Regional Manager
NOV $ 0 199g
City Manager's Office
City Of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
6/30/92
Steven A. Kirshbaum
4590 Denbigh Road
Mound, MN 55364
HM 472-3124
Office 473-7395
This is a letter to express my interest in filling the upcoming
opening on The Parks and Open Space Commission.
Although I don't have a history of working on committees or
commissions of this type, I am interested in the issues that
affect the city of Mound, and I feel that I am a fair and open
minded person. I feel that I could represent a practical
viewpoint. I have been following many of the issues that affect
our city and feel that I could be an asset to the governing body.
Thank you very much for considering me for this appointment.
Yours truly,
Steven A. Kirshbaum
November 24, 1992
Dear Ed,
I am applying for the opening on the Park and Open
Space Advisory Commission.
My husband and I moved to Mound in October, 1988. Our
son and his 3 year old son also live with us. I would now
like the opportunity to be a contributing member of this
community. As a Wife, Mother, Grandmother, and Registered
Nurse, I am interested in maintaining and improving a
recreational environment that adds to the physical,
emotional and spiritual well being of Mound citizens.
sincerely, ~ ~ ~
1545 Bluebird Lane
Mound, Mn. 55364
472-7813
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 23, 1992
Those present were: Geoff Michael, Frank Weiland, Michael Mueller,
Bill Voss, Jerry Clapsaddle, Mark Hanus, and Brian Johnson, City
Council Representative Liz Jensen, City Manager Ed Shukle, City
Planner Mark Koegler, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and
Secretary Peggy James. Chair Bill Meyer arrived late
(approximately 8:15), however, Vice Chair Michael chaired the
entire meeting.
The following people were also in attendance: Julie Lilledahl,
Dorothy Netka, Bill Netka, Diane Maloney, and Jim Bedell.
MINUTES.
The Planning Commission Minutes of November 9, 1992 were presented
for approval. Weiland noted that he should be listed on the
minutes as absent and excused. Hanus noted a correction on page 9
within the first motion, it should read "MOTION made by Voss to
reconsider . . ."
MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Weiland to approve the
Plannlng Commission Minutes of November 9, 1992 as
amended. Motion carried unanimously.
MOUND VISIONS: REVIEW OF THE MOUND ENVIRONMENTAL AND APPEARANCE
MODEL AND MOUND PROMOTIONAL PACKET BY BRUCE CHAMBERLAIN.
Bruce reviewed the Mound Visions Environmental and Appearance Model
for downtown and informed the Commission that Requests for
Proposals (RFP's) will be sent out in January 1993 for the
development of the Longpre's corner.
Chamberlain emphasized the sign plan as the Planning Commission was
involved with the creation of the Sign Ordinance. The plan
promotes the use of wall projection signs constructed of natural
materials such as wood, and it includes banners and flags. The
plan discourages neon, plastic type signs.
Mueller commented that banners are difficult to work with when
putting up and taking down, and when they get old they look bad.
Mueller questioned what the intention is for temporary signs.
Chamberlain noted that the idea of sandwich board signs was not
well accepted and stated that signs inside windows would be the
best. Mueller suggested using flags instead of banners.
Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992
Mueller expressed a concern that our existing sign ordinance does
not conform to the sign plan. When should inconsistencies between
the plan and city ordinances be addressed? Would it be premature
to release the RFP prior to addressing these issues? Chamberlain
noted that these concerns can be forwarded to the City Council in
December when they review the plan.
Michael questioned if it is not a standard policy that RFP's be
reviewed by the Planning Commission before release.
General consensus of the Commission was that the plan is good.
Mueller commented that the plan appears to bisect downtown at the
railroad tracks, and he suggested that the plan should be
incorporated into the entire downtown. He believes this could be
accomplished be making only minor changes to the style of Commerce
Square, such as in signage. Weiland agreed that downtown should be
unified instead of divided and that architectural styles and
schemes can be blended.
Johnson would like to see comments from a developer after he
reviews the RFP.
Mueller questioned if the Economic Development Commission or the
City has considered relocating the existing businesses? Have
owners of the businesses involved, such as House of Moy, been
contacted? Chamberlain commented that they had planned to wait
until they receive developer interest as the project is not clear
yet.
A promotional packet which is being developed for the City of Mound
was reviewed by the Commission. Chamberlain noted that some
sections were not yet complete. The promotional packet will be the
first ever developed for Mound.
ZONING CODE MODIFICATIONS.
Minimum Lot Size requirements for minor subdivisions:
City Planner, Mark Koegler, explained to the Planning Commission
that the City Council has requested additional input from them on
the issue of lot sizes for newly created lots. The Planning
Commission recommended that all newly created lots have a minimum
size of 10,000 square feet. It was questioned if the 10,000 square
foot minimum should apply to minor subdivisions within existing R-2
or R-3 zones. A 6,000 square foot lot minimum may be more
consistent with surrounding existing lots in the existing R-2 and
R-3 zones. Koegler commented that the City Attorney also has some
Planning Commission Minutes
November 23, 1992
legal concerns when it is required that you create a greater lot
size than what is allowed. The City Council Minutes of September
8, 1992 reflected the following discussion:
There has to be some differentiation between splitting raw
land and splitting and combining lots of record.
The need to put some major and minor subdivision language into
this ordinance so there is a differentiation between the two.
Also discussed was the fact that at the present time the minor
subdivision language does not allow for variances.
The way the ordinance is proposed the requirement is 10,000
square feet for subdivision in any case. The only way that
you can build on under 10,000 square feet is on a lot of
record. The intent is good but there is a point that this
does not take in the whole city and could cause problems.
Diane Maloney spoke in opposition to requiring all new lots to be
a minimum of 10,000 square feet. She stated that she has owned
property in Mound for many years with the understanding that it was
subdividable, however, this change would ruin all her plans.
Hanus is in favor of keeping existing lot size requirements for
minor subdivisions, but is in favor of requiring all major
subdivisions to have 10,000 square foot lots.
Meyer commented that 90% of the variances requested are because
people want to build more than what the lot can accommodate. If
the lots are larger this would not be such a problem. Mueller
stated that the 30% hardcover requirement will keep the size of the
house conducive to the lot size.
A poll was taken and it was concluded that 5 Commissioners were in
favor of allowing 6,000 square feet for newly created lots in the
R-iA and R-2 zones. There were 3 Commissioners in favor of
requiring all newly created lots to be 10,000 square feet. These
results are summarized below:
Clapsaddle
Wants functional lots, a 6,000 square foot lot
may be functional in some neighborhoods. We
need to be flexible.
Mueller
In favor of 6,000 square foot lots for minor
subdivisions with 60' minimum lot width.
Johnson
In favor of 10,000 square foot lots, variances
can always be issued.
Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992
- Weiland
10,000 square foot lots.
- Voss
6,000 square foot lots.
- Hanus
6,000 square foot lots
- Jensen No comment.
Meyer
10,000 square foot lots is a better target, a
goal.
- Michael
6,000 square foot lots.
It was discussed that there are many 3,200 square foot 10ts in
Mound and if a minimum of 10,000 square feet is required, three
3,200 square foot lots would only total 9,600 square feet and would
be just short, but is this not a sufficient size for a lot? Maybe
the requirement should only be 8,000 square feet. What is
conducive to the neighborhood?
Mueller commented that the variance process, or the ability to
issue variances, should not be used to encourage the issuance of
variances.
Could a minor subdivision be approved for 9,000 square foot lots if
10,000 square feet is required and issue a lot size variance? The
City Planner stated that he needs to pose a question to the City
Attorney because he does not believe that the code specifically
states variances cannot be issued to minor subdivisions.
Shed placement on lakeshore lots:
The City Council also requested additional input on the issue of
the location of sheds, particularly for lakeshore properties.
Comments were received from each Planning Commissioner.
Mueller commented that allowing sheds on the street side of the
property for lakeshore lots will create a messy appearance for
inner lots. Mueller is not in favor of any sheds on the street
side of a property.
Clapsaddle is not opposed to sheds located on the street side, but
he would like to regulate the appearance of the structure, it
should have the same aesthetic quality of the principal structure.
Johnson commented that if sheds are allowed on the street front
side of lakeshore properties, they should be allowed in the front
yards of all properties.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 23, 1992
VOSS commented that Mound should not over-regulate. Hanus agreed
with Voss and stated that if people cannot afford to build an
accessory structure larger than 120 square feet and cannot afford
to go through the permit process then they should be given the
option to construct a small accessory structure to store their lawn
mower and other equipment.
Meyer is in favor of allowing sheds in the front yards if it gets
equipment and other materials put away.
Michael is opposed to having sheds in the front yards, he stated
that he has a single car garage and fits his lawn mower, snow
blower, ladder, etc. in the garage and still fits his car in it,
sheds should not be necessary.
Koegler noted that the Commission's comments relating to sheds and
lot sizes will be forwarded to the City Council for their public
hearing tomorrow evening (November 24, 1992).
Zoning Code Modifications/Shoreland Manaqement Ordinance Incon-
sistencies.
Hanus noted the following inconsistencies between the proposed
Shoreland Management Ordinance and the proposed Zoning Code
Modifications, as follows:
1. There are two definitions for an accessory building/structure.
There is a conflict in the total square feet allowed for
accessory buildings in Sections 23.407(3) and 23.610.4 1.A.
between 1,500 and 3,000 square feet. It was confirmed the
correct figure is 3,000 square feet.
Section 23.408 (7) states "In all districts, structures shall
be fifty (50) feet or more from the ordinary high water line
when the property abuts a lake or stream." Hanus suggested
the language be changed to clarify that all structures meet
the required lakeshore setback regardless if they abut a lake
or stream.
Koegler informed the Commission that the DNR deadline has been
extended, therefore he will recommend to the City Council that the
public hearing be continued. He further explained that the
Secretary is merging the existing zoning ordinance, the proposed
zoning code modifications and the shoreland management ordinance
into one document which will hopefully reveal any and all
inconsistencies between the three documents. It is Koegler's
intention and recommendation that a complete revised Zoning
5
Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 1992
Ordinance be available for review by the City Council prior to its
adoption.
PROPOSED FENCE ORDINANCE REVISIONS.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, informed the Planning Commission that
the City Council requested that they review Section 23.415 to
determine if any changes are necessary to clarify provisions found
in the fence ordinance.
Koegler noted that the language in Section 4(c) relating to fences
on lakeshore lots is cumbersome, however, it seems clear that this
provision restricts fence heights on lakeshore lots to 36 inches
both in the side yard behind the structure and in the rear yard
including fences that are parallel to the lakeshore.
Koegler also recommended modifications to Section 23.415 (4) and
Section 23.415 (7).
The Planning Commission agreed that the current fence ordinance is
very difficult to read and should be re-written. It was also
questioned how dog kennel fences should be addressed. The
Secretary suggested that for lakeshore fences they be restricted to
36 inches in height within 50 feet of the Ordinary High Water. The
City Planner referred to Section 23.415(7) which states, "In case
of lakeshore lots, no such fence or wall shall be located in a
manner which will block or otherwise adversely interfere with an
adjoining property owners lake view."
The City Planner will investigate modifications to the fence
ordinance.
8HORELAND ORDINANCE - DRAFT 5.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, explained to the Planning Commission
the pertinent change made in the Shoreland Management Ordinance by
the City Council since their last review. The change was made to
Section 1200:20 B. 2. b., Design Criteria for Water-oriented
Accessory Structures, the following was added:
"b.
A lock box is allowed providing that it does not have a total floor area
exceeding twenty (20)_ square feet and does not exceed four (4) feet in
height. Where possible, lock boxes shall be positioned such that the
narrowest side of the structure is parallel to the ordinary high water
line."
Hanus expressed a concern about how the height will be measured for
lock boxes that are dug into the side of a hill.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 23, 1992
CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT.
Liz Jensen reviewed the City Council meeting of November 10, 1992.
MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Clapsaddle, to
adjourn the meeting at 10=42 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vice Chair, Geoff Michael
Attest:
NINUTES - ECONON[C DEVELOPNENT COH~flSSION - NOVEMBER ~9~ 1992
The meeting was called to order at 7 AM. Members present:
Mark Brewer, Ken Smith, Sharon McMenamy-Cook, Jerry Pietrowski.
Absent: Jerry Longpre, Paul Meisel and Fred Guttormson. Also
present: Bruce Chamberlain, Hoisington Koegler Group; LynDelle
Skoglund, Parks and Open Space Commission; Gino Businaro, new
Finance Director and Ed Shukle, City Manager.
Upon motion Smith, seconded by Pietrowski and carried
unanimously, the minutes of the October 15, 1992 meeting were
approved.
Bruce Chamberlain reviewed the Mound Visions Project and he
proposed an Environmental and Appearance Model that has been
developed by the Design Committee. Bruce indicated that he would
be presenting this information to the Planning Commission at its
November 23, 1992 regular meeting. He indicated that he had
already presented it to the Parks and Open Space Commission at
their meeting of November 12th. A number of concerns were
expressed with regard to its contents and the aggressiveness that
the City would take in trying to enforce it, assuming the City
Council would agree to it. No action was taken on the item. The
promotional packet was discussed. Bruce indicated that currently
folders were being printed and he reviewed some information with
regard to what will be included within it.
City Manager Ed Shukle pointed out under other business that
the Christmas party is scheduled for Friday, December 18, 1992 and
will be held at the American Legion club in Mound. He indicated
that official invitations would be sent to the EDC to attend.
A vacancy on the commission was discussed. Ben Marks has
submitted his resignation. The vacancy has been advertised in the
local newspapers and resumes will be accepted until December 1st.
At the next EDC meeting, December 17th, interviews will be held of
candidates with the City Council. The EDC will then be asked to
rank those candidates and submit a recommendation to the City
Council for its consideration and subsequent appointment.
