1993-01-12CITY OF MOUND ~ION STATEMENT- 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 COUNCIL - REG~ MEETING
7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, JANUARY 12, 1993
CITY COUNCH, CHAMBERS
Se
o
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
OATH OF OFFICE.
REQUEST FROM SEVENTH GRADE CLASS - OUR LADY OF
THE LAKE SCHOOL - POPULATION SIGN FOR CITY.
PG. 5
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 8, 1992,
REGULAR MEETING; THE DECEMBER 9, 1992, BUDGET
HEARING; AND DECEMBER 17, 1992, SPECIAL
MEETING.
PG. 6-17
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 26, 1993, 7:30
P.M.) (THIS WAS ORIGINALLY SET FOR JANUARY 12, 1993,
BUT THE NOTICE FOR THE HEARING DID NOT GET PUBLISHED
TO MEET THAT DATE). PG. 18
CONTINUE THIS 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 26, 1993, 7:30 P.M.) (THIS PUBLIC HEARING NEEDS
TO BE CONTINUED TO THE JANUARY 26, 1993, MEETING TO
COINCIDE WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT). PG. 19
PUBLIC HEARING: NEIL WEBER FOR TEAL POINTE DEVELOPMENT
CO. - CONSIDER A REQUEST TO VACATE PARTS OF COBDEN LANE
AS DESCRIBED FOR THE PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AREA NAMED "TEAL POINTE". PG. 20-70
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A $20,000
BOND FOR THE CITY CLERK.
PG. 128
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES
FOR 1993.
PG. 129
RESOLUTION APPOINTING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO
THE PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION; PLANNING
COMMISSION; AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.
PG. 130
RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING MEMBERS TO SERVE ON PARKS
& OPEN SPACE COMMISSION; PLANNING COMMISSION; AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.
PG. 131
PAYMENT OF BILLS.
PG. 132-152
INFORMATION/MISCELI.%NEOUS
ao
Department Head Monthly Reports for December
1992. PG. 153-178
Be
LMCD Representative's Report for December
1992.
PG. 179-180
C. L.M.C.D. mailings.
PG. 181-210
De
Financial reports as prepared by Gino
Businaro, Finance Director, for the months of
October and November, 1992. PG. 211-214
Ee
Financial reports as prepared by Gino
Businaro, Finance Director, for the months
of August through November, 1992.
PG. 215-218
Fo
Planning Commission Minutes of December
14, 1992.
PG. 219-226
0
Parks & Open Space Commission Minutes of
December 10, 1992.
PG. 227-229
He
Letter dated December 14, 1992, from Knutson
Services, Inc. re: amendments to existing
recycling contract per our discussion last
month.
PG. 230-231
Letter dated December 9, 1992, from Hennepin
County re: County's review and evaluation
process of new tax increment financing plan. PG. 232-234
Ke
ne
Me
Ne
Oe
Letter dated December 4, 1992, from Don Fraser,
Mayor of Minneapolis and current President of
the National League of Cities (NLC) re: NLC's
adopted economic recovery plan. Mr. Fraser is
looking for letters of support to be written
to President Clinton, Representative Rod Grams,
Senator Dave Durenburger and Senator Paul
Wellstone. PG. 235-239
Letter dated December 21, 1992, from Captain
Larry Peterson, Sheriff's Water Patrol regarding
his appreciation to the Mound Fire Department
regarding a recent snowmobiling accident on Lake
Minnetonka. PG. 240-241
Letter dated January 4, 1993, from Mayor Vern
Haug, Tonka Bay re: concerns about MWCC charges to
lake area cities. PG. 242-246
REMINDER: COW Meeting, Tuesday, January 19, 1993,
7:30 P.M. City Hall. Enclosed is a copy of the
"Summary Report" on the City Council and Staff's
last goal setting retreat held April 6, 1991. This
item will be on the COW agenda along with several others
for discussion. Please bring this report with you
1/19/93. I will provide additional information at
the COW meeting on this subject. PG. 247-253
Economic Development Commission Minutes of
December 17, 1992.
PG. 254
LMCD Information.
PG. 255-270
4
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING= CASE ~92-060t 061t 062 & 063:
NEIL WEBER FOR TEAL POINTE DEVELOPMENT CO., BLOCKS
10, 11, 15 & 16, WHIPPLE, PID #25-117-24 12 0225,
0118, 0119, 0120·
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AREA, & VARIANCE. PG. 20-70
DISCUSSION: CROSSWALKS.
CASE ~92-069:
FRANK & ANDREA AHRENS, 4673 ISLAND
VIEW DRIVE, LOT 17 & 1/2 OF 18,
BLOCK 1, DEVON, PID #30-117-23
22 0008.
REQUEST: VARIANCE .
11. CASE ~92-070=
12.
13.
14.
15.
PG. 71-76
16.
17.
18.
19.
PG. 77-90
20.
DAVE TAYLOR, 5991 RIDGEWOOD ROAD,
LOT 14 & PART OF 13 & 15, BLOCK 6,
THE HIGHLANDS, PID #23-117-24 43 0028.
REQUEST: VARIANCE.
PG. 91-105
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO VACATE
A PORTION OF WINDSOR ROAD FOR MARK & JULIE
LILLEDAHL, 3233 TUXEDO BLVD., LOTS 15, 16 & 17,
BLOCK 13, WHIPPLE. (SUGGESTED DATE:
FEBRUARY 9, 1993, 7~30 P.M.) PG. 106-115
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
RECOMMENDATION FROM PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
RE: VACANCY - STEVE KIRSHBAUM. PG. 116-118
RECOMMENDATION FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
RE: VACANCY - STAN DRAHOS. PG. 119-120
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO SIGN A LEASE WITH MARK SALITERMAN RE: MUNICIPAL
LIQUOR STORE. PG. 121
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ACTING MAYOR FOR 1993.
PG. 122
RESOLUTION APPOINTING CITY CLERK, FRAN CLARK, ACTING
CITY MANAGER FOR 1993. PG. 123
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR
1993. PG. 124-126
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A $20,000
BOND FOR THE CITY TREASURER/FINANCE DIRECTOR.
PG. 127
2
To Whom It May Concern:
Sanuar~ 4,
We, the ?th ~rade class of Our Lad~ of the Lake School would like
to petition to have our Cit~ oF Mound Signs reflect our population count.
We request to be on the agenda Tuesdag, Januar~ 1~2, 1~93 to ask
what steps we might take next to see this project through.
Sincerely,
?th Grade Class
Our Lad~ oF the Lake School
MINUTES - MOUND C~TY COUNCIL - DECEMBER 8~ 1992
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in
regular session on Tuesday, December 8, 1992, in the Council
Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea
Ahrens, Phyllis Jessen and Ken Smith. Councilmember Liz Jensen
arrived at 7:45 P.M. Also present were: City Manager Edward J.
Shukle, Jr., City Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson,
City Planner Mark Koegler, City Engineer John Cameron, Building
Official Jon Sutherland and the following interested citizens:
John & Mary McKinley, Nancy Clough, Harold Meeker, John Edewaard,
Jean Robinson, Tammy Rush, Sara & Brad Biermann, Glenn Melena,
Ruben Hartman, Paul Henry, Harvey Bergquist, Julie Lilledahl,
Thomas Albert, Ron DeVinney, Neil Weber, JoAnne Bocke, and John
Bessesen.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
JoAnn Bocke, from the Automobile Association of America, presented
the 1991 Pedestrian Safety Citation to Sgt. John McKinley.
1.0 MINUTES
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Smith to approve the
Minutes of the November 24, 1992, Regular Meeting, as
submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.1
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE J92-060, 061, 062 & 063: NEIL WEBER FOR
TEAL POINTE DEVELOPMENT CO., BLOCKS 10, 11a 15 & 16, WHIPPLEa
PID ~25-117-24 12 0225, 0118~ 0119, 0120~ PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREAl STREET VACATION & VARIANCE
The City Planner reviewed his reports dated November 4 and December
1, 1992. He pointed out that the applicant applied for the
vacation of only a part of Cobden Road. The City Engineer and the
City Attorney agree that if the applicant is requesting a vacation
it should be for the entire right-of-way of Cobden Road, thus a new
vacation hearing will have to be published and mailed to affected
property owners. The Planner therefore suggested that this hearing
be continued to the January 12th Meeting so that a new notification
and publication can be done.
The Planner reported that the Planning Commission expressed concern
in three areas of the Shoreland Management Ordinance, bluffs,
density and impervious cover.