The next meeting of the commission will be held on Thursday,
December 17, 1992, at 7 AM, at city hall. Sharon Cook will bring
the rolls. Upon motion by Brewer, seconded by Smith and carried
unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 AM.
s~ctfully submitted,
City Manager
DEC 4 lgg
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIO~ F~ISTRICT
Lake Access Task For~
Agenda
7:00 pm, Wednesday, December 9, 1992
Community Room, Mnnetonka City Itall
14600 Minnetonka Blvd., Minnetonka
0
3e
5e
Welcome, roll call of designated Tasl: Force
and introductions, Chair Jim Grathwol
Review of agenda, call for consideratior~ of ~ddition~l
items not on agenda, Facilitator Don D~.c'l~hout
Review of Current and Potential Car/Tr~iler F~'l~ir~
Inventory dated 10/5/92: (attachment 1)
a. Analysis of the inventory relatio~ip to Zone
be
Review, approve/amend Data Gatheri;~g/St~da~'d~
committee Supplemental Recommend~L±~
2A and 2B)
Ce
Present model agreement for Lake A.~cezs Farl:ing
(hand-out at meeting for subseque~t city/agency
review and response by staff, elected officialz)
de
Prepare DNR and LMCD staff to worl~ with city/ager~cy
Task Force members to begin impleme~tatio~ proc,ms of
Lake Access Parking Agreements per Forking Standards,
to achieve signed agreements with four
cities/agencies by 4/15/93
Procedure for Handling Offers and Inq~.,iries Co~,cmrning
Potential Public Access Sites on Lake ;';inneton~a az
recommended by the LMCD Lake Access Committee
(attachment 3)
Recommendation for next Task Force me~z~Ling date, and
adjourn
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
DATA GATHERING AND STANDARDS SUBCOmmITTEE
9/10/92
SUBJECT: Resolution to the Lake Access Task Force
AL I:~lc hmo'ut. 2
In light of the car/trailer parking space data gathering and
analysis prepared by the Data Gathering and Standards Subcommit-
tees of the Lake Access Task Force for Lake Minnetonka, the
following supplemental recommendations are offered in which the
Subcommittee finds and recommends:
a. Continuing the goal of 700 car/trailer spaces and the
allocation of those spaces by zone.
b. The current allocation and distribution of car/trailer
parking spaces for the lake is not equitable.
c. All cities are urged to make a concerted effort to pro-
vide, their shares of lake access car/trailer parking
spaces. The Subcommittee further encourages coordination
and cooperation among cities to meet zone goals.
Lake Access Task Force ~or Lal'.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation
October --,
(carried over)
1992
-draft
TO:
LMCD Member Municipalities, Ilo. ~ i~ I .~,.,,'.v. [,T":i
FROM:
Task Force Chair Jim Orathwol
SUBJECT:
Verification of Available Car/!,~ ~J_J. er [';.'.~1: ,,,, :~,-~
Implementation of Public Accel, t~,,'l:i~,u '?'.-~,,',.,,!-.
Recommended Parking Standards for Public ,'~.:,.'e~~--~
car/trailer access parking inventory are n'_~nch,zd
October 21 by the Lake Minnetonka Lake A.~'
The Task Force now asks each city or age~.,:'~' t:) c:q,,)[-,~:] ~!:~ ~'~
Adopting the Parking Standards
preparatory to sharing in achie' ~.:~.~ tl,~.
car/trailer parking spaces for ! :." HJ~r~,'.l ,~, ~.
Verifying the car/trailer parki,..~
at its public access site -- in
lots as well as on-street parki[,,:~.
parking which is unsuited to ].o~,
be identified at this time
available public parking.
a. Staff from the LMCD and DNR
staff in this verification.
b. Parking so verified will be
the 700 car/trailer parking
It is our intention that standazds app~o ~,,.3 ;, , !.i,~,,
inventory verification by the cities and
operating public access on Lake Minnetont-'-, ':[11 ]~:, ,,~ '.c.
agreements which will finalize the accep~-~!:..]~,
parking for public boat launch accesse~.
We look forward to your participation in
objective for Lake Minnetonka.
Equitable Distribution of Public Access, ]0/ /9~, F. ?
It is important~ therefore, that all citJ:.? ,'~'o£~ly
consider their ability to provide lake ac:'::-::. WI~:,~'~ la~<!
limitations do not provide for an actual ~<.','.::~
cooperation with an adjoining city or ago~,.'? p~'ovJ.,!J~ ~ ~i~_~
is recommended. This cooperation would b~ ,,l,e~ t.q
considerations mutually agreeable to the
Lake Access Task Force members and staff ~,0~ ~v~il:~l.,[,: Lo
discuss your role in the equitable distri~,:~J_ion ~£ ~c~.:~:':~ t,~
Lake Minnetonka. We look forward to beg~.~.~ ~.~:-~ p~¢,~:~::-'~
in the weeks ahead.
Thank you for your consideration.
Lake Access Task Force for Lake Lake Minnetonka Conservation
-draft -
October --, 1992 (carried over)
TO:
LMCD Member Municipalities,
Suburban Hennepin Regional Park
FROM:
Task Force Chair Jim Grathwol
SUBJECT:
Equitable Distribution of Lake
Public Access
The 1992 Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task Fo~.
that renewed efforts be made to equitably dis~
access boat launch sites around Lake Minne~on~'~.
the stated goal of 700 car/trailer parking p].a,:,:~? i? wi.t~
reach, the distribution and quality of the ide~ti~ied
plus spaces are less than ideal.
These 700 car/trailer spaces consist of mome
parking and substantial amounts of on-street
Achieving the 700 parking space goal on Lahe
within the control of the lake cities depends
on agreements being reached among the cities
responsible for public accesses. This parkin~
consistent with the standards worked out by
Task Force.
These proposed agreements are fragile. They
culmination of significant compromise by the
represent compromise by the cities and agenci~:z
public accesses on Lake Minnetonka.
The burden for providing public access is
by all the cities. It is inconsis~en~ wi~h ~,~ !?~ L~'~
Access Task Force which recommended distribut[r,o public
access through 5 zones.
The concerns with not spreading the opportuni~
more evenly around the lake, and nat distribu~,.~
more fairly among the various units of gove~n~.?,~
Public access is concentrated in area~ aw:~y £~r~m ~:s,,~
demand.
Lack of future participation by governmenL
currently providing access may cause ~he~.~
units currently providing access to re~on,.~.d~_~
of their commitments.
12/2/92
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
- d r a f t -
Lake Access Committee
Chair Jim Grathwol
Procedure for Handling Offers and Inquiries
Concerning Potential Public Access Sites o~
Lake Minnetonka
BACKGROUND. Access to Lake Minnetonka for public
recreational uses is a goal of the Lake ~li~netonka
Conservation District and the MN Department of Natural
Resources.
The Management Plan for Lake Minneto~ka recog~ize~ that
recreational public access is a priority to balance user
enjoyment of this regional resource. Objectives and policies
have been established to insure this public use is fulfilled
and protected.
Adding additional public access to Lake Minnetonka is a
way to serve growing public recreatiomal interests. It is
assumed that lakeshore property may be suggested for a
possible public access. This could range from a property
simply being identified as having seemingly favorable
characteristics for a public access to an outright offer for
sale of a given lakeshore property.
Since siting a public access involves the interests of
many organizations, agencies and individuals, handling of
inquiries and offers will be subject to
upon by the responsible public agencies:
- 2 -
LAKESHORE PROPERTY OFFERED FOR SALE:
1) An offer of property for sale by its ow~er or an agent
representing the owner to any public agency obligates the
responsible agency official to communicate that offer to
the appropriate administrative official of the public
agencies which have a stake in an eventual access siting
or location. These agencies normally are:
MN DNR
City in which the site is located
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
2) Agencies so notified of a property offered for sale will
meet promptly~ involving the respective boards, councils
and administrative officials. A determination will be
made of the appropriateness of proceedi~g further with
the sale offer. If it is the group's consensus that the
offer has merit~ the arrangements for a public hearing to
be accompanied by appropriate site design will be
prepared among the involved agencies.
3. The balance of access siting arrangements will be carried
forward to their appropriate conclusion by the involved
agencies.
LAKESHORE PROPERTY SUGGESTED BY INDIVIDUALS:
1. A written proposal by an individual or organi~atio~ that
suggests a certain lakeshore property be con~idered for
public lake access obligates the responsible agency
official to communicate that suggest~o~ to
appropriate administrative official of'the public
- 3 -
agencies which have a stake in an eventual ~cces~_~
or location. These agencies, again, ,,orma~[ly are:
MN DNR
City in which the site is located
Lake Minnetonka Conservation Dizt~
Agencies so notified of a property suggested for sale
will meet promptly, involving the respective
councils and administrative officials and the owner or
owner's agent.
In the event the owner or owner's agen~ declines
participate in the meeting to discuss the proper ty'~
access site possibilities, the agency officials will th,~,
decide if they believe the property should be put.cued
further.
If the agency officials decide to pu~'~ue the proposed
property for an access site, it will fu~ ther notify
property owner of their interest to d,~ mine
owner is a willing seller. If the o'~,~c? a~ree~ to
participate as a willing seller, then th~ ;,roc~,.lu~,
outlined for a property offered for .c~]_e rill.
followed.
On a contrary response from the prope~, ty owner, if the
agency officials still decide to pur.~ t~,e
property for an access site in order ~o .~cquir~
according to procedures for a public n,rce~s si t~
allowed in MN Statutes, then the proc~ ~,r.~.~ o,~,t]~i,~c,J
a property offered for sale will be
INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS SUGGESTING CERTAIN PROPERTIES.
1. A person learning of a the possibility that a certain
property may be appropriate for a public lake access is
encouraged to have the owner or owner's agent or other
responsible public agency official prepare a written
outline as to why that property should be considered.
This outline will be sent to the administrative officials
of the public agencies identified in this procedure where
a lakeshore property is offered for sale. Lacking a
written outline, the suggestion will receive no agency
review. Any further pursuit of the suggestion will be
the responsibility of the person(s} introducing the
suggestion to bring it within the context of these
procedures.
December 2, 1992
4 1992
CITY of ORONO
Manlc~p~
Post O4Bce Box 66
Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066
Mr. David Cochran, Chairman
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
900 East Wayzata Boulevard
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
Dear Mr. Cochran:
! have been instructed by the City Council of the City of
Orono to write to you and convey our concerns regarding the so-
called Lake Access Task Force. This is the task force currently
chaired by Mr. Grathwol. We designate it the "so-called" task
force because it is unclear to the City of Orono whether this
group is considered by the LMCD to be separate from and
independent of the LMCD or whether the LMCD considers it a
subcommittee of its organization. And, it is unclear whether it
is separate from or the same as the LMCD's lake access committee.
It seemed to be somewhat unclear to the committee chairman, Mr.
Grathwol, as well, judging from his agenda of November 23, 1992.
Regardless of the confusion exhibited by its committee
chairman, the Lake Access Task Force unquestionably is the group
which your organization has designated to carry out a portion of
your long-range management plan. And, it is constituted of the
DNR, the fishermen's lobby, potentially all of the cities around
the Lake (although very few of them have proven to be active in
its implementation), and other public agencies. No one questions
that it was the DNR's purchase of property on Maxwell Bay that
gave birth to the task force. An important element in its
formation was an understanding that the task force would move
forward with a process to develop quidelines for the fair and
equitable dispersion of access points around the Lake prior to
the DNR moving ahead with the Maxwell Bay access plan.
The group, to date, appears to have been primarily concerned
with the study of car/trailer parking around the Lake and
secondarily concerned with the study of access ramps. We say
"appears to be" because thus far it seems that the chairman of
the task force, and the LMCD, in all likelihood have been
primarily concerned with avoiding a study of access points any
place except at Maxwell Bay. The task force has engaged in the
study of parking spaces as a diversion from the primary
responsibility which first brought it into existence.
TELEPHONE- 473-7357 · FAX- 4TJ-0510
Mr. David Cochran, Chairman
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
December 2, 1992
page 2
On Monday, November 16th of this year, Mr. Grathwol appeared
at a City of Orono Planning Commission meeting and chose that
public forum to present, and expose in advance, the report which
he intends this task force to produce on the subject of lake
access. What was presented was, that under no circumstances will
the City of Excelsior, (which he represents) allow additional
lake access or a car/trailer ramp. If the City of Orono were to
speculate, it would guess that Mr. Grathwol's personal agenda
also includes a number of other cities which the City of
Excelsior has completely protected from access ramps. We suggest
this conclusion partially because the reason that he gave for
this pre-judgment was "that the City of Excelsior does not wish
such ramps and so must be eliminated from consideration."
Mr. Grathwol's blatant parochialism on this point makes his
continued presence as Chairman of this task force completely
improper, and contrary to the spririt of your long-range
management plan. Neither the cities that supported the task
force's original plan nor the Metropolitan Council can have
conceived of such misuse of the forum you asked for. And, we
strongly request that you remove Mr. Grathwol immediately, either
by direct action or by persuading him to resign.
Mr. Grathwol's unfortunate actions as chairman of the task
force, and his personal statements have been brought to your
attention on a number of occasions by the City of Orono, and
probably by other agencies as well. Moreover, you have been
associated with Mr. Grathwol on the LMCD for a number of years
and must have known of his predjudicial views and intentions
before you made the appointment. We regret to say, therefore,
that in the opinion of the City of Orono that attitude displayed
by Mr. Grathwol is also a reflection of your own. Consequently,
before we accept any appointment made by the LMCD to the
chairmanship of this task force, we will expect some objective
method of determining that the next appointee will not be equally
prejudiced and will not have a pre-conceived conclusion as to the
task force activities before he commences the job.
As we mentioned above, Mr. Grathwol chose to have this task
force commence its studies not with the lake access problem which
was its charter, but with the parking space issue. We understand,
in Orono, that except for this single mindedness of the committee
chairman in seeking to carry out his own agenda, the members of
the task force have reached a general concensus (if not a
detailed agreement), about the actual number of parking spaces
available and used, their condition, the usefulness and location
of these parking spaces, the criteria to be a_pp.lied in
determining what constitutes a_----~-~rkin~ sP~-~e--~c~-~-ptable to t~
DNR, and indeed what are the DNR's general views regarding the
]3-6-~-ure steps needed in this area. Only Mr. Grathwol's opinion on
this matter appears to be different from the concensus, and his
opinion appears to be based upon Mr. David Cochran, Chairman Lake
December 2, 1992
page 3
Minnetonka Conservation District prejudicial judgments of the
LMCD. Which judgments appear to be based more upon political
considerations than on the ability to count. The
counterproductive actions of the chairman have overshadowed and
nullified the efforts of a mediator engaged to assist the task
force in achieving a consensus on the lake access issues.