1. Bluffs. The proposed Shoreland 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, & 3
contain slope areas exceeding 30% with a maximum slope
approaching 45% on portions of Lot 1. Virtually all of Lots
1, 2, & 3 would be unbuildable if the shoreland provisions
were applied.
Density. The Planned Developments 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.
The City Attorney pointed out that the Developer is going to have
to do a Proceeding Subsequent on some of the property he has before
a plat can be placed of record. There are also properties lying
directly west of Cobden that are platted, so Cobden does serve
those other lots.
The City Engineer reviewed his report, dated November 4, 1992. He
reported that there would need to be some fill on adjacent private
property off of Windsor Road in order to extend that road into the
development. He further addressed the drainage and grading,
streets, utilities and street vacation. There was discussion on
the traffic count in the area.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following persons spoke
against the proposed Planned Development Area: Harold Meeker (for
himself and also for Glenn & Alice Rogers), Brad Biermann, Ruben
Hartmann, Glenn Melena. Rogers and Biermann stated they would not
allow fill on their land to extend Windsor Road. The people do not
want the development because it will destroy the area, create too
much traffic in the area. There was also mention that there may
be Indian burial grounds in this area.
Mr. Neil Weber, developer stated he is trying to take into
consideration the environmentally sensitive nature of this issue by
creating large 12,000 square foot lots, clean up the wetlands. It
is a unique piece of land. He stated he would have a slide
presentation of the property depicting all seasons at the January
12th meeting. He stated the homes would be designed to compliment
the property, not detract from its beauty.
The Council asked what the traffic counts are on these streets at
present.
The Council expressed the same concern about the bluffs issue as
the Planning Commission. The Planner pointed out that virtually
all of Lots 1, 2, and 3 would be unbuildable if the shoreland
provisions were applied.
The city Attorney quoted Section 330:35, Subd. 8 of the city Code
which states, "Failure to act within thirty days of the closing of
the hearing shall be deemed as an approval of the preliminary plat
by the Planning Commission". This section has nothing to do with
the State Statute which calls for 120 days from the date that it is
filed if it is in full compliance. He further stated that in
talking with the Planner, it is his opinion that it is not in full
compliance, therefore the 120 days would not start to run. He
recommended that the city ask Mr. Weber for an extension so there
is no misunderstanding and the City has adequate time to consider
the request. Mr. Weber indicated that he would agree to an
extension, if needed.
Julie Lilledahl, 3233 Tuxedo Blvd., stated she was in favor of the
proposed PDA.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Ahrens to continue this
public hearing to January 12, 1993. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jessen to require Neil
Weber, developer of Teal Pointe, to escrow an additional
$1,000 for review work to be done by the City contractual
staff on his proposed PDA. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
Ahrens moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-157
RESOLUTION TO SET JANUARY 12, 1993, FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION
OF CERTAIN PARTS OF COBDEN ROAD SOUTH
BETWEEN DRUMMOND AND WATERBURY
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.2 RESOLUTION OF DENIAL - REOUEST FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION, 1720
DOVE L]%NE, MAXINE BEISSEL
The Planner explained that a resolution of denial has been prepared
for this item and the proposed copy was presented.
Jensen moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION %92-158
RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPLICATION OF
MAXINE BEISSEL FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF
PROPERTY AT 1720 DOVE LANEt LOTS ?, S, &
9, BLOCK 12t DREAMWOOD
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3 REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT - PROPOSED STORM
SEWER IMPROVEMENT - COTTONWOOD LANE/DAKOTARAIL~ JOHN CAMERON,
CITY ENGINEER
Mr. & Mrs. Hahn requested that this item be taken off this agenda
and put on a future agenda. The Council continued this item to the
January 26th, 1993, Meeting.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT
There were none.
1.4 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
1.5
1.6
5241 SHORELINE DRIVE
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to set January 12,
1993, for a public hearing to consider the issuance of the
Conditional Use Permit for a Class III Restaurant and Bar for
,,Headliners Bar & Grill), in the B-1 Central Business District
at 5241 Shoreline Drive. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AM APPLICATION FOR /%N
"ON-SALE" INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR MARK
SALITERMAN & BILL FEEHAN, DBA HEADLINERS BAR & GRILL,
5241 SHORELINE DRIVE
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Jessen to set January 12,
1993, for a public hearing to consider an application for an
"On-Sale" Intoxicating Liquor License for Mark Saliterman and
Bee Feehan, dba ,,Headliners Bar & Grill), at 5241 Shoreline
Drive (formerly The Jock Club). The vote was unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
DISCUSSION: PROPOSED INCREASE AND OTHER CHANGES RELATED TO
RECYCLING CONTRACTOR
The City Manager reported that Knutson Services, Inc. has
approached the Lake Minnetonka Recycling Group (LMRG) and asked
that we make some concessions in the area of revenue sharing and
drop sites to improve the financial viability of the recycling
program. Knutson proposed an increase in per house collection of
$.17 per month for 1993 and $.15 per month for 1994. The LMRG has
made the following recommendation:
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.
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.
The City Attorney suggested that the Council adopt this with
language it be approved if all the other LMRG cities approve of the
recommendation. The Council agreed.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-159
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYORAND CITY
MANAGER TO RENE~OTIATE THE AGREEMENT FOR
RECYCLING COLLECTION
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.7
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO VACATE A ~RTION
OF WI~SOR ROAD. (SUGGESTED DATE: JANUARY 12, 1993, 7:30
P.M.)
The Council discussed this request. The City Attorney suggested
that a staff report be given on this before a public hearing is
set. The Planning Commission will be reviewing this at their next
meeting. No action was taken at this time.
1.8 RESOLUTION APPROVING A GAMBLING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR OUR
LADY OF THE LAKE CHURCH - 2/6/93 - RAFFLE AND PULL-TABS
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-160
RESOLUTION APPROVING A GAMBLING PERMIT
APPLICATION FOR OUR LADY OF THE LAKE
CHURCH - 2-6-93
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.9 LICENSE APPLICATIONS
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Smith to approve the
followlng licenses to the teen club (Bradfer, Inc. dba
Someplace Else) contingent upon all required forms, insurance,
etc. being submitted: Z Games of Skill, 1 Pool Table, 4
~ausement Devices, and Pu~llc Dance. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to approve a
temporary On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Permit for Our
Lady of the Lake School, for Februar~ 6, 1993, Las Vegas Nit.,
contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being
submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.10 PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION made by Jess.n, seconded by Jensen to authorize the
payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of
$233,05?.28, when funds are available. ~ roll call vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.11 ADD-ON
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to cancel the
December 22, 1992 City Council Meeting. The Mayor to review
any items that might need attention and then call a special
meeting for December 29th, if necessary. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. Department Head Monthly Reports for November 1992.
B. L.M.C.D. mailings.
C. Letter from Triax Cablevision re: rate increase.
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.
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.
Fo
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.
G. Planning Commission Minutes of November 23, 1992.
Economic Development Commission Minutes of November 19,
1992.
/;
MOTXON made by Jensen, seconded by Jessen to adjourn at 10:15
The vote vas unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
MINUTEB - BUDGET HEARING - DECEMBER 9, 1992
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM. City Council members
present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz
Jensen, Phyllis Jessen, Ken Smith. Also present were: City
Manager Ed Shukle, Geno Hoff, Street Superintendent; Greg Skinner,
Water and Sewer Superintendent; Jon Sutherland, Building Official;
Jim Fackler, Parks Director; Len Harrell, Police Chief; Joel Krumm,
Liquor Store Manager; Gino Businaro, Finance Director; Don Bryce,
Fire Chief and the following interested persons: Phil and Eva
Hasch, Freda Olson, Tom Effertz, John and Mary McKinley and Judy
Bryce.
The Mayor began the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Mayor asked the City Manager to present the introductory
comments to the 1993 proposed budget. City Manager Ed Shukle
explained the purpose of the budget hearing. He indicated that
this was the annual Truth in Taxation hearing. The purpose of the
hearing was to discuss the proposed budget and tax levy for the
upcoming year. He further indicated that in September the City
Council approved a preliminary budget and levy and that the
proposed budget and levy for final approval has not changed. The
City Council would have the authority to reduce the tax levy if
they so desired, but they could not increase the tax levy from what
they approved in September. He then went into some of the
highlights of the budget and then indicated that he would take
questions. After some general questions were raised, Mayor Johnson
then asked to start from the beginning of the budget and work
through to the back, calling on the specific department heads to
explain their department budget. Following the review of each
department budget, the Mayor opened the public hearing. No one
asked to be heard regarding the budget. The Mayor closed the
public hearing and returned it to the Council for action.