In any event, that particular phase of the activity should
have been wrapped up over the objections of the chairman a number
of weeks, if not months, ago. And, if the chairman is removed,
it appears that the other members of the task force will be able
to come to an ad hoc resolution of the problems relating to
parking.
Thus, to conclude; given the poor judgment and extreme
prejudice of the task force chairman, and his activities to date,
we advise you that the City of Orono is not prepared to have the
Lake Access Task Force issue any report on any matter related to
lake access or parking access.
Very truly yours,
Barbara A. Peterson
Mayor
cc:
LMCD Board Members
Lake Access Task Force Members
Mayors of 14 Lake Cities
R[E'D DEC 41992
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIO~t
Lake Access Task
Agenda
7:00 pm, Wednesday, December 9, 1992
Community Room, Mnnetonka City Itall
14600 Minnetonka Blvd., Minnetonka
e
Welcome, roll call of designated Taxi:
and introductions, Chair Jim Grathwoi
Review of agenda, call for consideratic~n of addi~.i, onu].
items not on agenda, Facilitator Don [?.~ c:khout
Review of Current and Potential Car/Truiler
Inventory dated 10/5/92: (attachment
a. Analysis of the inventory relatio~hip ~o Zc~ne ~c,~l~;
be
Review, approve/amend Data
committee Supplemental Recommend~:~.Lc~ (a~a(:t~(~nt: '-~
2A and 2B)
Present model agreement for Lake ^c'ce~s Parl:ing
(hand-out at meeting for subsequeuL city/agency
review and response by staff, elec[ed of£icial~)
Prepare DNR and LMCD staff to work with city/agency
Task Force members to begin implem~en~.a~ion p~'oce~s of
Lake Access Parking Agreements per Forking 5[andard~,
to achieve signed agreements wi[h four
cities/agencies by 4/15/93
Procedure for Handling Offers and Inquiries Co:~cerning
Potential Public Access Sites on Lake ?linne'Eonka as
recommended by the LMCD Lake Access Co~umi[~ee
(attachment 3)
Recommendation for next Task Force me,~!.ing da~e, and
adjourn
0 0
~oo~
oo~
0 0
°l°
°I°
°°l°
u
u
0
~J
0
~J
U
0
0
~:~ ·
0 ~
I ~J
U ~
~ 0
0
0
~ u
0 ~
~ 0
c~
~J
0
0
.IJ
{~ 0
',q
U ~
~ 0
Z
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
0
I',1
·
lq
0
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
®
rr I-r
i.~ 0
·
N
Z
rTl
(/>
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
DATA GATHERING AND STANDARDS SUBCOb~IITTEE
9/10/92
SUBJECT: Resolution to the Lake Access Task Force
In light of the car/trailer parking space data gathering and
analysis prepared by the Data Gathering and Standards Subcommit-
tees of the Lake Access Task Force for Lake Minnetonka, the
following supplemental recommendations are offered in which the
Subcommittee finds and recommends:
a. Continuing the goal of 700 car/trailer spaces and the
allocation of those spaces by zone.
b. The current allocation and distribution of car/trailer
parking spaces for the lake is not equitable.
¢. All cities are urged to make a concerted effort to pro-
vide, their shares of lake access car/trailer parkin~
spaces. The Subcommittee further encourages coordination
and cooperation among cities to meet zone goals.
Lake Access Task Force for Lal: Lake Minnetonka Conservation
October -- 1992
(carried ove~)
-draft -
TO:
LMCD Hember Municipalities,
FROM:
Task Force Chair Jim Grathwol
SUBJECT:
Verification of Available
Implementation of Public Accel'
Recommended Parking Standards for Public
car/trailer access parking inventory are
October 21 by the Lake Minnetonka Lak~
The Task Force now asks each city or
1. Adopting the Parking Standardz
preparatory to sharing in
car/trailer parking spaces
Verifying the car/trailer par-I~.i,,,~
at its public access site --
lots as well as on-street parki~,,~.
parking which is unsuited %o
be identified at this time
available public parking.
a. Staff from the LMCD and DNN
staff in this verification.
b. Parking so verified will be
the 700 car/trailer parking
It is our intention that standards appzo,' ~!
inventory verification by the cities and
operating public access on Lake Minneton! ~ ,:!_].l. ~; .... { ',;,
agreements which will finalize the accep~'~:]~' c'~ ~.~'.~ l.~' ,
parking for public boat launch accessers.
We look forward to your participation
objective for Lake Minnetonka.
Equitable Distribution of Public Access, le/ -/92, }'. 2
It is important, therefore, that all
consider their ability to provide lake
limitations do not provide for an actual
cooperation with an adjoining city or
is recommended. This cooperation would
considerations mutually agreeable to the
Lake Access Task Force members and staff
discuss your role in the equitable distri~,~t, l on
Lake Minnetonka. We look forward to beginner.trig
in the weeks ahead.
Thank you for your consideration.
Equitable Distribution of Public Access, ~Ot /9~, I~.
It is important, therefore, that all
consider their ability to provide lake
limitations do not provide for an actual
cooperation with an adjoining city or
is recommended. This cooperation would
considerations mutually agreeable to the
Lake Access Task Force members and
discuss your role in the equitable
Lake Minnetonka. We look forward
in the weeks ahead.
Thank you for your consideration.
Lake Access Task Force for Lake Lake Minnetonka Conservation
-draft -
October --, 1992 (carried over)
TO:
LMCD Member Municipalities, ttennepl~
Suburban Hennepin Regional Park Di~ !,'~., I~]I ._,~.~
FROM:
Task Force Chair Jim Grathwol
SUBJECT:
Equitable Distribution of Lake
Public Access
The 1992 Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task
that renewed efforts be made to equitably
access boat launch sites around Lake MinnetonI:'~.
the stated goal of 700 car/trailer parking
reach, the distribution and quality of the
plus spaces are less than ideal.
These 700 car/trailer spaces consist of some
parking and substantial amounts of on-street
Achieving the 700 parking space goal on Lake
within the control of the lake cities dependm
on agreements being reached among the citiem
responsible for public accesses. This parkin~
consistent with the standards worked out by
Task Force.
These proposed agreements are fragile. They ;,,,', the
culmination of significant compromise by the
represent compromise by the cities and agencic.,~
public accesses on Lake Minnetonka.
The burden for providing public access is not
by all the cities. It is inconsistent with t~,,: ].986
Access Task Force which recommended distributi, r~cl public
access through 5 zones.
The concerns with not spreading the opportuni~
more evenly around the lake, and not distributi.~,j
more fairly among the various units of gove~ nr,,,',r~L ~r-~?
Public access is concentrated in areas
demand.
e
Lack of future participation by governmen[
currently providing access may cause
units currently providing access to
of their commitments.
].2/2/92
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION [~ISTRIC:T
- d r a f t -
Lake Access Committee
Chair Jim Grathwol
Procedure for Handling Offers a~d
Concerning Potential Public Access S±te~ o~
Lake Minnetonka
BACKGROUND. Access to Lake Minnetonka for public
recreational uses is a goal of the Lake
Conservation District and the MN Department of
Resources.
The Management Plan for Lake Minneto~a recog~'~i~e~ that
recreational public access is a priority to balmnce u~er
enjoyment of this regional resource. Objective~ ~d policie~
have been established to insure this pub].ic u~e is fulfilled
and protected.
Adding additional public access to L~ke Mi~etonka
way to serve growing public recreational ~nterest~. It
assumed that lakeshore property may be suggested for a
possible public access. This could range from a property
simply being identified as having seemingly favorable
characteristics for a public access to an o~tright of£e~ for
sale of a given lakeshore property.
Since siting a public access involve~ the interests of
many organizations, agencies and individu~l~, ha~dli~g of
inquiries and offers will be subject to t~.~
upon by the responsible public agencies:
LAKESHORE PROPERTY OFFERED FOR SALE:
1) An offer of property for sale by its owner or an agent
representing the owner to any public agency obligates the
responsible agency official to communicate that offer to
the appropriate administrative official of the public
agencies which have a stake in an eventual access siting
or location. These agencies normally are:
MN DNR
City in which the site is located
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
2) Agencies so notified of a property offered for sale will
meet promptly, involving the respective boards, councils
and administrative officials. A determination will be
made of the appropriateness of proceedin~ further with
the sale offer. If it is the group's consensus that the
offer has merit, the arrangements for a public hea~'ing to
be accompanied by appropriate site design will be
prepared among the involved agencies.
3. The balance of access siting arrangements will be carried
forward to their appropriate conclusion by the involved
agencies.
LAKESHORE PROPERTY SUGGESTED BY INDIVIDUALS:
1. A written proposal by an individual or' or~mniz~tion that
suggests a certain lakeshore property be considered for a
public lake access obligates the responsible a~ency
official to communicate that suggestion to the
appropriate administrative official of the public
LAKESHORE PROPERTY OFFERED FOR SALE:
1) An offer of property for sale by its owner or an agent
representing the owner to any public agency obligates the
responsible agency official to communicate that offer to
the appropriate administrative official of the public
agencies which have a stake in an eventual access siting
or location. These agencies normally are:
MN DNR
City in which the site is located
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
2) Agencies so notified of a property offered for sale will
meet promptly, involving the respective boards, councils
and administrative officials. A determination will be
made of the appropriateness of proceeding further with
the sale offer. If it is the group's consensus that the
offer has merit, the arrangements for a public hearing to
be accompanied by appropriate site design will be
prepared among the involved agencies.
3. The balance of access siting arrangements will be carried
forward to their appropriate conclusion by the involved
agencies.
LAKESHORE PROPERTY SUGGESTED BY INDIVIDUALS:
1. A written proposal by an individual or organization that
suggests a certain lakeshore property be considered for a
public lake access obligates the responsible agency
official to communicate that suggestio~ to the
appropriate administrative official of the public
- 3 -
e
agencies which have a stake in an evc~nLu~l ~cc~
or location. These agencies, again, ~lormctily ~re:
MN DNR
City in which the site is
Lake Minnetonka Conservation Diz~ ici
Agencies so notified of a property sug~ezted for
will meet promptly, involving the re~pective bo~zd~,
councils and administrative officiml~ ~nd the owner or
owner's agent.
In the event the owner or owner's agenL de~linez to
participate in the meeting to discuzn ~he propert~y'~
access site possibilities, the agency o[~ici~l~ will
decide if they believe the property ~hould be
further.
If the agency officials decide to puz?ue the proposed
property for an access site, it will fui ~ihez nn~ify
property owner of their interest to d~mine ~f
owner is a willing seller. If the o~,~' ~re~
participate as a willing seller, the~ th~ proc~,{~,,
outlined for a property offered for ~7"~]~¥ ~i].] l,~-~
followed.
On a contrary response from the prope~, ty owner, if the
agency officials still decide to pur~,n~ the
property for an access site in order ~ ~) ~quiF,~ J ?.
according to procedures for a public ~,rc,?~ ~it~
allowed in MN Statutes, then the p~oc~,{~,~ e,.'%] [~'~
s property offered for sale will be f,,~
INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS SUGGESTING CERTAIN PROPERTIES.
1. A person learning of a the possibility that a certain
property may be appropriate for a public lake access is
encouraged to have the owner or owner's agent or other
responsible public agency official prepare a written
outline as to why that property should be considered.
This outline will be sent to the administrative officials
of the public agencies identified in this procedure where
a lakeshore property is offered for sale. Lacking a
written outline, the suggestion will receive no agency
review. Any further pursuit of the suggestion will be
the responsibility of the person(s) introducing the
suggestion to bring it within the context of these
procedures.
INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS SUGGESTING CERTAIN PROPERTIES.
A person learning of a the possibility that a certain
property may be appropriate for a public lake access is
encouraged to have the owner or owner's agent or other
responsible public agency official prepare a writter~
outline as to why that property should be considered.
This outline will be sent to the administrative officials
of the public agencies identified in thi~ procedure wher~e
a lakeshore property is offered for sale. Lacking a
written outline~ the suggestion will receive no agency
review. Any further pursuit of the suggestion will be
the responsibility of the person(s) introducing the
suggestion to bring it within the context of these
procedures.
IIE"I DEC
December 2, 1992
4 1992
CITY of ORONO
Municipal Offices
Post ~ Box 66
Mr. David Cochran, Chairman
Lake Minnetonka 'Conservation District
900 East Wayzata Boulevard
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
Dear Mr. Cochran:
I have been instructed by the City Council of the City of
Orono to write to you and convey our concerns regarding the so-
called Lake Access Task Force. This is the task force currently
chaired by Mr. Grathwol. We designate it the "so-called" task
force because it is unclear to the City of Orono whether this
group is considered by the LMCD to be separate from and
independent of the LMCD or whether the LMCD considers it a
subcommittee of its organization. And, it is unclear whether it
is separate from or the same as the LMCD's lake access committee.
It seemed to be somewhat unclear to the committee chairman, Mr.
Grathwol, as well, judging from his agenda of November 23, 1992.
Regardless of the confusion exhibited by its committee
chairman, the Lake Access Task Force unquestionably is the group
which your organization has designated to carry out a portion of
your long-range management plan. And, it is constituted of the
DNR, the fishermen's lobby, potentially all of the cities around
the Lake (although very few of them have proven to be active in
its implementation), and other public agencies. No one questions
that it was the DNR's purchase of property on Maxwell Bay that
gave birth to the task force. An important element in its
formation was an understanding that the task force would move
forward with a process to develop quidelines for the fair and
equitable dispersion of access points around the Lake prior to
the DNR moving ahead with the Maxwell Bay access plan.
The group, to date, appears to have been primarily concerned
with the study of car/trailer parking around the Lake and
secondarily concerned with the study of access ramps. We say
"appears to be" because thus far it seems that the chairman of
the task force, and the LMCD, in all likelihood have been
primarily concerned with avoiding a study of access points any
place except at Maxwell Bay. The task force has engaged in the
study of parking spaces as a diversion from the primary
responsibility which first brought it into existence.
TELEPHONE - 473-7357 · FAX - 473-0:510
Mr. David Cochran, Chairman
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
December 2, 1992
page 2
On Monday, November 16th of this year, Mr. Grathwol appeared
at a City of Orono Planning Commission meeting and chose that
public forum to present, and expose in advance, the report which
he intends this task force to produce on the subject of lake
access. What was presented was, that under no circumstances will
the City of Excelsior, (which he represents) allow additional
lake access or a car/trailer ramp. If the City of Orono were to
speculate, it would quess that Mr. Grathwol's personal agenda
also includes a number of other cities which the City of
Excelsior has completely protected from access ramps. We suggest
this conclusion partially because the reason that he gave for
this pre-judgment was "that the City of Excelsior does not wish
such ramps and so must be eliminated from consideration."
Mr. Grathwol's blatant parochialism on this point makes his
continued presence as Chairman of this task force completely
improper, and contrary to the spririt of your long-range
management plan. Neither the cities that supported the task
force's original plan nor the Metropolitan Council can have
conceived of such misuse of the forum you asked for. And, we
strongly request that you remove Mr. Grathwol immediately, either
by direct action or by persuading him to resign.
Mr. Grathwol's unfortunate actions as chairman of the task
force, and his personal statements have been brought to your
attention on a number of occasions by the City of Orono, and
probably by other agencies as well. Moreover, you have been
associated with Mr. Grathwol on the LMCD for a number of years
and must have known of his predjudicial views and intentions
before you made the appointment. We regret to say, therefore,
that in the opinion of the City of Orono that attitude displayed
by Mr. Grathwol is also a reflection of your own. Consequently,
before we accept any appointment made by the LMCD to the
chairmanship of this task force, we will expect some objective
method of determining that the next appointee will not be equally
prejudiced and will not have a pre-conceived conclusion as to the
task force activities before he commences the job.
As we mentioned above, Mr. Grathwol chose to have this task
force commence its studies not with the lake access problem which
was its charter, but with the parking space issue. We understand,
in Orono, that except for this single mindedness of the committee
chairman in seeking to carry out his own agenda, the members of
the task force have reached a general concensus (if not a
detailed agreement), about the actual number of parking spaces
available and used, their condition, the usefulness and location
of these parking spaces, the criteria to be app. lied in
determining what constitutes a parking space acceptable to the
DNR, and indeed what are the DNR's general views regarding the
future steps needed in this area. Only Mr. Grathwol's opinion on
this matter appears to be different from the concensus, and his
opinion appears to be based upon Mr. David Cochran, Chairman Lake
Mr. David Cochran, Chairman
Lake Ninnetonka Conservation District
December 2, 1992
page 2
On Monday, November 16th of this year, Mr. Grathwol appeared
at a City of Orono Planning Commission meeting and chose that
public forum to present, and expose in advance, the report which
he intends this task force to produce on the subject of lake
access. What was presented was, that under no circumstances will
the City of Excelsior, (which he represents) allow additional
lake access or a car/trailer ramp. If the City of Orono were to
speculate, it would guess that Mr. Grathwol's personal agenda
also includes a number of other cities which the City of
Excelsior has completely protected from access ramps. We suggest
this conclusion partially because the reason that he gave for
this pre-judgment was "that the City of Excelsior does not wish
such ramps and so must be eliminated from consideration.',
Mr. Grathwol's blatant parochialism on this point makes his
continued presence as Chairman of this task force completely
improper, and contrary to the spririt of your long-range
management Plan. Neither the cities that supported the task
force's original plan nor the Metropolitan Council can have
conceived of such misuse of the forum you asked for. And, we
strongly request that you remove Mr. Grathwol immediately, either
by direct action or by persuading him to resign.
Mr. Grathwol's unfortunate actions as chairman of the task
force, and his personal statements have been brought to your
attention on a number of occasions by the City of Orono, and
probably by other agencies as well. Moreover, you have been
associated with Mr. Grathwol on the LMCD for a number of years
and must have known of his predjudicial views and intentions
before you made the appointment. We regret to say, therefore,
that in the opinion of the City of Orono that attitude displayed
by Mr. Grathwol is also a reflection of your own. Consequently,
before we accept any appointment made by the LMCD to the
chairmanship of this task force, we will expect some objective
method of determining that the next appointee will not be equally
prejudiced and will not have a pre-conceived conclusion as to the
task force activities before he commences the job.
As we mentioned above, Mr. Grathwol chose to have this task
force commence its studies not with the lake access problem which
was its charter, but with the parking space issue. We understand,
in Orono, that except for this single mindedness of the committee
chairman in seeking to carry out his own agenda, the members of
the task force have reached a general concensus (if not a
detailed agreement), about the actual number of parking spaces
available and used, their condition, the usefulness and location
of these parking spaces, the criteria to be applied in
determining what constitutes ~---p-~r~-~g spa~e--~c~-~-pt'~-61~' to t~e
DNR, and indeed what are the DNR's general views regarding the
~-6-~ure steps needed in this area. Only Mr. Grathwol's opinion on
this matter appears to be different from the concensus, and his
opinion appears to be based upon Mr. David Cochran, Chairman Lake
December 2, 1992
page 3
Minnetonka Conservation District prejudicial judgments of the
LMCD. Which judgments appear to be based more upon political
considerations than on the ability to count. The
counterproductive actions of the chairman have overshadowed and
nullified the efforts of a mediator engaged to assist the task
force in achieving a consensus on the lake access issues.
In any event, that particular phase of the activity should
have been wrapped up over the objections of the chairman a number
of weeks, if not months, ago. And, if the chairman is removed,
it appears that the other members of the task force will be able
to come to an ad hoc resolution of the problems relating to
parking.
Thus, to conclude; given the poor judgment and extreme
prejudice of the task force chairman, and his activities to date,
we advise you that the City of Orono is not prepared to have the
Lake Access Task Force issue any report on any matter related to
lake access or parking access.
Very truly yours,
Barbara A. Peterson
Mayor
CC:
LMCD Board Members
Lake Access Task Force Members
Mayors of 14 Lake Cities
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364 168-
(612) 472 0600
FAX (612) 472-062'2'
December 10, 1992
TO: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND
CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER '
SUBJECT= NEXT EDC MEETING - DECEMBER 17, 1992,
MOUND CITY HALL
Enclosed is the agenda for the upcoming EDC meeting of
Thursday, December 17, 1992, 7 AM, at city hall. Please note that
the first item on the agenda is an interview with an applicant for
the vacancy on the Commission. The applicant is Stan Drahos, a
local resident and businessman. Also note enclosed is material
regarding the promotional packet that is currently in process.
Since the City Council will be present at the interviews Thursday
morning, they will have the opportunity to review the material to
be put into the promotional packet and hopefully, the material can
be finalized so it can go to the printer for publication.
For those of you who are not familiar with how the Commission
interviews are to be conducted, the chair of the Commission, Paul
Meisel, will ask the applicant to explain why he is interested in
being on the EDC. Other questions from Mr. Meisel and any of the
members should be asked to the applicant. Following the interview
the applicant can be excused and the Commission and Council can
move on to the agenda. After the item is discussed on the contents
of the promotional packet, the Commission should go back and
discuss the possible appointment of Mr. Drahos. At a subsequent
City Council meeting, the Council will consider the recommendation
of the Commission.
Also enclosed are the Minutes of the November 19, 1992,
Economic Development Commission meeting and a preliminary draft of
the proposed Appearance Model. Sharon Cook will be bringing the
rolls Thursday morning. If you cannot attend the meeting, please
contact me.
ES:is
printed on recycled paper
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
DECEMBER 17, 1992- 7 AM
Approve Minutes of November
regular meeting.
19, 1992
0
Interview of Stan Drahos,
vacancy.
Applicant for
3. Mound Visions Project-
Environmental and Appearance Model
Promotional Packet - ~4
4. Discuss Appointment to EDC %v~'~ / 6~-'
5. Other Business
0
Next Meeting- January 21, 1993
7. Adjournment
MINUTES - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 19, 1992
The meeting was called to order at ? AM. Members present:
Mark Brewer, Ken Smith, Sharon McMenamy-Cook, Jerry Pietrowski.
Absent: Jerry Longpre, Paul Meisel and Fred Guttormson. Also
present: Bruce Chamberlain, Hoisington Koegler Group; LynDelle
Skoglund, Parks and Open Space Commission; Gino Businaro, new
Finance Director and Ed Shukle, City Manager.
Upon motion Smith, seconded by Pietrowski and carried
unanimously, the minutes of the October 15, 1992 meeting were
approved.
Bruce Chamberlain reviewed the Mound Visions Project and he
proposed an Environmental and Appearance Model that has been
developed by the Design Committee. Bruce indicated that he would
be presenting this information to the Planning Commission at its
November 23, 1992 regular meeting. He indicated that he had
already presented it to the Parks and Open Space Commission at
their meeting of November 12th. A number of concerns were
expressed with regard to its contents and the aggressiveness that
the City would take in trying to enforce it, assuming the City
Council would agree to it. No action was taken on the item. The
promotional packet was discussed. Bruce indicated that currently
folders were being printed and he reviewed some information with
regard to what will be included within it.
City Manager Ed Shukle pointed out under other business that
the Christmas party is scheduled for Friday, December 18, 1992 and
will be held at the American Legion club in Mound. He indicated
that official invitations would be sent to the EDC to attend.
A vacancy on the commission was discussed. Ben Marks has
submitted his resignation. The vacancy has been advertised in the
local newspapers and resumes will be accepted until December 1st.
At the next EDC meeting, December 17th, interviews will be held of
candidates with the City Council. The EDC will then be asked to
rank those candidates and submit a recommendation to the City
Council for its consideration and subsequent ppolntment.
a '
The next meeting of the commission will be held on Thursday,
December 17, 1992, at 7 AM, at city hall. Sharon Cook will bring
the rolls. Upon motion by Brewer, seconded by Smith and carried
unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 AM.
ctfully submitted,
City Manager
DEC 1 0 1992
Painting
"Professional Painting Pays"
DEC. ?, 1998
ED SHUKLE
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD RD.
MOUND, MN.
REF: ECONOMIC DEVELOF'MENT COMMITTEE
Serving the area
since 1979
DEAR ED,
THROUGH I'HE GRAPE VINE I HAVE HEARD THERE IS A VACANCY COMING UP IN THE
E.D.C. I THINK YOU KNOW MY DEDICATION TO MOUND AND ITS FUTURE. MY
INVOLVMENT WITH THE TASK FORCE ON CITY HALL, OUR MOUND CITY DAYS, M.D.A.
TELETHON AND NORTHWEST TONKA LIONS ARE SOME OF THE THINGS I DO TO MAKE
MOUND A BETTER F'LACE TO LIVE.
I AM HOPING TO CHANGE NOT ONLY THE IMAGE MOUND HAS, BUT ENHANCE ITS
FUTURE. WITH THAT IN MIND I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED IN JOINING E.D.C.
AND HELP MAKE MOUND WHAT EVERYONE WOULD LIKE IT TO BE.
S I N~F~Et_Y x-~
STAN DRAHOS
Member o[ Minnesota Painting and Decorating Contractors
5016 Wooclridge Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364 · (612) 472-2092
Ill
Mound
Environmental
Appearance
Model
Mound,
Minnesota
Contenls-
Introduction
Buildings
5
Signage
10
Car Parks
15
Open Space
19
Appendix 1
23
Mound Market Position
(Adopted by the City in August 1991)
To take full advantage of our geographic location, our existing business
community (retail professional & industrial), our unique natural features and
our distinctly talented people, the Community of Mound will conduct future
economic development, business recruitment and enhancement, visual
betterment, su'uctural improvement, planning, and downtown promotion
according to a recreational/cultural/scenic destination market position and
development theme.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
tnVodua/on-
The Mound Environmental & Appearance Model is based on the Mound Market Position and is
intended to carry forth a design vision of downtown Mound. It has been developed by the
Mound Visions project under direction of the Economic Development Commission. Through
much deliberation, debate and public input the Environmental & Appearance Model has taken
form as a guiding document for commercial development and revitalization.
This document allows the community of Mound to explicitly describe how downtown should
appear and function. It, hopefully, allows creative latitude while still maintaining an overall
character that will unify downtown Mound.
The Model draws inspiration from many successful communities and shopping districts but
mainly from the history of Mound itself. Mound's early days as a Lake Minnetonka resort
community is a major part of local folklore and is rich in architectural character. It seems only
fitting that this be the basis for future development in Mound: an historic resort hotel
architectural theme.
You will see by reading the model that the intent is not to recreate structures which were at one
time standing in Mound. The idea is to use the character of those structures as inspiration for
a new downtown Mound. One which accommodates modern retail practice yet has an appealing
identity of its own.
While the Environmental and Appearance Model depicts the detail features, the Downtown
Mound Concept Plan is a master plan drawing which illustrates the proposed layout alterations.
Downtown Mound Concept Plan:
The downtown Mound concept plan was informally adopted by the EDC and City
Council in Spring 1992. It calls for fairly dramatic alterations in the way
downtown functions and appears.
The concept plan has, as its basis, five goals: 1. Provide marketable commercial space.
2. Take full advantage of views, access and use of downtown lakes.
3. Improve pedestrian and vehicular circulation.
4. Maintain "downtown" character as opposed to "suburban" character.
5. Make doing business in downtown Mound easy and enjoyable.
Under the plan, businesses would need to be relocated and buildings razed. This
may seem like a drastic measure but given the condition of many existing
structures and the highly competitive environment among retail centers, it may be
the only way for Mound to capture a significant portion of the market.
The concept plan calls for the following alterations to downtown Mound. See the
graphic on page 4.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
· Relocating County Road 15 (Shoreline Drive):
The concept calls for a portion of County Road 15 east of Commerce
Blvd. to be diverted to the north. This move accomplishes several things.
1. It allows high volume and higher speed ual'ftc to be directed
through the heart of Mound's convenience and auto oriented
2. It forms a direct linkage with County Road 15 west of
Commerce Blvd.
3. It solves a development problem in the Lost Lake area by
allowing new development to be oriented toward Lost Lake,
downtown's greatest recreational and scenic opportunity.
· Relocating and constructing Auditors Road as a "main street":
Auditors Road would become the traditional main street of Mound. The
street would intersect with Commerce Boulevard a short distance south of
where it currently is, conform to the edge of Lost Lake and connect with
Shoreline Drive approximately where Belmont Ave. is currently located.