Councilmember Jessen requested that consideration be given to
adding some funds into the budget for the Adopt-a-Green-Space
program. Her rationale was that the City should continue to
purchase greens for Christmas time to be placed in the planter
boxes and to have that within the budget. She also asked the City
Council to consider funds to buy flowers that could be planted by
people participating in the Adopt-a-Green-Space program. After
some discussion, it was suggested that $500 of the $2000 already in
the Promotions budget be allocated for the purpose of buying greens
for Christmas 1993.
Councilmember Smith moved and Councilmember Jensen seconded the
following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-161
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1993 GENERAL FUND
BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,325,?80;
SETTING THE LEVY AT $1,734~801; AND
APPROVING THE OVERALL BUDGET FOR 1993.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Other business discussed was the possibility of having a second
meeting in December for the City Council. Jon Sutherland, Building
official, indicated that there were three items coming up on the
December 14th Planning Commission agenda that would have to be
dealt with at some future date by the Council. One of them seems
to be an urgent item. Council asked the City Manager to contact
the city attorney regarding the possibility of having an approval
motion, based upon the Planning Commission's recommendation, over
the telephone, rather than conducting a formal meeting. The City
Manager is to check with the city attorney to see if this is
appropriate and legal.
There was no other business.
MOTION by Smith, seconded by Jensenand carried unanimously to
adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM.
Mayor
City Manager
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - DECEMBER 17, 1992
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in
emergency session on Thursday, December 17, 1992, in the Council
Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City, at 8:00 A.M.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea
Ahrens, Liz Jensen, Phyllis Jessen and Ken Smith. Also present
were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk Fran Clark,
Building Official Jon Sutherland, Police Chief Len Harrell, Finance
Director Gino Businaro and the following interested citizens: Paul
Meisel, and Tom Johnson.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
1.0
CASE ~92-073:
PAUL LARSON, 5217 WINDSOR ROAD, LOTS 3 & 4,
BLOCK 18, WHIPPLE, PID ~25-117-24 21 0051,
VARIANCE REQUEST
The Building Official explained the request. He further stated
that the Planning Commission and Staff recommended approval. This
case would not have needed a variance if the new zoning code
modifications were adopted.
Smith moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-162
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD
SETBACK VARIANCE FOR 5217 WINDSOR ROAD,
LOTS 3 & 4, BLOCK 18, WHIPPLE, PID #25-
117-24 21 0051, P & Z CASE #92-073
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.1
CASE t92-069:
FRANK & ANDREA AHRENS, 4673 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE,
LOT 17 & 1/2 OF 18, BLOCK 1, DEVON, PID #30-
117-23 22 0008, VARIANCE REQUEST
Councilmember Ahrens removed herself from the Council.
The Building Official explained the request. He stated that a new
survey has been submitted showing the water and sewer easements and
it appears that there is sufficient room to construct the new
gazebo within the setbacks. The variance request is to recognize
an existing nonconforming structure on the property. He further
stated that if the Ahrens' should decide to cut down the size of
the gazebo, they would not need to request the variance. The
Planning Commission recommendation was in favor on a 7 to 1 vote.
Councilmember Jensen stated she was the one who voted against the
request because if the Shoreland Management Ordinance was in
effect, this structure would not be allowed. She further stated
she did not think this was the appropriate forum for addressing
this item. She stated she thought it should be discussed at a
regular City Council meeting in January.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Johnson to table this item.
The Council wanted to discuss this further. Johnson withdrew
his second, Jensen withdrew her motion.
Councilmember Jensen stated she felt considering this item at this
emergency meeting could give the perception to the general public
that the Council was doing something special for a Councilmember.
Mayor Johnson and Councilmember Jessen agreed.
Councilmember Smith stated he did not have a problem with the
request because it is recognizing an existing nonconforming
structure. It is not allowing another nonconformance. He further
stated that the Shoreland Management Ordinance has not yet been
enacted and did not feel that should be a concern at this point.
The Council discussed the fact that they have requested an
extension from the DNR to May of 1993 for the enactment of the
Shoreland Management Ordinance.
The applicant, Andrea Ahrens, stated the request was basically to
swap a current structure for the new gazebo.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Johnson to table this item
to the January 12, 1993, Regular City Council Meeting. The
vote was 3 in favor with Smith voting nay. Ahrens abstained.
Motion carried.
1.2 PAYMENT REQUEST ~4, 1992 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT - $8,007.91
The City Manager explained that the City Engineer has recommended
approval of this request.
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Smith approval payment
request #4, from Grldor Construction, in the amount of
$8,007.91, for the 1992 Lift Station Improvement, when funds
become available. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.3 APPROVAL OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION PROMOTIONAL
PACKET
The city Manager reported that the Council met with the EDC prior
to this meeting and reviewed the Promotional Packet.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to approve the EDC
Promotional Packet for publication, with the changes made by
the Council and the EDC. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
1.4 CROSSWALKS - DOWNTOWN MOUND
The City Manager introduced Tom Johnson, Planning Engineer for
Hennepin County. Police Chief Len Harrell was present and related
what he could about the fatal pedestrian accident which happened on
Tuesday evening in the crosswalk at the House of Moy.
The Council discussed the following:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Improving the lighting in the area of the crosswalks.
Installing flashing lights activated by pedestrians at
the crosswalks.
Working with the County on consolidating crosswalks and
moving crosswalks from mid block areas.
Finding reflective materials that would make the
crosswalks show up better at night.
Looking at warrants from the County to see what would be
allowed and where.
The Council asked that the Police Chief and the City Manager work
with the County and see what options are available and what can be
done with the crosswalks in downtown Mound. They will also check
with the House of Moy and see if they woUld be willing to put a
light on their building to illuminate that crosswalk better.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jessen to adjourn at 9:50
A.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
/?
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CITY of i' /IOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROaD
MOUND MINNESOT*~ 55364:687
1612) 472 0609
FAX~6~2~4T~ 0620
CASE NO. 92-071
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
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,
Janu&ry 26, 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.
Ail persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be
given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
Francene 'C. Clark,-C-£%y Clerk
Published in "The Laker" 1-4-93 and mailed to property owners within 350' by
1-11-93.
/ ~ ~ prinled 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 Sa Intoxicating Liquor License for Mark Saliterman
"On- le"
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~dene Ct Clark, CMC, City Cler~
Publish in The Laker December 28, 1992
JAN ? 1§93
I
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CITY of MOUND
534~ MAYWOOD IROAD
,MOUND MINNESOTA 55364 '687'
612t 4.72 0600
FAX i612~ 472-0620
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE APPROVAL OF A REQUEST TO VACATE CERTAIN STREETS
AS DESCRIBED BELOW FOR THE PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA
NAMED "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, January 12, 1993 to consider the approval of a request to vacate
certain streets as shown on the map on the back of this notice and legally
described as follows:
That part of Cobden Lane as dedicated in the Plat of "Whipple" which lies between
the westerly extensions of the south line of the north 20 feet of Lot 13, Block
16, "Whipple" and the south line of Lot 14, said Block 16; reserving an easement
for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across the east 10 feet of the
west half of that part of above said Cobden Lane being vacated, and also
reserving an easement for grading purposes over, under and across the north 20
feet of the west half of that part of above said Cobden Lane being vacated.
That part of said Cobden Lane which lies between the westerly extensions of the
north line of the south 10 feet of Lot 14, Block 15, "Whipple" and the north line
of Lot 13, said Block 15; reserving an easement for drainage and utility purposes
over, under and across the east 10 feet of the west half of that part of above
said Cobden Lane being vacated.
That part of the east half of said Cobden Lane which lies between the westerly
extensions of the North line of Lot 13, said Block 15, and the south line of Lot
14, Block 10, "Whipple".
The street vacation being requested is part of a request for a Planned
Development Area 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.
Ail persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be
given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
Francene C. clark, City Clerk
Published in "The Laker" December 21, 1992 and December 28, 1992. Mailed to property owners
within 350' of subject property by December 30, 1992. Posted by December 23, 1992.
printed on recycled paper ~ I
N. //~ $£G. 85, T.//7, /i'. ~'4
?,i
/
/
/
/
II
MiNN~
LAKE
January 8, 1993
I I
IIE D JAN 1. 1. 1993
TO: Mound Council and Staff
FROM: Teal Pointe Development
Neil Weber, and Fred Bame
RE: Teal Pointe Preliminary Plat and it's issues.
INTRODUCTION
The following discussion highlights some of the issues under discussion.