Convenient, diagonal parking would line both sides of the street.
Commercial buildings would front on the north side of the street and a
parkway/promenade would be south of the street, adjacent to Lost Lake.
The new Auditors Road has many assets.
1. Convenient, on-street parking will front every business.
Overflow will be to the rear.
2. It emphasizes an excellent view across Lost Lake.
3. The building orientation provides southern exposure on the front
facade which is an important factor affecting retail sales.
4. Street layout affords a view of business entries from Shoreline
Dr. which is important in drawing consumers onto Auditors Rd.
· Relocating the Post Office:
Many businesses would be relocated under this concept but the Post Office
is one which plays a key role in future downtown Mound. Elimination of
the existing P.O. building will allow restoration of the Lost Lake channel
as well as the reconstruction of Auditors Road. It is vital that the new
Post Office be located in the Auditors Road/Commerce Blvd. intersection
area. The reason for this is that the P.O. draws a great deal of people each
day. Placing the P.O. in the suggested location will increase traffic counts
on Auditors Road, insuring strong retail sales. This placement also makes
the P.O. easily accessible from any district of downtown.
· Providing parallel parking on the county roads as redevelopment occurs:
Currently, the county roads are not wide enough to include parking. As
redevelopment occurs, inset parallel parking bays can be constructed.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 2
· Restoring the Lost Lake channel to Lake Minnetonka and constructing
marinas:
The recreational and visual use of Lost Lake is an element which will help
make Mound a regional draw. Temporary docking facilities would be
provided to allow Lake Minnetonka boaters to browse downtown.
Contract docks would be provided for use by the hotel and others.
Reintroducing the recently restored "Minnetonka" streetcar boat to the
channel for excursions is a future possibility if the Bartlett Blvd. bridge is
reconstructed over the channel.
· Constructing a permanent facility for the Mound Farmers Market on the
Lost Lake site:
The farmers market is currently being operated in a downtown parking lot.
If the market were to be expanded and given a permanent location and
facility, it could become a viable draw for downtown Mound. The facility
could also be used for indoor/outdoor recreation, containing pavilion space
and a warming house for Lost Lake ice skating.
· Constructing a hotel on the Lost Lake site.
A hotel in this location would anchor the east side of Lost Lake and would
be the terminus of a promenade connecting with downtown. A hotel
provides an opportunity to recreate a turn-of-the-century Lake Minnetonka
hotel. The hotel takes great advantage of the views across Lost Lake as
well as the recreation potential of the marina.
· Creating a downtown trail network:
Trails would create a recreational element in downtown. They would
connect natural features such as Lake Langdon and Lost Lake to the retail
district. They would also provide a reason to go downtown in the
evenings. Loop trails around the lakes are ideal but may be challenging
due to the residential development abutting portions of both Lost Lake and
Lake Langdon. Creative solutions can no doubt be discovered.
· Creating a central hub of local streets connecting the downtown districts:
This hub provides a mode of local ~'avel (a back way through town) other
than the county roads. It also creates a sense of spacial understanding by
allowing visitors to see all parts of downtown from one location.
· Creating direct access to the west from the existing 110/15 intersection:
Convenient access to the Lake Langdon area is important since parking is
to the rear of the buildings. A 4-way intersection improves safety.
These are the primary features of the concept plan. Aspects will no doubt be
altered slightly as development occurs but it is important to remain committed to
the concept and the above mentioned goals to insure downtown Mound can realize
its full potential.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
page 3
I
o
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 4
Buildings are key factors in drawing customers into a shopping district and an individual
shop. For this reason a building facade model has been developed for downtown Mound to
encourage construction and rehabilitation consistent with Mound's market position.
Basic Pdnciples:
Mound can trace its roots back to the resort hotel era of the late 19th and early
20th Centuries. To maintain this historic connection, buildings in Mound's CBD
should reflect the style of Lake Minnetonka resort hotels and storefronts should
contain the elements of a traditional, commercial storefront. Combined, these two
elements will produce a pleasing character unique to Mound.
V ..... '~FLAGS & ,~CLAPBOARD
~_~p,r~u,~"~ .~*~ ~NNE~ /SIDING
....... ~ z ~ ~COM~UND
~v~= =.,
.~:..- · .. :: ' ..... ....,:~a' .: ~' :. -- ~- ' ..~: 'a...:..
M~t~'e rmde~g of ~e ~ay~te Hotel ~ke ~eto~
An example of a Lake Minnetonka resort hotel which contains many of the general features
appropriate for buildings in downtown Mound.
Wl&'OOW
DISPLAY
WlNDOW
PIER
EN'IP. ANCE
-- BUUO.F_AD
20- 24 ~.
Traditional storefront constructed In most historic downtowns.
Commercial buildings in downtown Mound should be scaled, placed and oriented
for the pedestrian and passing auto. As a result all buildings should front very
close to or on the right-of-way. There should be no front yard parking. Adjacent
buildings should adjoin: free-standing structures on the streeffront are
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 5
inappropriate. Signage should be tastefully done and not overpowering. Materials
Display Window:
Display windows are the traditional means for store keepers to show their
wares and are the most important element of the storefront. They should
take up the entire space between the structural piers, bulkhead and
transom. They can be a single pane of glass or divided by mullions. They
should be clear glass only, no tinted or decorative glass. They are often
used for press-on or neon signage but no portion of the display window
should be covered by paper signs or any other opaque element. Display
windows should be double or triple pane for energy efficiency.
Structural Pier:
Piers are the su'uctural members which hold up the storefront. They
should flank all display windows and entrances. As the span between
piers increases so to should the prominence of the pier. (eg. piers flanking
a display window should be more prominent than ones flanking an
entrance.) The piers should be wood timbers or wood veneer, or simulated
with anodized metal or aluminum. The base of piers can be stucco, buff
colored or painted brick or stone. Piers should be no wider than 1.5 feet
and stretch from the sidewalk to the lintel. Piers should project outward
2 to 4 inches beyond any other portion of the storefi.ont and should be
placed no more than 10 feet apart from one another at any point along the
sidewalk. Piers are especially important elements on verandas.
Entrance:
The storefront entrance should be weU proportioned and located to
compliment the overall facade composition. The entrance should be
covered by awning or veranda to give shoppers shelter fi.om the weather
before entering or leaving a shop.
The door should be mostly glass
but never all glass. Each entrance
should have an air lock designed
into it to maximize energy
efficiency. The architectural style
of the door gives each shop an
opportunity to create a unique
streetfront identity.
TYPK2.AL E~SaRF_.A. BLE DO01~
Desirable storefront entrance doors.
Undesirable storefront entrance doors.
Transom Window:
Transom windows were originally meant to provide air circulation to the
shops. Transoms further enhance the unity of a streeffront but at the same
time provide for individuality of the shop. Transom windows should be
the same width as the display window or doorway below it and
approximately I to 2 feet in height. Transoms can contain decorative
and/or divided glass and are often used for signage. They should be
double or triple pane for energy efficiency. The elements of a transom can
also be used on a veranda to unify thc structure.
Lintel:
The lintel is the horizontal structural member which supports the second
story and roof above openings such as windows and doorways. In
traditional storefronts the lintel is a very important visual element in the
composition of the facade. With the resort hotel concept the lintel has less
or no importance to the composition of the storefront and can therefore be
hidden from view with coverings such as clapboards.
Side and Rear Facade:
Side and mar facades of visual importance can be defined as any side of the
building wMch is not adjacent to a public street but is visible from a public area.
Examples would include rear parking areas, car park entrance drives and wails
adjacent to public open space. The architectural style of the building's front
facade should be carried through to the side and rear facades but the detailing can
be less intensive.
Windows are encouraged on side and rear facades but size and proportion of the
openings are less critical. Along with car park configuration, side and rear
facades play an important role in directing shoppers to the streetscape.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
page 9
Signage-
The fundamental purpose of signage is obviously to help us navigate our way to places
we wish to go. On a commercial street, signs are a very important piece in the overall
streetscape composition. On the traditional downtown street, signs in conjunction with buildings
become landmarks by which people who are familiar with the area t-md their way and direct
others. On the suburban strip, signs become landmarks in themselves competing for the driver's
attention with large sizes, lights and bold colors. The flavor of signage in downtown Mound is
a significant element in realizing full potential of Mound's market position. This signage model
focuses attention on streetscape business signage but the character pomayed should be carried
through to signs in the rear of buildings, car parks and open spaces as well.
Basic Principles:
Signs in downtown Mound should portray the natural and scenic character of
Mound but also have an artistic flair. They should be modest in size but can
sometimes be bold in nature. In all cases signs should be well proportioned to
their sun'oundings. Along with many other aspects of downtown, signs provide
one more opportunity to set Mound apart from other shopping districts. This
appearance model strongly encourages signs to be an artistic statement about the
business or building it represents. This model may not be appropriate for all
existing buildings and areas of downtown but should be incorporated into new
development at the core of downtown.
Style:
There are many styles of signs appropriate for downtown Mound. Some of those
styles include signs flush on the building facade, neon tubing inside the display
window, awning signs, flags and banners and
cantilevered signs mounted on a building or
post. This appearance model encourages the
use of various styles of signs for different
occasions and types of businesses. A free-
standing cantilevered sign, for instance, could
be placed in a front plaza where the business
entry is set back from the sidewalk. A small,
temporary banner could be hung from the pier
area of the building advertising a sale. Choose
a signage style to compliment the surroundings
and adjacent businesses. Sign lighting should
be accomplished by using directional lights A goodexampte ora cantfleveretls~,n
shielded from direct view. mounted on the buiMing.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 10
Inappropriate styles include pylon signs, pedestal
signs, back-lit awnings, back-lit box signs, neon-lit
can signs and interchangeable letter boards.
Materials:
Materials of natural and more traditional character are
encouraged in downtown Mound. Chalk lettering and
art on slate can be very appealing and easily altered
for specials and sales. Sandblasted wood signs are
desirable, adaptable and attractive and recommended
for use in Mound. Wood, steel, glass, iron, brass and
sometimes brick or stone are appropriate materials.
Extruded aluminum, plastic, vinyl and other "high
tech" sign materials are highly discouraged unless they
are quality reproductions of traditional materials.
~ylon signs detract from the
pedestrian scale and
character of a downtown
street.
Placement:
Careful placement of signs reinforces a pattern along the streetscape. To present
downtown Mound as a unified shopping district, sign placement needs to be
complimentary to ones neighbors and should in no way impede conffortable
pedestrian flow. Signs should only be placed directly adjacent to the business
they are advertising. Signs can be located in 4 general areas along the streetscape.
1. The lintel and pier area of the building:
· Cantilevered
sign mounted
on the building. ~ .... "'
· Sign flush to
the building · ~....:~
facade. .'.'"'
· Banner.
A well proportioned sign board mounted directly on the
buiMing facade.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 11
2. Display and transom windows: · Neon tubing inside the window.
· Stick-on or painted lettering and an
directly on the window.
· No opaque blocks of any kind should
cover window area.
.... . ~ .... ~.,~ ..~ ~
Gene~ a~ ~nd w~ten paper sig~ m
the d~play widow clu~er the window, look
unprofessional and detract from
merc~M~e disp~y.
3leon and stick-on
lettering is professional,
attractive and informative
without interfering with
window displays.
3. Awnings:
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
page 12
4. Plaza area:
· Free-standing~ ??,~,., ·
cantilevered sign.
· Banners and/or
flags.
A high quality free-standing cantilevered sign.
Flags should be used only where they can be
the focal point of a long vista. They should
be used sparingly around downtown since
their impact is lost with too many. It is
s~'ongly recommended that the use of tall
flags be reserved for civic businesses and
organizations such as the Post Office, library,
banks, service organizations and community
centers. Hags may also be an architectural
feature of a block of buildings.
Excellent use of flags to accent a ~ew.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 13
Colors:
Colors used on ail signage in downtown Mound should be selected for overall
streetscape composition, compatibility with architecturai style and in some cases
adherence to historic precedent. The resort hotel theme encourages creative and
festive use of colors.
Proportion:
Signs should not overpower other elements of the streetscape. Well proportioned,
pedestrian oriented signage is strongly encouraged. Signs mounted flush onto a
building facade should be no more than approximately 2 square feet per running
foot of building frontage and should be horizontal in nature. Cantilevered signs
or banners mounted directly onto a building should extend outward from the
building no further than 3 feet and have an area no greater than 6 square feet.
Free-standing cantilevered signs should be no taller than 6 feet and have an area
of no greater than 8 square feet. Flags should be mounted on 20-40 foot poles.
Signs on awnings should be no more than approximately 2 square feet per running
foot of awning. The overall area of signs inside display windows should be no
more than 25% of the window area.
It is strongly recommended that all business signage (business name, hours of operation, sales
and specials, etc.) be designed for a business as a complete package. This will allow signage to
work well together and aiso eliminate the need for temporary, generic and often unattractive
"saie" or "specials" signs.
Following is one example of a comprehensive business signage package: 1) business name on
awning valence, 2) art painted directly on the display window which depicts merchandise/service
and business name, 3) stick-on letters on the display window near the entry door depicting
address and open hours, 4) temporary "saie" banner attached to the pier of the building. This is
one of numerous sign packages encouraged by this appearance model. Each business should
analyze its specific situation and design a package which works best for them.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 14
Car Par/
Parking areas in Mound's CBD should be designed as "car parks". Addressing elements
such as tree canopy, pedestrian circulation, lighting, screening as well as convenient parking are
key factors in creating an image consistent with Mound's market position. The following model
should be followed when designing and constructing off-street parking areas.
Basic Pdneiples:
Car parks should be designed with 5 key elements in mind.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Proper engineering.
Least environmental impact
Safe and convenient automobile circulation.
Safe and comfortable pedestrian circulation.
Preserving desirable and screening undesirable views.
Pedestrian CircUlation:
When possible, car parks should be constructed so parldng isles are parallel to the
main flow of pedestrian traffic. This will allow pedestrians to use drive isles for
walking. When this layout is not possible or where pedestrians have several
different destinations, designated pedestrian walks a minimum of 4' in width
should cut across parking and drive isles. These walks should be located in
conjunction with landscape plantings to provide comfort to the pedestrian. The
walks should be constructed with an alternate paving material.
Pavement Treatments:
Car parks should be constructed of concrete, bituminous asphalt, brick, stone or
concrete pavers.
All bituminous pavement should be seal coated using red aggregate.
bituminous parking area should be left black.
No
Whether a car park is constructed with a raised or fiat curb, all car parks should
be edged with a material different fi.om its main pavement For instance, if a
parking area is constructed of typical concrete, the edging could be colored
concrete, brick, stone or concrete pavers.
All car parks with designated internal pedestrian ways should provide pedestrian
crossings at all parking and drive lanes with pavement different fi.om the primary
pavement
Paint striping or alternate paving materials should be used to del'me parking
spaces.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
page 15
Lighting:
All car parks should provide adequate lighting for a safe and friendly environment.
Light standards and luminares should be decorative and compatible with the
chosen styles of the City. Light standards intended to illuminate parking areas
should not be over 22' tall. Where there are designated pedestrian ways,
pedestrian scale light standards not over 12' tall should be provided.
Car parks should be illuminated to an average of not less than 2 foot candles.
Recommended types of lamps are metal halide and florescent. Low pressure
sodium lamps should not be used.
Landscaping:
General:
25% of vehicular use area should be covered by tree canopy when trees
are 2/3 mature size.
A 4' minimum dimension to all trees from edge of pavement should be
maintained where vehicles overhang.
A 2' clear strip of sod or mulch should be provided where vehicles will
overhang.
Perimeter landscaping:
Where car parks abut public right-of-way, an 8 foot minimum landscaped
buffer should be provided. The buffer can contain deciduous and/or
evergreen plant material of various heights, rock or organic mulch,
necessary retaining walls not to exceed 2' in height, wood or iron fence
not to exceed 4' in height, earth berm not to exceed 4:1 slope, stone or
brick wall not to exceed 4' in height.
All heights are to be measured from the sidewalk or top of curb elevation
on the adjacent fight-of-way.
Deciduous boulevard trees should be placed in all perimeter landscaping
areas at a distance apart of 40' on-center.
Low, uninterrupted screening in the form of shrubs, fences or walls should
be provided along the length of a perimeter landscaping area. A majority
of the screening should be between 2' and 4' in height and only
occasionally go above or below that range.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 16
Interior Landscaping:
For each 100 square feet of vehicular use area, 5 square feet of interior
landscaping area should be provided.
The minimum size for an interior landscaping area should be 60 square
feet.
All efforts to adhere to the Environmental and Appearance model should be in conformance with
the Mound Zoning Code. building code, shorcland management ordinance and stonnwater
management plan. ting
e
)ed
and
Col ,r
8'Land
I Ma~edll
Sidewalk ,'",o. Street
Model car park design.
Mound Emironmental & Appearance Model page 17
Open
Preserving and appropriately designing open space in downtown Mound is paramount in
drawing consumers into the shopping district and encouraging them to return.
Basic Principles:
The Open Space section is based on the Downtown Mound Concept Plan
contained in this document. It is obvious that many of the landscape features
discussed, do not yet exist. Adherence to this section of thc Environmental &
Appearance model is central to the success of downtown Mound. The Open
Space model is chiefly concerned with:
* Defining critical views and vistas.
· Outlining the character of the streetscape.
· Defining open space corridors and nodes.
Critical Views and Vistas:
Views and vistas can be
defined as preserved openings
or avenues of sight between
two points or areas. They
are important to the workings
of downtown for two reasons.
One, they allow incoming
traffic to see parts of
Mound's downtown which
may not be seen otherwise.
Two, views and vistas create
A view looking toward downtown from an overgrown Lost
Lake channel.
a sense of spacial understanding and relationship which encourages exploration
and impulse shopping by the consumer.
The critical views and vistas in downtown Mound are described and shown as
follows (see page 19 for map):
1) The view looking west/southwest from Shoreline Drive to the Auditors
Road district. This is the most important view in downtown Mound because it
shows west bound County Road 15 (Shoreline Drive) travelers that there is a
shopping district ahead and they will soon need to turn left to reach it. This view
can be filtered by trees and landscaping so long as a solid screen is not created.
It is also important to note that it is not necessary for Co. Rd. 15 drivers to read
Auditors Road business signage from this view. Curiosity, attractive structures
and a convenient turn lane will draw consumers onto Auditors Road and they will
discover businesses as they pass down the street.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 18
2) The vistas created at the convergence of the three local su'eets
connecting the various districts of downtown (Commerce Place, Auditors Road
and Lake Langdon). This hub will likely be the primary route of local travel. It
should be noted that due to the existing railroad tracks, the north leg of this
intersection may not be accomplished for many years. Even so, the vista and
access should be uncompromisingly preserved to permit a future crossing.
3) .The view across Lost Lake between Auditors Road and the hotel site
Picturesque views from these vantage points vivify the charm of downtown
Mound.
4) The view of Lake Langdon from entrance drives off of Commerce
Boulevard. Downtown Mound should take better advantage of this scenic view
which is currently screened by thick vegetation. Lake Langdon could, in the
future, become an excellent passive recreation area and a key feature of
downtown.
Downtown
Mound
Critical views and vistas in downtown Mound.
3
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
page 19
Streetscape Character:
Aspects of streetscape
character have been covered
in other sections of the
Environmental & Appearance
Model but there are some
elements which still need to
be addressed.
When the f'mt streetscape
project is designed in
downtown Mound, it should
be assumed that it will be the
format for all future projects.
For this reason it is important
that the fu-st project be of
.... ::i,~ ~
A well don, streetscape which su¢ccssfutly d,fine$ tt~¢
character of the shopping dixtffct.
highest quality and poru'ay a design intent in keeping with the resort hotel theme.
Sidewalks:
Front sidewalks should be between 8 feet and 12 feet wide. Side yard
walks should be between 5 feet and 8 feet wide. They should be
constructed of attractive and durable materials appropriate for pedestrian
traffic. Materials should be used in such a way to create a pleasing human
scale. Examples of this include a 1-2 foot band of alternate paving
material separating the street from the primary walking corridor, using
control joints to reduce the size of concrete units, or creating a pattern
using inset blocks. The purpose of any of these options is to do away with
the typical concrete sidewalk which has no definition or interest.
Materials, colors, patterns, etc. should be chosen for their conformance
with the architectural theme.
Crosswalks:
Crosswalks should be thought of as a continuation of the sidewalk. In the
primary pedestrian areas of downtown, crosswalks should be constructed
of different paving materials or patterns than the street. Paint striped
crosswalks are acceptable in auto oriented areas of downtown.
Crosswalk signals at streetlights should be generously timed to allow safe
and comfortable street crossing by pedestrians. Implementation of the
downtown Mound concept plan hopefully eliminates the need for mid-
block pedestrian crossings.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 20
Open
Street Furnishings:
S~'eet furnishings along with landscaping are the unifying elements of
downtown and include such things as street fights, benches, trash
receptacles, drinking fountains, bollards and information kiosks. The
intensity of street furnishings depends on the area of downtown in which
they are located. The pedestrian oriented areas will contain the greatest
intensity of furnishings and diminish in the auto oriented areas.
Unified furnishings should be used throughout downtown. For instance
decorative street lights, benches and trash receptacles may be fewer in
number in the auto oriented areas but the style should remain constant.
This is a key factor in presenting downtown Mound as a unified shopping
district and drawing consumers through all parts of downtown.
Even though an area is auto oriented, some pedestrian amenities such as
benches and trash receptacles should be present to make the shopper
comfortable and encourage them to spend time in downtown.
Landscaping:
Landscaping, just as street furnishings, plays an important role in unifying
downtown Mound. Plants should be chosen for their hardiness to the
micro-climate in which they are planted. There should be a few unifying
species of shrubs and especially trees carried throughout downtown. As
is the case with many other aspects of this appearance model, the fLrSt
streetscape project will dictate the character of future projects.
Space Corridors and Nodes:
Open space corridors and nodes can be defined as
public greens to be preserved in downtown Mound.
Corridors refer to strips of green space. Nodes
refer to significant blocks of green space. Please
note that this section does not discuss wetlands. It
is assumed that wetlands will be protected through
other means. See map on page 22 depicting open spaces.
Corridors:
1) ,The promenade area along the north side
of Lost Lake all the way from Lake Langdon to the
hotel site, This is a key corridor since it will
become the primary recreation and visitor activity
center in downtown Mound. It provides a
Open spaces should portray they
character of downtown.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 21
necessary pedestrian link between the east and west sides of Lost Lake not to
mention a powerful connection between Lost Lake and Lake Langdon. The
corridor also acts as a defining edge of the open water and marina on Lost Lake.
2) The fringe along Lake Langdon where it meets the downtown area.
Lake Langdon provides excellent opportunity for passive recreation in the form
of trails and possibly canoeing although at this time water quality is a concern.
Lake Langdon's scenic qualifies are a true asset to downtown and an open space
corridor will present it appropriately.
3) ~The corridor immediately south of the RR tracks, west of Commerce.
.Blvd; It is important to maintain this open space to allow recreational access to
Lake Langdon from the north end on downtown. This is also an important open
space corridor because it will allow broad views to any development which occurs
immediately west of the area.
Nodes:
1) The intersection of Auditors Road and Shoreline Drive. This could
become a gateway area for people entering downtown. It would be an excellent
area for special landscape features announcing downtown Mound.
2) Farmers market area. A market pavilion will likely occupy some of this
space but it should be designed to interface with a large outdoor gathering area
for public events, speeches and concerts.
Downtown
Mound
Signif~ant cordon and nodes. C~cles refer to n~es. L~e~ refer ~ cor~o~
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model
page 22
Business Cluster Plan:
Business clustering is a concept used by suburban shopping mails since the 1950s.
It involves grouping together a certain mix of businesses which share customers
and markets. Clustering is a tool which downtown commercial centers are
beginning to use as a means to compete in a retail environment full of consumer
choices.
Clustering broadens the draw of a commercial center by creating a compact,
critical mass of businesses which provides consumers greater choice and
convenience in a small area. Clustering will also increase purchases by promoting
impulse shopping.
Clustering is a tool Mound can advantageously use to target businesses for
redevelopment projects. The type of cluster planning recommended for downtown
Mound includes two levels of detail.
1) Traffic Cluster: Broad scale clustering is based on the type of traffic
(auto vs pedestrian) which is generated and/or required by a business.
There are 4 types of traffic clusters.
Type 1 clusters contain businesses which promote pedestrian
browsing or put another way, multi-store shopping with a single
stop of the car.
· Type 2 clusters contain businesses which promote an equal mix
of pedestrian browsing and "one stop - one store" shopping.
Type 3 contains businesses which strongly favor "one stop - one
store" shopping. This cluster, as with types 1 and 2 is usually
part of a multiple-stop shopping trip.
· Type 4 businesses are destination stops and rarely part of
multiple-stop trips.
2) Customer Group Cluster: Customer groups further define traffic clusters
by placing businesses adjacent to one another who not only share similar
traffic panems but also share customer groups. This level of clustering can
only be determined when a development project is undertaken and specific
businesses have committed to the project. There are a total of 8 customer
groups.
· Tourists
· Out-of-town shoppers
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 23
· Day visitors
· Special demographic groups
· Specialized markets
· Local workers
· Local residents
· Other businesses in town
This document will address only the traffic cluster plan. Customer group clustering is not
included because a specific project along with committed businesses needs to be established
before detailed business placement can be successfully accomplished.
The following business list categorizes businesses by optimum traffic cluster. The list includes
businesses which are either targeted for Mound or already existing in Mound. The businesses
are categorized according to nation-wide research done by hyett.Palma, Inc., a leader in
identifying retail trends. The research statistically analyzes shopping patterns of many types of
retail businesses and uses the analysis to define a typical pattern for success.
Type 1 Cluster: High pedestrian activity
· Bakery
· Family shoes
· Children's wear
· Sandwich & coffee shop
· Key shop
· Records & tapes
· Women's clothing
· Travel clothing
· Drag store
· Variety store
· Jewelry
· Film processing
· Prints & posters
· Family restaurant
· Museum/history center
· Women's specialty store
Type 2 Cluster: Mix of auto and pedestrian activity
· Beauty shop · Convenience market
· Liquor store · Drag store
· Dry cleaner · Hardware
· Tanning salon · Video rental
· Art gallery · Arts & crafts
· Eye glasses · Flowers
· Imports · Optician
· Pet store · Photographer
· Accountant · Attorney
· Bank · Barber
· Bar & restaurant · Books
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 24
· Delicatessen
· Diner
· Post office
· Hair salon
· Photo copy/fast print
· Antiques
· Chiropractor
· Framing shop
· Recreational equipment rental
· Theater
· Interior decorator
· Dentist
· Insurance agent
· Restaurant
· Office supply
· Visitor information center
· Baby sitting service
· Outfitter/Sporting gear
· Hotel
· Sporting goods
· Travel agency
· Senior center
Type 3 Cluster: Multiple-stop auto activity
· Day care
· Super market
· Auto repair
· Gas station
· Dance studio
· Hobby store
· Miniature golf
· Health club
· Electronics repair
· Auto supplies
· Fast food
· Shoe repair
· Floor coverings
· Karate' studio
· Paint & wallpaper
· Yomh center
Type 4 Cluster: Destination retail and service
· Ambulance service
· Equipment rental
· Library
· Bed & Breakfast
· Cabinet maker
· Funeral home
· Car wash
· Laundry
· Newspaper office
· Bowling alley
· Veterinarian
This list is intended to be a general guide for locating businesses. When a project is undertaken
in Mound, a business would be located based on its specific target market, not necessarily this
guide.
The map on the following page illustrates the traffic cluster plan recommended for downtown
Mound.
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 25
e~ml
or~ O
Mound Environmental & Appearance Model page 26
MOUND VISIONS
Memorandum
througt~
*Design
'Promotion
*Business
Development
December 9, I992
To: Mound Economic Development Commission
From: Bruce Chamberlain
Re: Mound Promotional Packet
Enclosed is a draft of the various sections of the Mound Promotional
Packet. All sections are included and complete except the section termed
"An opportunity for business success" which still needs some fine tuning.
Please review the information pages and have your comments ready for
the meeting. You will notice that the page length of the sections varies.
This is so the titles can be stacked along the right side of the pocket folder
for easy access by the reader.