From the start of this project in 1985, we have expressed the desire to
work cooperatively with the city and community to develop this property
in a way that would improve the neighborhood and benefit the City
of Mound.
in 1987 The. City of Mound sold us the land on Drummond (the 3 upper lots)
to be included in the development.
We are proposing to develope the property by providing 10,000 SF minimum
lots and providing a density of 9 lots rather than the 11 that would be
allowed if the Shoreland regulations were applied.
We are interested in reducing the density so that we might preserve the
quality of the environment and v~getation on the site.
While we have attempted to apply the strictest standards possible, a
number of issues have come up. We are interested in dealing with these
issues so that everyone involved will be satisfied.
THESE ISSUES INCLUDE:
Community Response - A number of people in the neighborhood, I
believe, have had a misconception as to Just what we are trying to
do with this site. We want to maintain the quality of environment
as much as they do. We are applying stricter guidelines to ourselves
than they themselves have. Our lots are much larger than most of
the neighborhood.
The concept of "nothing" happening to the property is not realistic.
However, if the CitY or the neighborhood would be interested in
purchasing the land for a park or simply to be left the way it is.
(which is not good land stewartship) we would entertain a valid
purchase agreement with earnest money.
Our proposal of 10,000 minimum SF lots is an upgrade within the
community. The community has not given direction to development
other than to indicate that nothing should be done.
e
Indian Artifacts - The potential of Indian artifacts existing on
this site is extremely remote.
Be
Outlot A - Staff has suggested that outlot A by private. We would
agree but will abide by whatever, the Council would like.
PAGE
Traffic - Single family development of 10,000 SF minimum lots would
be the lowest traffic generator of any kind of development including
park development. We are also doing development which is below
the density allowed. The site, because it will be developed at a
lower density than allowed by code further reduces the traffic impact
on the neighborhood.
Hardcover - Will comply to Shoreland ordinance code.
Access Road - We have been working with Wiss Jauney Elstner
Associates, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois to provide retaining walls
which will not incroach on private property with fill. They are
experts in providing unique design solutions to engineering problems.
We will provide retaining walls and guard rails as required to insure
that private property is not disturbed.
This will not alter the right of way we are requesting of 40'
(Windsor Road now is 32') or the roadway width of 20'(which matches
Windsor Road). The grading of the road does not change from what
it has been. Details will be discussed at the meeting.
We hope that we now have addressed your concerns. We want the City to
be proud of this project just as we want to be.
I I
Introduction to WJE
Wiss, Janne); Elstner
Associates, Inc. and its
Erlin, Hime Associates
Division specialize in
problem-s o lying for all
O'pes of structures and
construction materials.
They answer questions
such as: Why did it fail?
Can it be repaired? Is it
safe? How can the roof
and walls be I~ept from
leaking ? What's wrong
with this concrete ? Are
these materials suitable
for construction?
Wiss, Janney, Elsmer. Associate~, Inc. C0.'J£) is an
employee-owned, interdisciplinary firm of structural/
civil enginee;s, atchhects, and materia! scientists. With
offices na!Jonwide, WJ£ providesa ~ide range of consu]ting,'~
research, and design sen'ices in all areas of construction technol-
ogy. The Erlin, Hime Associa:es (EHA) Division of W~'E provides
specialized eonsu!dng services in construction materials evaluation
through laboratory techn!qaes.
Since itg establishment in 19~6, WYE has se,wed thousands of
clients worldwide, from inclividu~!s ~o large corporations, univcrsi.
ties. ~d government agenci~. ~e f~ has nc~ev~ ~ interns.
fional ~cpuzetion ~ pmblem-solvin~ for existing buildings,· bridges,
and o~er s~ctures ~ough professional cx~nise, t~hni~l
ab~ty. ~d quick ~ase m c~en: hems.
The WJE headquarters in Northbrook, Illinois. includes an office
and la~ra~o, ry complex, ~ctural ~es: facility, and equipment for
tes~-~g, instrumentation, and rese~,'ch. A r~tworked computer
system is availabl~ for engineering calculations, experimen~ data
analysis, instrumentation monitoring, and database development, as
ss'ell as design and drafting.
W/E service~ include: "
· Asaese~ent +"'f__ Existing Stru=turea ' ':
' · Investigations and Failure Analy~la ·. :'
· Tearing and Instrumentation ....
· · Conatructlon Materlala Evaluation "
Repair and Reh,,bllltatlon -.
Hlotorlo Preservation "
Specialized Sorvloes for New conatru~tion'
Reaaaroh .nc~ Development "" ."." ....
.: . ....'...:... :.'.
.-.-'..:- : .r-': ...'.': ~..' --. : ..
:'.. ~-!..' :....' :: :'..:..'. ..... '..
TECHNICAL MANUAL
(.
PRODUCT PROFILE
GENERAL INFORMATION: · Absorption Rate .....................................................
· Compressive Strength ................................................
· Composition ................................................... -. ....
STANDARD UNIT:
: Weight ...........................................................
S~ze .............................................................
· Exposed Face .......................................................
MINI UNIT AND CAP UNIT:
~ Weight .............................................................
Size ...............................................................
· Exposed Face .......................................................
PINS:
Standard ................ Yz ' x 91/4 ' High Strength
Pultrusion Fiberglass
Mini ..................... yz · x 5% ' HighStrength
Pultruslon Fiberglass
~ Tensile Strength .......... 170,000 psi
Tensile Modulus 5 x 10. psi
; FlexuralStrength ......... 200,000 psi
Flexural Modulus 5.5 x 10' psi
· Interlamlnar Shear Strength 9,000 psi
· Specific Gravity ........... 1.9
\
COLOR AND FACE OPTIONS:*
· Factory Colors ............ Gray, Tan, Brown
Custom Colors ............ Special Quantity
Orders Only
Face Patterns ............ Sculptured Rockface,
Corduroy,
ExposedAggregate*'*
Verification should be made as to the availability of
the above colors and faces
Actual Weight may vary by region
The exposed face is accomplished by sandblasting
at the site
5% (Approximately)
1250 psi (Approximately)
High Strength, High Density,
"0" slump concrete
94 lbs. (Approximately)'*
8'H x 18'W x 24'D
1 Square Foot (8'x18')
44 lbs. (Approximately)**
4"H x 18%'V x 12"D
1/~ Square Foot (4"x18')
UNIT
The elongated tall section
provides additional stability
for straight walls as the tall
piece rests on the unit
below It. ! G~OVES
I ~
Remove the extended tall
pieces at the grooves to '
return the block shape to
its 30' sides when building
tight convex curves.
TYPICAL WALL SECTION TERMS
~p ~ / ~ ~
~ ~ ~PA~D
I ~~ ~ . I~ I I I I I
I K tlIIIII
I ~..t ~ ?q/ I I I ~*~,~ ~c~
~ I~"~'1/ '/ ~lllllllll~*LU~"~s
0~..~8~.~ ~. f / ~ I I I I I I I I I I I REiNF~EME~
[~_,' Y '- ~ I I I I I I I I I I~t~T~
FIBE~ ~N -
t : 11111 iIiii
[i~~l ~ .il I~1 III I III III I I~[
I1~11111111111111111111 ' " - ,I
II~llllllllllllllllllll
PE DUCT INSTAI.t. ATION
BASE:
To be a 6" depth of 95% compacted granular fill. Provide for a
level base in both front to back and side to side directions for
walls below 10%0.. in height. For walls above 10'.O" provide a tilt
fFom front to back so that the back is 1" lower than the front star-
ting at the foundation. The number of courses below finished
grade will vary depending on the application.
SUCCEEDING UNITS:
A. Interlocking each unit with its adjoining members is accom-
plished with the %" x 9%" high-strengthfiberglass pin system.
B. Center each unit over the two supporting units below and pull
unit forward, away from the embankment, until movement is re*
stricted by the interlocking action of the pins and the kidney re-
ceiving cups. This slopes the wall backward towards the em-
bankment, with an automatic set-back of %" per layer.
C. Backfilling should be completed at each 8" course with a
granular material. (NOTE: Do not use a mechanical compactor
directly on the KeyStone¢ unit.)
D. Tie Back Material will lie between adjoining courses while inter.
locking with the pinning system. Walls up to6' high may not re-
quire a tie back system. (See Geogrid Placemenl Chart.)
E. Drainage Systems may be required in extremely wet soil condi-
tions to reduce the hydrostatic pressure.
F. Curves and Contours will take special consideration.
· The base course must be level.
· Convex curves require approximately a 1" gap between units
for a 6' high wall and will allow a radius as tight as 3'3".
· Concave cun~es require a.n Overlap of unit edges and may be
as tight as a 90° corner (NOTE: overlapping and gapping will
vary depending on the height and curvature of each wall).