The pocket folders are also finished and will be shown at the meeting.
See you Thursday.
Mound City Hall. 5341 Maywood Road · Mound · Minnesota · 55364 · 612-472-1155
Building a better comtnunity
Today, Mound is ready to seize a unique opportunity - to retain its small town
charm and natural downtown features while providing a business and shopping
environment which will appeal to its growing cosmopolitan population. This
is the mission of Mound Visions, a program undertaken to reawaken the spirit
and vibrance of downtown.
It is obvious to any visitor that downtown Mound has experienced the same
business decline and problems found in other small towns (and many large
cities for that matter), but Mound is a city moving forward with a vision. A
vision drawn from the people who live here. A vision which includes research
into the successes and mistakes of other community's efforts to revitalize their
MOUND VISIONS
downtowns. A vision to propel Mound forward into the 21st Century as one of the premier cities
on Lake Minnetonka.
Sponsored by the city's Economic Development Commission and paneled by local citizens,
Mound Visions has developed the Mound market position, downtown concept plan,
environmental & appearance model and business cluster plan. The Vision calls for downtown
Mound to recapture the charm of Lake Minnetonka by reopening an historic boat access channel
via Lost Lake, as it was in the era of the streetcar boats. The Mound Vision calls for reoriented,
newly designed, attractive and complimentary structures which will maintain an individual
identity )'et conform to an historic, resort hotel architectural theme. The city's new pedestrian-
friendly main street will hug resurrected Lost Lake, while county road 15 will be redirected
Mound Information Guide
northward through the core
service area of downtown.
'Fo accommodate our
citizens and visitors, the
vision calls for an increase
in the number and kinds of
businesses in downtown with
consumer convenience and
choice of paramount
concern. The Mound Vision
includes the creation of a
permanent facility for our
Farmers Market, which
would also provide shelter
for year-round festival
events. The Vision calls for
a trail system connecting our
downtown lakes and parks
with the commercial areas.
I
Chosen architectural st~le o~ downtown
Most importantly, this is a vision being put into action. Mound, its public officials as well as
its citizens are dedicated to improving the city's future. Evidence of this dedication can be found
Memnd /nfornmtion Guide · Building a better community page 2
in the tree planting on the city's thoroughfares; flowerboxes built and distributed by local citizens
along downtown streets; the Adopt-A-Green-Space program; the construction of Mound's newest
development: Commerce Place; the numerous community service organizations; an active
Chamber of Commerce; and on and on. Wide .community support is helping to ensure we
succeed.
A collective spirit
Mound is a city comprised of people who come from every imaginable background, yet who
have, as a con'wnon bond, the collective spirit of this community; its past, its present and what
it can become. Whether you're thinking of buying a house and living here, opening a business
or another type of investment, we extend to you a very warm welcome and look forward to
calling you neighbor.
Mound Information Guide · Building a better community page 3
Downtown
Mound, Minnesota~
CONCEPT PLAN
Mound Information Guide · Building a better community page 4
' The scenic road to Mound
The road to Mound is a scenic one, no matter from which direction you are arriving. Scattered
farmsteads, lakes and rolling hills make the area west and north of Mound some of the most
picturesque rural countryside in the region. If traveling from Minneapolis you will encounter the
splendor of Lake Minnetonka's north shore. From the southwest you will pass through the 3,400
acre Carver Park Reserve, a paradise for those who enjoy nature. If arriving from the southeast,
bring your life preserver because the only route is via Lake Minnetonka.
II
DE[At, K)
WATERTOWN
CO.
11C
LONG LAKE
DOWNTOWN
MINNEAPOLIS
8 MILES
MINNE11~"TA
CO
HUTCHINSON. RD.
32 MILES 1 44
II
Mound area map
rtWY. 5
EXCELSIOR
1-494
TWIN CIT1ES
INTERNATIONAL
10 MILES
Mound Information Guide
Mound is 30 minutes from downtown Minneapolis and 40 minutes from the Minneapolis/St. Paul
International Airport; a distance which has brought this once rural community into the ring of
metropolitan suburbs. Mound is directly served by Hennepin County Roads 15, 110, 44 and 125
and only 15 minutes from 1-394 and 1-494.
The Metropolitan Transit Commission operates daily bus service in Mound with local runs to
adjacent communities, Ridgedale Shopping Center and downtown Minneapolis. An express bus
operates from 6:30 to 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. between downtown Mound and downtown
Minneapolis. Call MTC at 827-7733 for detailed bus scheduling.
Local and regional taxi service is provided by a number of companies. See the Yellow Pages for
listings.
Dakota Rail, providing cargo transport, passes through the heart of Mound's industrial and
commercial districts and continues west to Hutchinson and east to Minneapolis. Rail passage is
fairly infrequent with only 1 to 2 trips per day.
Mound Information Guide · The scenic road to Mound page 2
A wealth ofneighborhoodparks
Mound has 27 public parks scattered throughout the city containing organized sports facilities as
well as passive recreation facilities such as trails and picnic areas. Mound's most celebrated
park, Mound bay park, contains a sand beach on Lake Minnetonka, picnic facilities, park
pavilion, boat launch and open play area. The park is a favorite attraction for kids and adults
alike. Mound Bay is also host to the Mound City Days concert, drawing thousands of people.
CITY of MOUND
Langdoff Heights -- ;~
BAY
L .,x . E
Mound park system
,~oreline Drive
M t N N
Mound Information Guide
Mound boasts over 17 miles of lakeshore and 11 of those miles on Lake Minnetonka. To give
all residents the benefits of Lake Minnetonka, the City of Mound administers the Commons Dock
Program which provides boat docking facilities for a nominal fee along public lakeshore. Contact
City Hall at 472-0600 for detailed information regarding the Commons Dock program.
I
City of Mound commons dock facility
In addition to recreation offered on area lakes, there are a number of local organizations which
promote and organize community sports and recreation of all types. Included are the Hockey
Boosters, Little League and Westonka Community Education to name a few. For information
call Jim Glasoe, Westonka Community Education Recreation Coordinator at 472-0341. He can
provide information about the various activities and organizing groups.
Mound Information Guide · A wealth of neighborhood parl~ page 2
The Lake Minnetonka area offers a number of superb recreational and cultural facilities
convenient to Mound. The regional parks and park reserves offer visitors a wide variety of
activities ranging from team sports to nature interpretation. The Luce Line Nature Trail is 64
miles of convened rail corridor, extending from Plymouth to Cosmos. The Old Log Theater and
Lake Minnetonka An Center are excellent cultural attractions, both within 15 minutes of Mound.
The Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is nationally respected for its wonderful gardens and
research & development of cold climate plant species.
DELANO
Baker Park
MAPLE PLAIN LONG LAKE
DOWNTOWN
MINNEAPOUS
HUTCHINSON ~ke Theater 1-494
32 MILES EXCELSIOR
Carver Park Reserve
HWY. 5
pe
Arboretum
TWIN CITIES
INTERNATIONAL
10 MILES
Regional recreation and cultural centers.
Mound Information Guide · A wealth of neighborhood parks page 3
Distinctive neighborhoods
If you take a wrong turn while on your way to the famed Al & Alma's Restaurant located in the
heart of Mound's residential district, you won't find it by asking what street its on because the
locals will tell you its "on the Island over Cook's Bay." Winding streets and a lake at every turn
have led generations of Mound residents to create names like The Island, Three Points and The
Highlands to describe their neighborhoods. With 38% of the town being water, neighborhoods
conform to the shoreline, not our sense of direction.
II I I
CITY of MOUND
Shoreline Drive
BA, Y
L ~, K E M ~ N N
Neighborhoods of Mound
Mound Information Guid~
CITY OF MOUND
79%
HOUSEHOLD TYPES
19%
Source: Metropolitan Council, 1987 Es~imat~
Housing values in Mound
range from $25,000 to
over $400,000. A 1992
median home value of
$87,500 provides an
opportunity to live in an
affordable community
with all the benefits of
lake recreation and small
town character. Housing
values rose roughly 34%
during the 1980s.
[] SINGLE-FAMILY
[] MULTI-FAMILY
[] MOBILE HOMES
[] XOW~aOM~S
70~
From cost to style to size,
there is great variety in
Mound's housing stock.
The 1990 census shows
Mound has 3,965 housing
units, of which 72% are
owner occupied, 22% are
renter occupied and 6% are
vacant due to transition of
occupants.
HOUSING VALUES
OWNER
OCCUPIED
HOUSING
UNITS
Median Home Value: $87,500
VALUES
Mound Information Guide · Distinctive neighborhoods page 2
The majority of Mound's housing
stock was built sometime after
WWII with nearly 1/3 built in
the 1970s alone. Many of the
older homes in Mound were
originally cabins and later
converted into year-round
residences. Newer homes
include a wide variety of split-
level, ramblers and multi-story
homes.
HOUSING STOCK - YEAR BUILT
1989 to Mar 1990
1985 to 1988 1%
7%
1939 or earlier
16o/o
1980 to 1984
0%
1940 to 1949
9%
1970 to 1979
30%
950 to 1959
123/o
350'
300-
250-
200-
150'
100-
50'
0-
RENTAL HOUSING
1960 to 1969
16o/0
Total Housing Units: 3,965
Sourc~ Metropolitan Council, 1990 Ce~su~
'25O
-200
-150
-100
-50
-0
Rental
Units
There is affordable rental housing
available in Mound as well. The
1990 census shows that Mound has
950 single and multi family rental
housing units with rent ranging from
less than $100 to over $1,000 per
month.
Median Rent: $464/Month
Monthly Rent
Mound Information Guide · Distinctive neighborhoods page 3
Progressive education system
Mound is fortunate to have three highly rated school systems in the area; Westonka Public
School District 277, Our Lady of The Lake Catholic School and Calvary Memorial Church
School. The following information is copied from promotional material from each school.
Westonka Public Schools
"District 277, Westonka Public Schools, consolidated in 1917, encompasses 30 square miles
including water. It serves all or parts of the communities of Mound, Minnetrista, Navarre,
Lyndale, Orono, Shorewood, Independence and Spring Park. Westonka offers our 2,400 students
and 15,000 residents outstanding personnel, program.q and services."
For Information call:
Westonka Community Center
5600 Lynwood Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
District Office
Community Education & Services
School Age Child Care
Special Education
Gifted Talented Programs
472-0306
472-0341
472-0344
472-0331
472-0335
Mound Westonka High School
5905 Sunnyfield Road East
Minnetrista, MN 55364
472-0362
Grandview Middle School
1881 Commerce Blvd.
Mound MN 55364
472-0391
Hilltop Primary School
5700 Game Farm Road East
Minnetrista, MN 55364
472-0355
Shirley Hills Primary School
2450W~shireBlvd.
Moun&MN 55364
472-0321
Mound Information Guide
Our Lady Of The Lake School
"The mission of Our Lady of the Lake School is to foster the development and enhance the
growth of the spiritual and academic aspects of the total human being."
· Our Lake of the Lake School 472-3400
2411 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
Calvary Memorial Church School
"Calvary Memorial Church School is dedicated to the cooperation of parents, school and church
in the education of children. It has a K-6 program utilizing a Christ-centered curriculum which
is supplemented by music (choral and instrumental) computer and physical education courses."
· Calvary Memorial Church School 471-8511
2420 Dunwoody Ave.
Navarre, MN 55391
Mound Information Guide · Progressive education system page 2
Snu town clunm
Mound is perched on the westernmost edge of Lake Minnetonka ,'md is one of the few
Minneapolis suburbs that can boast a real downtown. A downtown where store clerks know you,
call you by name and offer genuine personal service. A downtown where everyone gathers to
see the city's Christmas tree lighting every year, or watch the Mound City Days parade, attend
the craft fair or other similar events and festivals offered throughout the year. And, we invite
you to meander through our variety of neighborhoods. Mound offers tree-lined streets and quiet
neighborhoods filled with friendly people, 27 city parks, over 17 miles of lakeshore, rising
property values and a wonderful mixture of longtime residents as well as an increasing influx of
new people. It all adds up to a dynamic, eclectic and cosmopolitan community, filled with
unique opportunities while retaining its small town charm.
CITY of MOUND
!15
I
Shoreline Drive
L fl K E
,ESI
BAY
M
N
N
0
Mound Information Guide
Family oriented
We boast a highly rated educational system of elementary and secondary schools with state-of-
the-an facilities. There are several excellent day care programs, a Hennepin County library
offering children's programs as well as several adult programs, an excellent senior's program and
facility and numerous vocational and educational programs offered for all ages through
Community Education. We have little league baseball with modem facilities. Mound City Days,
with week-long events, fireworks and a carnival. There are several churches representing diverse
religious beliefs, high school sporting events, an indoor ice arena and many neighborhood parks.
And, let's not forget Lake Minnetonka. Mound has an attractive public beach with picnic areas,
activity center, and the renovated train depot utilized as a pavilion. We have lakeshore docking
space, referred to as the "commons" offered each year for a nominal fee. Another advantage to
our location on the lake is the amount of boat traffic, or more aptly, the lack of it. It's relatively
quiet on our end of the lake; most of the traffic and activity concentrates closer to Wayzata and
Excelsior. Whatever your interests, Mound has something to offer you and when you want to
go to the cities, Minneapolis is 30 minutes away and St. Paul is only 45 minutes.
A colorful past
Not surprisingly, Mound came by its name due to the many prehistoric Indian mounds within its
boundaries. Several mounds remain undisturbed although many where destroyed during early
development. The city's European settlement dates back to the 1850s when the first pioneers
moved into the lake region. Mound's earliest settlers, Mathias Cook, Nathaniel Harrison and
Captain Frank Halstead, all of whom have Lake Minnetonka bays named after them, established
Mound as a trading and agricultural center, soon to become a resort mecca. Shortly after the turn
of the century, when the streetcar boat was the primary means of lake travel and vacationers
arrived by train, Mound boasted seven resort hotels and several restaurants. At that time Mound
offered people a pleasant stop or overnight stay, picnics and friendly visits on long summer days
or moonlit walks along Minnetonka shores.