The above Installation guidelines apply to both the full size and the
mini unit.
These installation procedures do not take into account geographical
variations in site and soil conditions and therefore may require fur-
ther engineering details. None of the Information illustrated here
should be construed as a construction detail.
CONVEX CURVES
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Cl -- Interaction coefficient between grid and soil type
C. -- Interaction coefficient for sliding
Fr -- resultant force resisting sliding of wall
F.S. -- factor of safety
H --exposed wall height
He --embedment distance
hi -- distance to grid layer number I
hw -- height of soil wedge from top of wall
t -- grid layer number from the base
KA -- active soil force coefficient
L -- length of reinforcing grid
La -- available length for developing grid strength
I.~ -- embedment length required
Mo -- moment overturning wall
Mr -- moment resisting overturning
N -- number of grids required
Nmin -- minimum number of geogrid layere
Pc -- percent of coverage of geogrid in a layer
q -- uniform surcharge
R ~ resultant load on wall
Rh -- horizontal component of R
R~ --vertical component of R
TA -- allowable grid strength
tar; -- average tensile force In geogrld layer
Tr. ~ long term design strength of geogrid
Tr -- tension reinforcement force required for tiebacks
T= -- total wedge force
o -- bearing pressure
· yb ~ unit weight of retained soil
"/r -- unit weight of foundation eoil
Yr -- unit weight of reinforced backfill
eb -- angle of Internal friction of retained soil
eF -- angle of Internal friction of foundation soil
· ; -- angle of Internal friction of reinforced backfill
KEYSTONE MODULAR
RETAINING WALL UNITS
PART 1 GENERAL
1.1 Work includes furnishing and installing modular
block retaining wall units to the lines and grades
designated on the construction drawings and as
specified herein.
1.2 APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF RELATED WORK
A. Section 02265 -- Geogrid Wall Reinforcment
1.3 Reference Standards
A. ASTM C90--75 (1981 rev) -- Hollow Load
Bearing
Masonry Units
B. ASTM C140--75 (1981 rev) -- Sampling and
Testing Concrete Masonry Units
C. ASTM C145-75 (1981 rev) -- Solid Load
Bearing Concrete Masonry Unlts
1.4 Delivery, Storage and Handling
A. Contractor shall check the materials upon
delivery to assure that proper material has
been received.
B. Contractor shall prevent excessive mud, wet
cement, epoxy, and like materials which may
affix themselves, from coming in contact with
the materials.
C. Contractor shall protect the materials from
damage. Damaged material shall not be incor-
Iorated into the reinforced soil em.
ankments.
PART 2 RETAINING WALL
2.1 Mat~rlala
A. Concrete Units
1. Masonry units shall be KeyStone~ Retain-
ing Wall Units as manufactured by:
2. Concrete wall units shall have a minimum
28 day compressive strength of 1000 psi in
accordance with ASTM C-90. The concrete
shall have adequate freeze/thaw protec-
tion with a maximum moisture absorption
rate of 6%.
3. Exterior dimensions may vary. Units are
required to have a minimum of one half
square foot of face area each.
4. Retaining wall units shall provide a
minimum of 150 pounds per square foot of
wall face area. Fill which Is contained
within the dimensions of the units may be
considered as 80% effective weight.
5. Units shall have angled sides and capable
of attaining concave and convex align-
merit curves with · minimum radius of 3.5
feet.
B. Units ·hall be Interlocked with non-
corrosive fiberglass pins.
7. Units shall be Interlocked as to provide a
minimum of 114 inch of setback per each
course of wall height.
B. Fiberglass ~onnecflng pln~
1. Nylon resin rods with fiberglass reinforce-
ment.
2. Pin· ih·Il have · minimum flexural
strength of 180,ooo psi.
2.2
Co
Base Material
1. Material for footing shall consist of com-
pacted sands, gravel and/or concrete as
shown on the construction drawings. A
minimum of 6 inches of compacted base
is required.
D. Unit Fill
1. Fill for units shall be free draining sands
or gravel. No more than 10 percent shalJ
pass the No. 200 sieve with a maximum
size of ~,~ inch. Gradation of the fill shall
be approved by the Engineer.
2. A minimum of 12 Inches of drainage fill
must extend behind the wall.
E. Backfill
1. Material shall be insltu soils when appr0v-
ed by the Engineer unless otherwise
specified In the drawings. Unsuitable soils
for backfill shall not be used within the
reinforced soil mass when using geogrid
for tiebacks.
2. Where additional fill Is required contrac-
tor shall submit sample and specifica-
tions to the Engineer to determine if ac-
ceptable.
Retaining Wall Installation
A. Excavation
1. contractor shall excavate to the lines and
t~rades shown on the construclion draw-
ings. Over excavation shall not be paid for
and replacement with compacted fill
and/or wall system components will be re-
quired at contractor expense. Contractor
shall be careful not to disturb embank-
ment materials beyond lines shown.
B. Foundation Soil Preparation
1. Foundation soil shall be excavated as re-
t~ired for footing dimensions shown on
· construction drawings, or as directed
by the Engineer.
2. Foundation soil shall be examined by the
Engineer to assure that the actual founds.
lion soil strength meets or exceeds
assumed design strength. Soils not
meeting required strength shall be remov-
ed and replaced with acceptable material.
3. Over-excavated areas shall be filled with
compacted backfill material.
C. Bass Footing
1. Footing shall be placed as shown.on the
construction drawings with a minimum
thickness of 6 Inches.
2. Footing materials shall be Installed upon
undisturbed insitu soils.
3. Material shall be compacted so ·s to pro-
vide a level hard sudace on which to place
the first course of units. Compaction will
be with mechanical plate compactors to
95% of standard.
4. Footing ah·Il be prepared to Insure com-
plete contact of retaining wall unit with
base. Gaps shall not be allowed.
5. Footing materials shall be to the depths
and widths shown, contractor may opt for
using reduced depth of sends and gravel
end using · concrete topping. Concrete
Ih·Il be unrelnforced &nde maximum of
one Inch thick.
D. Unit Installation
1. First course of concrete wall units shall be
placed on the footing. The units Shall be
checked for level andalignment. The first
course is the most important to insure ac-
curate and acceptable results.
2. Insure that units are In full contact with
base.
3. Units are placed side by side for full length
of wall alignment. Alignment may be done
by means of a string line or offset from
base line.
4. Install fiberglass connecting pins and fill
units. Tamp fill.
5. Sweep all excess material from top of
units and install next course. Insure each
course is completely filled prior to pro-
ceeding to next course.
6. Lay up each course Insuring that pins pro.
trude into adjoining courses a minimum of
one inch. Two pins are required per unit. Pull
each unit forward, away from the embank-
ment, against pins in the previous course and
backfill as the course is completed. Repeat
procedure to the extent of wall height.
7, At the end of each course where the wall
changes elevation, units shall be turned
Into the backfill. Units shall be laid as to
create the minimum radius possible. A
minimum of 3 units shall be installed into
the grade. Only the front face of the units
shall be visible from' the side of the wall.
E. Oeogrld
1. If geogrid is to be Installed as tiebacks,
follow the additional requirements of Sec-
tlon: Geogrid Wall Reinforcing.
PART 3 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
3.1 Measurement
A. Measurement of retaining wall is on · square
foot basis computed on the total area of wall
shown on the construction drawings. Area is
taken from the footing to the top of wall, times
the applicable length of section.
3.2 Payment
A. Payment for the wall will be made on a square
foot basis of Installed units at the contract
unit price bid.
B. Payment shall be considered full compensa-
tion for all labor, materials, and equipment to
Install units, drelnage fill, backfill, footings
end clean up.
GEOGRID WALL REINFORCEMENT
PART 1 GENERAL
1.1 Work Includes furnishing and installing geogrid
reinforcement, wall fill, and backfill to the lines
and gredes designated on the construction draw-
Ings. Also Included is the furnishing and Installing
al/appurtenant materials required for construc-
tion of the geogrld reinforced soil retaining wall
as shown on the construction drawings.
1.2 APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF RELATED WORK
A. Section -- KeyStone Modular Retaining Wall
Units
1.3 REFERENCE STANDARDS
A. ASTM D 638 -- Test Method for Tensile Pro-
perties of Plastic
B. ASTM D 1248 -- Specification for
Polyethylene Plastics Molding and Extrusion
Materials
C. ASTM D 4218 -- Test Method for Carbon
Black Content in Polyethylene Compounds by
the Muffle Furnace Technique
D. ASTM D 1785 -- Specification for Poly (Vinyl
Chloride) (PVC) Plastic Pipe, Schedules 20, 40,
80 and 120
1.4 DELIVERY STORAGE AND HANDLING
A. Geogrid:
1. Contractor.shall check the geogrid upon
delivery to'assure that the proper material
has been received.
2. Geogrids shall be stored above --2(PE
3. Contractor shall prevent excessive mud,
wet cement, epoxy and like materials
which may affix themselves to the grid.
work, from coming in contact with the
geogrid material.
4. Rolled geogrtd material may be laid flat or
stood on end for storage.
PART 2 MATERIALS
2.1 DEFINITIONS
A. Geogrid is a high density polyethylene (HDPE)
grid, specifically fabricated for use as a $oll
reinforcement.
B. Concrete retaining wall units are as detailed
on the drawings and are specified under Sec-
tlon: Concrete Retaining Wall Units.
C. Wall fill Is a free draining granular material us-
ed within the concrete units.
D. Backfill Is the soil which Is used as fill for the
reinforced soil mass.
E. Foundation soil Is the insttu soil.
2.2 PRODUCTS
A. Geogrid shall be the type as shown on the
drawings and having the property re-
quirements as described in the attached
specifications.
ACCEPTABLE MANUFACTURERS
A. The Tenser Corporation.
B. A manufacturer of equivalent products, preap-
proved by the Engineer prior to bid opening.
PART 3 EXECUTION
3.1 FOUNDATION SOIL PREPARATION
A. Foundation ~oll shall be excavated to the
fines and grades as shown on the construc-
tton drawings or as directed by the Engineer.
B. Foundation ,soil shall be examined by the
Engineer to assure that the actual foundation
soft strength meets or exceeds aeaumed
design strength.
C. Over-excavated areas shall be filled with com-
pacted backfill material.
D. Foundation soil shall be proof rolled prior to
fill and geogrld placement.
&~ WALL ERECTION
A. Well erection shall be H specified under ~ec.
lion: Concrete Retaining Wall Units.
SPECIFICATION GUIDELINES
GEOGRID INSTALLATION FOR RETAINING
WALLS
A. The geogrid soil reinforcement shall be laid
horizontally on compacted backfill, con-
nected to the concrete wall units and embedd-
ed a minimum of 12 inches. Hook grid over
fiberglass pins, pull taut, and anchor before
backfill is placed on the geogrid.
B. Slack in the geogrid at the wall unit connec-
tions shall be removed in a manner, and to
such a degree, as approved by the Engineer.
C. Geogrid shall be laid at the proper elevation
and orientation as shown on the construction
drawings or as directed by the Engineer.
D. Correct orientation (roll direction) of the
geogrid shall be verified by the contractor.
E. Geogrid may be secured in-place with staples;'
pins, sand bags, or backfill as required by fill
properties, fill placement procedures, or
weather conditions, or as directed by the
Engineer.
F. Overlaps:
1. Uniaxial geogrld does not need to be
overlapped in the across the roll direction,
except to contain the fill at the slope face
when wrap-around facing is used. Uniaxial
seOl~rid shall be overlapped a minimum of
roches in the roll direction, or as
directed by the Engineer.
2. Biaxial geogrid shall be overlapped a
minimum of 6 inches along the edges
parallel to the direction of the reinforce-
ment.
3. Biaxial geogrld shall be overlapped a
minimum of 18 inches along edges
perpendicular to the direction of reinforc-
ment, or as directed.
4: A layer of soil a minimum of 4 Inches in
thickness shall be spread between unlax-
, eogrid layers in the area to be overlap-
or as directed.
FiLL PLACEMENT
A. Wall fill material shall be placed in 8 inch lifts
and compacted to 95 percent of standard pro-
ctof.
B. Backfill shall be placed, spread, and com-
pacted in such a manner that minimizes the
development of wrinkles in and/or movement
of the geogrid.
C. Only hand-operated compaction equipment
shall be allowed within 3 feet of the wall face.
D. Backfill shall be placed from the wall outward,
to Insure that the geogrid remains taut.
E. Tracked construction equipment shall not be
operated directly on the geogrld. A minimum
backfill thickness of 6 inches is required prior
to operation of tracked vehicles over the
geogrid. Turning of tracked vehicles should be
kept to a minimum to prevent tracks from
displacing the fill and damaging the geogrid.
F. Rubber-tired equipment may pass over the
geogrid reinforcement at slow speeds, less
than 10 MPH. Sudden braking and sharp turn-
_ lng shall be avoided.
3.5
PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.1 Measurement:
A. Measurement of geogrid Is on a square yard
basis as computed on the total area of
geogrid shown on the construction drawings..
4.2 Payment
A. Payment shall be made on a square yard basis
of installed geogrid at the contract unit price
bid.
B. Payment shall be considered full compensa-
tion for all labor, materials, and equipment us-
ed to install geogrid and backfill.
I
GEOGRID PLACEMENT CHART
Since actual project conditions may vary from
lhose assumed in the developmenl of this chart, it
ts important to recognize the conditions for which
the chart applies, which are:
· The bearing capacity of the foundation soil be-
low the wall is adequate. (maximum required al-
lowable bearing capacity fo~ the cases present-
ed is 3500 psf)
· In cases A, B, and C, the reinforced wall fill, re-
tained backfill, and foundation soils are sandy
silts or gravely sands which have a strength
fined by an effective angle of friction of 32~, zero
cohesion and a moist unit weight of 125 pcf.
· Both the reinforced wall fill and retained backfill
are well drained.
· Minimum faclors of safety are: 1.5 against rein-
forcement pullout and reinforcement rupture; 1.5
against external sliding failure; and 2.0 against
external overturning.
ENGINEERING CREDITS:
SERVICE ENGINEERING
CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ST. PAUL, MN
BASIC GEOGRID PLACEMENT CHART·
WALL CASE GRID NUMBER GEOGRID GEOGRID LAYER NUMBER
HEIGHT TYPE OF LENGTH
FEET LAYERS FEET I 2 3 4 5
4 A --
4 B --
4 C SS2 I 2.5 1.5
5 A _ D
I
5 B SS2 I 2.5 2 S
T
5 C SS2 2 3.7 1.3 3.3 A
N
6 A SS2 1 2.5 2.7 C
E
6 B SS2 2 '2.5 1.3 3.3
6 C SS2 3 4.3 .7 2 4 A
B
7 A SS2 2 3.0 1.3 4.0 O
V
7 B SS2 3 3.0 1.3 2.7 4.7 E
7 C SR1 3 4.9 1.3 2.7 4.7 B
A
8 A SS2 3 3.2 1.3 3.3 5.3 S
8 B SS2 4 3.5 .7 2.7 4.7 6.7 E
I
8 C SR1 3 5.8 1.3 3.3 513 N
10 A SR1 3 4.3 1.3 4 6.7
F
10 B SR1 4 4,6 1.3 3.3 5.3 7.3 E
E
10 C SR2 3 7.0 1.3 4.0 6.7 T
12 A SR2 3 5.5 1.3 4.7 8.0
12 B. SR2 4 5.7 1.3 4 6.7 9.3
12 C SR2 5 8.1 1.3 4 6 8 10
'The chart is to be used for estimatin~ purposes only. Design must be
performed by a qualified engineer using actual design parameters for the
proposed site,
CASE A.
GEOGRID
.r .?.
CASE B.
-'
L
CASE C.
~ GEOGRID
..r ~
L
~: .~ '. I~' ~-~ pcf
I I
CITY of MOUND
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CASE NO. 92-060
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA, PRELIMINARY PLATy
STREET VACATIONSv AND 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:
Ail persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above
will be given 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.
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
DD
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 Modifications
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
7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160
! I
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:
go
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.
as'
Teal Pointe Planning Report Supplement
December 1, 1992
Page 3
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 Standards
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 Shoreland 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.
!
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.
MINUTF 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.
March 23, 1988
Dear Brad and Sara,
We apologize for the girls urinating on your lawn. We will be honest by
telling you that we have thought about them doing this in the past, but
since Bits was running, pooping and urinating on our property we really
figured that property boundaries didn't matter to you. We now realize that
we were totally wrong in thinking this.
The Bible tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Sometimes this is a
real test because of different priorities, etc. Obviously our grass is not
high on our list. Since we now realize that your lawn is very important to
you, we will truly be more comsiderate about it. Please let's not let this
different priority come between us.
If you would like financial compensation for any damage the girls have done,
please tell us. We will be more than happy and willing to do this.