As time passed and the resort era on Lake Minnetonka faded, Mound settled back as a
commemial center for the area's mostly seasonal residents. In 1946 World renowned Tonka Toys
began in Mound where they built toy trucks and f'ue engines until the early '80s. During the
1960s and 70s Mound was the central location for the area's winter festival, offering snowmobile
races as the main attraction, with thousands of spectators. Mound has a colorful past with
wonderful memories.
Mound Information Guide · Small town charm page 2
Demographics
According to the
1990 census,
Mound has a total
population of 9,634
people with 2.6
persons per
household.
Although areas
west of Mound are
experiencing fairly
rapid growth,
Mound itself is
nearly fully
developed and
population is
expected to remain
relatively constant
in the future.
Population & Households
10000
2000
1000
0
1970 1980 1990 2000 2020
Actual Projected
POPULATION
HOUSEHOLDS
Decreasing population
due to smalls famili~
Source: Melropolit an Council
City of Mound & Metropolitan Area
MARITAL STATUS
DIVORCED
WIDOWED
MARRIED/SEPARATED
MARRIED/NOT SEPARATED
NEVER MARRIED
MOUND
METRO
When looking at
age break-down and
marital status,
Mound is strikingly
similar to the
metropolitan area as
a whole.
Mound Information Guide · Small town charm page 3
City of Mound & Metropolitan Area
AGE BREAK-DOWN
0 to 4 65+
Preschooler
5 to 18 45 to 64
School Age Empty Nester
19 to 24
Early Householder
MOUND
~ METROPOLrrAN AREA
25 to 44
Baby Boomer
Source: Metropolitan Coundl, 1990 Census
In the area of educational attainment, 89.2% of Mound residents over age 25 have a high school
diploma or higher and 21.8% possess a bachelor's degree or higher. This statistic is again very
similar to the Metropolitan area as a whole.
City of Mound
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
(Persons over 25)
No High School Diploma(103%)
Graduate/Professional Degree(5.2%)
Bachelar's Degree(16.7%)
High School Diploma(34.0%)
Associate Degree(lO3%)
Source: Me'a'opolilan Council, 1990 C. ensu~
Some College/No Degree(23.1%)
Mound Inforrnation Guide · Small town charm page 4
The median
household income
and per capita
income of Mound
is approximately
11% higher than
the metropolitan
average. This
represents a fairly
significant
difference. Mound
household income
is similar to
communities such
as Bloomington,
Long Lake, and
B umsville.
City of Mound & Metropolitan Area
$4O,0OO
$35,000-
$30,000.
$25,000.
$20,000.
$15,000-
$10,000-
$5,000-
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD
INCOME
· MOUND
[] M~T~OEOD'TAN ^REA
PER CAPITA INCOME
Source: Me'aopolltan Coundl, 1990 Census
City of Mound
Employment
Roughly 1,850 people were
employed within Mound in 1990
and the Metxopolitan Council
estimates that number to rise by
27% in the next decade.
0 50 100 150 200
25o3oo35o4oo45050o
Total number of jobs: 1,849
Source: Metropolitan Council, 1990 Census
Mound Information Guide · Small town charm page 5
City government/services
The City of Mound has a council/manager form of government with Planning Commission, Parks
& Open Space Commission, and Economic Development Commission as recommending bodies.
The City Council meets the 2nd and 4th Tuesday of every month, the Planning Commission
meets the 2nd and 4th Monday, the Parks & Open Space Commission meets the 2nd Thursday
and the EDC meets the 3rd Thursday of every month. Call Ed Shukle, Mound City Manager,
at 472-0600 with inquiries about city government and the roles and activities of the various
commissions.
If you are contemplating building, remodeling or starting a business, contact Jon Sutherland or
Peggy James in the Mound Building Department at City Hall. They can inform you about codes
and regulations which may apply to the project and guide you through the process of seeking any
necessary approvals.
Municipal water and sewer services are provided to all residential, commercial and industrial
areas of Mound. Other utility providers are listed below.
· Natural gas
Minnegasco (612) 372-4727
· Electricity
Northern States Power (612) 330-6724
·Telephone
GTE (612) 472-8800
· Cable TV
Tfiax 1-800-422-1473
.Garbage
Blackowiak & Son (612) 472-3398
Randy's Sanitation (612) 479-3335
Westonka Sanitation (612) 472-1379
Woodlake Sanitary Service (612) 479-1967
Nitty Disposal (612) 451-1421
The 12 officer Mound Police Department takes great pride in its community oriented approach.
As a member of the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force, Mound Police was one of the first
departments in the state to implement and participate in the D.A.R.E. program. In _a~difion to
standard duty, the department also includes a K-9 unit and a crime prevention officer. Call Chief
Len Harrell at 472-3711 for further information.
Mound has a 37 member volunteer rue department with modem, high quality equipment. The
department has an excellent, class 6 insurance rating which has a positive impact of local
insurance costs. The Mound Fire Department services Mound as well as several surrounding
communities. Call Fire Chief, Don Bryce at 472-3555 for more information.
Mound Information Guide · Small town charm page 6
Property taxes
Minnesota real estate taxes are based on market value, meaning the price that a willing buyer
would pay to a willing seller in a free market. Market value times the tax rate equals property
taxes.
1992 residential tax on homesteaded property is arrived at by multiplying the value of the
property [(under $72,000 x 1.0%) + (any value up to $115,000 x 2.0%) + (any value over
$115,000 x 2.5%)1.
1992 commercial tax is arrived at by multiplying the value of the property [(under $100,000 x
3.0%) + (any value over $100,000 times 4.7%)].
1992 Mound property taxes are distributed in the following fashion.
· City of Mound rate:
· Hennepin County rate:
· Westonka School District rate:
· Miscellaneous rate:
19.842%
41.869%
58.714%
1.770%
· Total rate: 122.195%
Community Involvement
Mound is very proud of the high level of community involvement by its residents. Among many
other activities, Mound citizens organize the only local MDA Telethon in Minnesota, raising
$53,000 in 1992. For a complete list of the numerous service organizations in Mound, contact
the Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce at 472-6780 and ask for the Business Directory.
Community festivals and events are an important part of Mound and contribute greatly to its
small town charm. The numerous festivals and events include: (information not yet received)
Mound Information Guide · Small town charm page 7
A n opportunity for business success
Retailing history
Until the 1970s, Mound was a relatively self-contained community outside the ring of
metropolitan influence. Because of that, Mound was able to capture a comfortable portion of its
retail sales potential for little other reason than the fact that most people who lived in Mound also
worked in or close to Mound.
Beginning in the 1970s, three important societal changes would negatively impact retail sales in
Mound: (1) transportation became much more efficient in the Twin Cities, allowing people
greater mobility to shop and work further distances from their homes, (2) more and more Mound
residents were commuting eastward for employment, and (3) women were entering the work
force in large numbers. These phenomena dramatically altered the spending habits of Mound
residents. By the mid 1980s many local retailers were not able to accommodate the market shift
and as a result, retail sales dropped and a number of businesses closed.
By studying Mound retail sales figures throughout the 1980s it appears that by 1986 the
merchandise choice offered by Mound retailers fell below a critical mass necessary to constitute
a convenient shopping district. As a result, large numbers of consumers began shopping
elsewhere. Since 1986, retail sales have increased roughly 20-25% but Mound is still not
capturing a majority of its retail sales potential.
Retail potential
It is generally understood that a business district has two ways of capturing increased sales: to
increase the number of customers it serves and/or to increase the dollar amount spent by those
customers. By being proactive and realizing the market potential, Mound is ready to accomplish
both of these tasks in the coming years.
Through redevelopment and fundamental changes in the structure of its business district, Mound
plans to greatly increase consumer choice and convenience. Mound, initially, could capture two
groups of new customers: (1) Mound residents who began to shop elsewhere in the 1970s and
'80s, and (2) new residents who live west of Mound but commute eastward. As downtown
Mound gains a reputation as a quality shopping district with recreational opportunities on Lake
Minnetonka, a third customer group, metro-wide destination shoppers, could also be attracted to
Mound and further diversify the retail mix.
In 1990, Mound captured roughly 35.8 million dollars in retail sales o~,~.,,~. This figure
represents only 45% of the retail sales potential from Mound residents alone (based on average
Minnesota state-wide spending habits). Hoisington Koegler Group Inc., estimates that within two
years of a substantial redevelopment project including targeted retail additions of 25,000+
square feet, the City of Mound could see an overall increase in retail sales by 68% or
roughly $24 million from the 1990 level.
The market shifts which would induce this to happen are: (1) to increase the retail capture rate
of Mound residents from 45% (1990 level) to 62% (roughly equal to the 1981 level). This
amount of increase can be accomplished through quality retail store management and by
Mound Information Guide
increasing the consumer choices and convenience available in Mound. (2) to capture roughly
62% of the retail sales potential from new Minnetrista residents.
The City of Minnetrista, immediately west of Mound, is expecting to see 300-600 new executive
homes built in the next 2 years, all within the Mound Westonka School District. This provides
great opportunity to capture consumers who are new to an area and who have few established
shopping habits. Downtown Mound is in a very good geographical location to capture these
shoppers because the schools are located in Mound and downtown is on the commuting route but
still close to people's homes. Overall, Minnetrista expects to see 800 to 1000 homes built over
the next 10-15 years. Also important to note is the decision on the part of the City of
Minnetrista not to develop a major commercial center but rely on surrounding business districts
to satisfy their resident's commercial needs.
The U.S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) is the standard way to code commercial
businesses (including retail) by their primary product. The Minnesota Department of Revenue
gathers retail sales data from all cities in the state and releases the data according to SIC code.
Mound Visions has used this data to make retail sales projections for each retail SIC category.
You will notice by the following chart that some categories have 0 retail sales in Mound which
means that there are fewer than 3 and possibly no establishments reporting in the category. Sales
from any establishments that fall into this scenario would then be lumped into the Miscellaneous
Retail category. See the U.S. Standard Industrial Classification for a complete list of store types
and their respective SIC category.
CHART & ADDITIONAL DESCRIPTION WILL BE IN THIS LOCATION
Retail mix
Retail mix represents the relationship of businesses and the spectrum of merchandise available
within a shopping district. It is a very important consideration for retail success. Small retailers
need to be close to other stores who have the same types of customers, same traffic patterns and
same hours of operation. And most retailers need a critical mass of merchandise to draw
customers, a critical mass most stores are not large enough to provide alone.
Mound Visions has closely studied retail mix in deriving a strategy for commercial success in
downtown Mound. The Mound Business List identifies existing and targeted business types
which, Mound Visions believes, have an opportunity to be successful in Mound. The Mound
Business Cluster Plan identifies optimum placement of those business which, based on nation-
wide research, assures greatest opportunity to maximize sales. The Mound Business List and
Business Cluster Plan are likely enclosed in this folder but if not, contact City Hall at
(612) 472-0600 to receive a copy.
Mound Information Guide · An environment for business success page 2
As the former home of Tonka Toys manufacturing facility, Mound has been endowed with a
600,000 square foot industrial/office complex now termed the Balboa Business Center. This
facility which is within downtown, houses nearly all of Mound's heavy industries and employs
roughly 350 people. At this time (Winter 1992/93) the complex is nearly fully occupied. For
leasing and management information contact Welsh Companies at (612) 944-5810.
Mound is home to a number of light industries scattered throughout the commercial districts.
Wholesale and assembly operations located within the B-1 zoning district require a conditional
use permit. For further information regarding industrial uses contact City Hall at (612) 472-0600.
Public financing
The City of Mound has shown willingness in the past to participate financially in private
development projects. Commerce Place, the newest commercial development in Mound, was
built in 1987 with Tax Increment Financing dollars used for property acquisition and site
preparation. A revolving, low interest loan program was initiated in the early '80s to encourage
investment in existing buildings using Community Development Block Grants. Also, the City
of Mound has assisted businesses in pursuing Small Business Adminisu'ation loans and other
business incentive programs initiated by the state and federal governments.
The current city administration shows equal commitment to using available financing tools to
encourage private investment. Nearly all of downtown Mound is within a Tax Increment
Financing project area which allows the City to pursue TIF for commercial redevelopment. The
City has a long standing relationship with Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of
Trade & Economic Development, both of which, at times, can play a role in public financing.
Fundamentally, Mound is willing and eager to work with businesses and developers to see that
viable projects have every opportunity for success.
Mound Information Guide · An environment for business success page 3
$16
$14
$12
)OLLARS$10.
IN
VlILLIONS :$8
$6
$4
$2-
$0-
LUMBER FOOD
HARDWARE STORES
ETC.
GENERAL
MERCHANDISE
APPAREL &
ACCESSORIES
EATING
DRINKING
AUTO
STATIONS/
DEALERS
ESTABLISHMENTS
FURNITURE MISCELLANEOUS
FURNISHINGS
APPLIANCE
[] 1990 ACTUAL SALES
[] PROJECTED SALES 2 YRS. AFTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
increasing the consumer choices and convenience available in Mound. (2) to capture roughly
62% of the retail sales potential from Minnetrista residents who move into the area in the next
two to three years.
The City of Minnetrista, mediately west of Mound, is expecting to see 300-600 new executive
homes built in the next 2 years, all within the Mound Westonka School District. This provides
great opportunity to capture consumers who are new to the area and who have few established
shopping habits. Downtown Mound is in a very good geographical location to capture these
shoppers because the schools are located in Mound and downtown is on the commuting route but
still close to people's homes. Overall, Minnetrista expects to see 800 to 1000 homes built over
the next 10-15 years. Also important to note is the decision on the part of the City of
Minnetrista not to develop a major commercial center but rely on surrounding business districts
to satisfy their resident's commercial needs.
The U.S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) is the standard way to code commercial
businesses (including retail) by their primary product. The Minnesota Department of Revenue
gathers retail sales data from all cities in the state and releases the data according to SIC code.
Mound Visions has used this data to study retail sales for each retail SIC category. You will
notice by the following chart that some categories have 0 retail sales in Mound which means that
there are fewer than 3 and possibly no establishments reporting in the category. Sales from any
establishments that fall into this scenario would then be lumped into the Miscellaneous Retail
category. See the U.S. Standard Industrial Classification for a complete list of store types and
their respective SIC category.
CHART & ADDITIONAL DESCRIPTION WILL BE IN THIS LOCATION
Mound Information Guide · An environment for business success page 2
Mound Information Guide · An environment for business success page 3