It ~s our ho~ fence in all of our property as a wildlife habitat. We do
not, hgwe----~er' kn~~m~n-f~-i-~-g-~T~ this. Sara, ~mentione~-¥~-t you might
fence ~n your yard. We won't take this as an offense against the girls, so
please do. It would be a relief.
Until our fenced in wildlife habitat manifests, please know that our property
~-~open ~o you, ~~ gu~s~--~want to share what we have
remal
been blessed with. Exercise is so important to animals so Bits is welcome to
continue running down on the point. As for guests, the only thing that we
would like to ask is that no one smoke down there because of so many leaves
and brush.
This weekend Neil will put up stakes on our exact boundaries so that I know
exactly where the girls can and can't go. For some reason this has always
been confusing to me.
Let's continue to be open with each other to avoid any further differences.
TEL No. Feb. 8, 0 4:09 P.02
THE 1NSI'ITUTE FOR MINNESOTA ARCHAEOLOGY
3300 UNIVERSITY AVL/. S.l,., SUITE 202
KIINNEAPOi. IS, MINNUSO'IA 5.5414
612/623-0299 FAX 612/623-0177
i)oard of Dirc¢l~??
J;.i Wiu'ner
As'~,wi.m' Ch;dr
('~wlyn I
~'1 Cd ~tl r6 T
(;olde, Valle)
M;.tricc I ;. [
Mend.la Height*
l)out'.las A Bhk
M
%Villi,m~ I .undqui,I
PI6 Iii,
Red
l)ir~x'lors
Jean Ch:dc)
Red
Anlh, m~ I).
BI'utc I }lmnpht>5
]:'K¢CUIiVk'
lanuary 12, 1993
To: Mr. Tom Casey
From: Klm C. Breakey
.Off 1111/93 Mr, Tom Casey telephoned o, ur offices at the ~bove number and ide,ntified
hunself, as an attorney, He began by askmJg general questions about archaeologteal
eonsulung and how archaeological consulting could affect a development near Lake
Mhmetonka. I replied that if there ,w..e~ public. ~nds or.do_ll~s,.e.~.
development plans .shou. l.d be sub..~.tted~_to ~c~l~t, mnes0.
Office and that he should contact Ntt'. IjenlltS L~lmmesum
He then asked if I knew of any sites in the vicinity, I said the area surrounding Lake
Mirmetonka has long been known to contain numerous arc.haeologlcal sites, the. most
viisible o.f whieh, are burial mounds. Mr. Casey ,,asked me ff I, knew of any bund
mounds tn the wcinity of the developmont. I replied_~at that_h'ffonnpfio, n is a....ma.tt.er of
public req.,ord and is on microfieh.e, at tho Minnesota Htstory Center Archives L~ivts~on.
lthen indicated I had the information on file here at the 1MA as well,
.... ~: , Casey asked me to look up any information reg.axdin, g m_o.und, s, in .Secti .on 25,
"- TI~I 1TN R24W, I found that in the late 1880's T,It, Lewts of the r~ortnwestern
Archa~logieal Society had mapped three m.o. unds in I- S. ec -
Hennepm County and conveyed that ~formatton to Mr. Casey m a later,phone can me
same day. I have no further mfomtton ab.o,.,ut the mound group, .more.reformation
may be on ~e at the State HLqtori¢ Preservation Office archaeologtcal ate f'fle.
Sincerely,
Kim Breakey
Curator of Collections
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 1992
CABB ~92-060, 0$1t 062, & 063: NEI~. W2BER FOR TEAL POINT;;
.DEVELOPMENT CO., ~tlIPPLE IN BLOCKS 10, 11, 15 & 16t PID~s 25-117-2
· "t o-x-t~-..ei'a.' WA~JATZONS, AND VARIANCE - PUBr. IC 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
Planning Commission Minutes 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.
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 Point· 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.
Ail lots shall be required to observe the front, side and rear
yard structural setbacks as shown on the approved preliminary
plat.
4
I I
Planning Commission Minutes
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:
Revise preliminary plat to show outlot for wetlands and
correct boundary to exclude the Drummond 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.
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
5
Planning Co~u~£ssion M£nutes 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:
1. 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 l, 2, and 3 to be serviced by private individual lift
pumps.
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:
1. 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.
ADplicant's presentation to Planninq Commission.
Neil 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.
6
Plann[n9 Commission Minutes
November 9, 1992
planning 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?
Increased run-off.
7
Planning Commission Minutes November 9, 1992
What will the development do to surrounding property owner's
taxes and value of homes?
5. 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.
Chair 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
8horeland Management Ordinance will affect the proposed
preliminary plat and to allow the Planning Commission the
opportunity to review the reconfiguration of lots 1, Z,
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 Minutes
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 conditional 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 M£nutes November 9, 1992
reconfiguring lots l, 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 6 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
Development Area for Teal Point as recommended by staff
and including the following 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 &.
3. Drummond Road not be vacated.
As a result of not vacating Drummond Road, lots 1, 2, and
3 will need to be reconfiqured.
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.
e
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
--'/
.-,~, .. ~::~i,i:,~,~,~m.., . ..,,,.,:..:, Il ~, il..d
li ~i ~ !t, I,i :1,,::-i I1~ !I
: .. ,, ,d6,t,,.l~-,:,,:~. !, '~ "
I:~ I~
' ii I~i'':l ~:: '" ~:
:'
I ~1-~-, L..-~-.
l l,,,,::::,,,!,,.: ,,,,,,, 11, I;:
~ i,; ,: :;:::,:::i:~ ::::::l, ill !i
! !I ..... Iti{ ,ii [iii [iii
3?
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
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 trader 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
! I
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.
o
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.
I
Teal Pointe Planning Report
November 4, 1992
Page 4
In general, the proposed development represents a positive addition to the City of
Mound. Processing the proposed development as a PDA is appropriate given the
unique 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.
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.
o
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
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
Mr. Jon Sutherland
Planning and Zoning
City of Mound
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 (OHW) 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
and 2, Block 17, Whipple) not included in the plat. Some type of
easement or agreement will be required.
The proposed slope on Outlot 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
through 4 and could include Lots 5, 8 and 9.
An Equal Opportundy Employer
Mr. Jori Sutherland
November 4, 1992
Page Two
Streets
The application is for private streets to serve both the three (3)
lots off Drummond 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. Drummond 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
lO0-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 Drummond
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.
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 4, 1992
Page Three
Storm Sewer - more detailed plans and stormwater calculations will be
required at the time of final plat submission. As stated in Mr.
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.
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 B 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 Drummond Road.
Vacate full BO-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:jmk
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
CITY of MOUND
November 5, 1992
To:
From:
Subject:
Planning Commission
Oreg Skinner & Oeno Hoff
Public Works
Teal Pointe Addition
We have reviewed the plans and written narrative from
Mr. Neil 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 Mr. 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 S~ER AND DRAINAOE
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.
prmted on recycled paper
¥7
WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINKS
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.
Application for
M~IOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND
0it¥ of Mound
5341 Naywood Road~ Mound~ MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600~ Fax: 472-0620
Planning Commission Date: ~_~-gL
City Council Date: ~
Site Visit Scheduled:
Case No.
Sketch Plan Review:
~'-Preliminary Plat:
Final Plat:
----~Escrow Deposit:.
OOT I 2199~
$150.00
$150.00
$100.00
$1,000.00
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Copy to City Planner:~~~ Deficient Unit Charges?
Copy to Public Works:~~'~. Delinquent Taxes?
Copy to City Engineer:
Other: VARIANCE REQUIRED?
Please type or print the following information:
Address ofSubjectProperty ~ ~ _~]~,~1~. ~ ~h~~
Owner'sName ~ ,~~ D.~~~ ~)' Day Phonej~~~~J
pp~cant'.s Name (~f oth,~ ~h,~.owner)
ga
Add:ress~
Name of Surveyor:
Nameof Engineer:
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Addition
Zoning District
Day P hone~__~~
Day Phone 410' _~4[
Day Phone 47~/* ~41
Block
PID No.
Use of Property:
PROPOSEDPLATNAME:
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 all owners of the subject property, or an explanation
given~why this is not the case.
,i~naturec' .... 6'~' ~wne'r "~y., I2011~
sig~h~t~u%re%- Aer r ~~~ ~1 ~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.
6.
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 with. a
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 Propert~
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-
B. 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 thBt 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 ~imlessly, 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.
-5-
1. Site Location Map
The Site Location Map indicates where the part$cular 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 Value.
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-
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 major 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 a spacial 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 spa¢ial 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 existing conditions on this site. Spot elevations
and topography give you an example of how the topography varies on this
site. Included are loci%Ions of major trees and the marsh grass which
exists around the water line. The elevat:on 929.5, wh:ch is the normal
high water mark of Lake M~nnetonka, 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 M~nne%onka. As stated earlier, the zoning is
R2 in the area. The site is loci%ed 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 w~th the d~s%ribution of air' tempera%ute, 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
intensities of rain indicate the need for 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
southwest. 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.
Each individual smte as indicated on the plan would be analyzed, especially
fo~ wlnd dmrection and sun access, to take best advantage of these
conditmcns. Diagrams 9 through 12 are showing photographs to and from the
site from various points of view. Each photo is labeled and should give
you a fee!mng for the kind of topography, vegetatmon, and views that exist.
The smte ms very unique and beautiful. It is very unlike the image that is
normally g~ven to properties on the island in Mound. ! think that the
marketing will take advantage of thi~ and will exploit the fact that this
is a very unmque site,.with beautiful surroundings, and that once you are
on the smte you are aware o~ the beautiful natural environment so unique to
hake Minnetonka.
.'%
$$
! i
30 October 1992
RECEIVED
I lOV 2 1992
PRELIMINARY pLAT AMENDMENT OF WRITI'EN 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 andi~o'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 LINE~
I understand that the City is not enthused about the private sewer lines. 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 the 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.D(X:
&O
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 run-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 PLOWING
Because the road to the development is a private road, the 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 ex)operating 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 slopes will be done to both help stabilize the slope and control run-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!
i I ,~ ,;
WET WELL Bulletin #607JC
MOUNTED PUMP STATION
~'I~£N ~U~P COMPA~y
8~5 3RD STREET $. W.
~'W ~R~HTO~, Mtd S~11~
PI. lONE (612) 636.7060
Smith& Love,--*
Controls--Wet Well Mounted
Pump Station control panels
are NEMA Type 1 with all
coded wiring. Dead front design
and coded wiring increases
operator safety as well as
making service easier and
faster. 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 8, 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 & LoYeless ~,¥et Well Mounled Pump
Station has been proven in over 3200 installations.
· Sizing--Wide range of sizes available with
horsepower range of 1.5 to 30, 4" and 6"
piping, 4" 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' x 6' and 8'x 10' rectangular wet
wells.
I Inslallation--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.
I 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-
hal-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.
)S
Control
Heater
:ilation syste
-- Vacuum pump
sensing [
y cover
Manway
cover
~ Check
Discharge plug
-- Flexible coupling
Discharge piping ~
(not by S&L)
Displacement switch
piping
(not by S&L)
STANDARD MODEL
NEW VARIATIONS ON THE
PROVEN WET WELL MOUNTED
PUMP STATION DESIGN
Recessed Wet 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 §o through the impeller, the turbo
pump will pass any solid that will pass throurh the suction lines, even at
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 cycle. If the in-
flow to the wet well is greater than the capacity of the lead pump, th~ 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
completed in less than one hour.
Smith & Loveless
D sk)n
Main Plant: 14040 Santa Fe Trail
Lenexa, KS 66215
(913) 888-5201
Printed in USA.
I
revised S/S/92
Application for
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - D.
City of Mound
$341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 4?2-0600, Fax: 4?2-0620
Planning Co~lssion
c,ty counc,l
Copy to City ~ngineer:
Copy to Public
Ot he r =
Case No.
Conditional Uae Permit Fee= ~;290.00
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Please type or print the following lnforuation:
Address of Subject Property
Applicant'. ,~e (if other than owner)
~e of ~urveyor: /~mt ~ ~ ~ ~l/f~ Day Phone
LEG~ DESCRIPTION OF SUBJE~ PROPERTY:
Addition PID No.
Name of Proposed Use az 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, llght, smoke/odor, perking, end
describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts.
If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing
reasonable~uarantees for the completion of the proposed development. Estimated Development
Cost of the Project: $
Number of Structures: ~ Number of Dwelling Units Per Structure: ]
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: sq ft Total Lot Area: ag ft
Naa 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(e} and provide ~opies of resolutions.
APPLICATION TO VACATE
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
472-0600, fax: 472-0620
06-ri 12 1992.
Case No. ~~~_~
Date Filed
Application Fee: $150
Legal description of property owned by applicant: _ _ _~[~
Addition PID No.
Street or "..ement to be Vacated:
Reason for Request & interest in Property:
Is 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 ~.~ ~/~ Date(.~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Recommendations from Utilities: NSP
Minnegasco GTE
Recommendations from City Depts.: Public Works
Fire Chief
Engineer Police Chief Other
I I
revised 4/2/92
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Naywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
Planning Commission Date:~
City Council Date:
Site Visit Scheduled:
Application Fee: $50.00
Case No . ~-0~3
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Copy to City Planner: ~ ~d~Z
copy to Public Works: '-.~ -
Copy ~o. City EngineerI
Please type or print the following information:
Address of Subject Property
Owner's Address ~0 ~~ /~, U,, ~
Applicant's Name (if other than owner) ~ ~~
Addres~ Day Phone
LEGAL ....... ' ! ~' -~-'~ ~:~
DESCRIPTION:
Block
Addition -- PID No.
Zoning District ~ Use of Property:
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance,
permit, or other zoning procedure for this
yes, list date(s) of application,
provide copies of resolutions.
conditional use
property? ( ) yes, ~) no. If
action taken, resolution nu~b%r(s) and
1. Detailed descripton of proposed con~tr_uc_tio]~ _or alteration (si~e., number
of stories, type of use, etc.): ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~j~
rev~ed 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 VARIANCE
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~or~ing)
Front Yard: I N S E W l~?~~~ft. ft. ft.
Rear Yard: N S E W ft. ft. ft.
Lake Front: ( N S E W ) ~ ft. ft. ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft.
Lot Size: sq ft sq ft sq ft
Street Frontage ft. 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: ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~
Se
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.
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the
relocation of a road? Yes ~, No (). If yes, explain ~ ~
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?
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.
t~v~- or- ~ _~,~ or-- 4o'_(v0~oo-~. ~ .......
i I
!
cml oF
I I
: ,OUT~OT.A '
..J
.
I
Z
I ,1
o/
il/
0 0 0 0
Curlcx l lankcts
Now you can prevent erosion, assist
in germination and protect eeedlings
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 ere 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 surface
A SHOCK ABSORPTION VEGETATION I)ENETRATION lemperature fluctuations of the soil,
The dense mat or curlex f~t.)er~ end tt~getat;O~ gm~'l~l; thro~h the cur/e;( conform tO the terrain, protect against
plastic nerfmg arrests ~he destructive ~ rnattJng he~p~ ancho~ the met In sun burnout and break up rain drops
~~~~~~r ~t~r~!~-~].'~ instruction, are clear so that
inexperienced labor can apply Curlex
Blankets.
Uses and Application
Curlex Excelsior Blankets are
designed to prevent erosion on:
· Steep slopes
· Berms
· Median strips
· Mine tailing sites
· Oitches
· Strip mine sites
· Ski slope,
· Dam sites
· Dikes
· Landscape projects or any other
"hard to hold" problem area.
~IoE~ ~ VlEfW~ of Curlex Blanket (left) and HI.Velocity Cutex Blanket.
,. ~ ~: ........ ~; ~1~- .L. J£_ L ................ = ,. = _ , ,_ __ _~_--I_-~_,-~_~_._._---~i ........ ~_.~ ........
Curlex Blankets
The E~celsior Curlex Blanket Is a machine-
produced met of curle~ wood excelsior gl 80%
$,x.inch or longer fiber length. It hal, a cor~l~-
tent thickness, with the f~ber evenly d~stdb~t-
ed over lhe entire area of the blankel. 'rhe lop
side of each blanket ts covered wllh · pho-
todegreclable extrucled plaslic mesh. The
ke! is smolder.res;stent without the u~
chemical additives.
Installation InslructlonS
Pcoperl¥ prepare, fertilize and ~aed area to be
covered before blanket is applied. When
blanket Is unrolled, nailing should be o~ top
end fibers in contact with the $oil over Ihe
ertl;re area. In ditches, apply blankets in the
direction the'water flows, b~Iting them al the
ends and sides and then stapling On slopes,
apply blankets eilher horizontally or vert;cally
Io slope, butt ends and sides and than staple
I1 is not.necessary Io dig check slots, anchor
dtlches or bury ends 0f blankets unless callecl
for in design ,~pecillcalions.
ROLL SIZE
Width ...... -. ;. i ...... 48 in. (+/- 1 in.)
Length .................. 180 h. average
Weight Per Roll ........ 78 lbs. (+/- 10%)
Square Yards Per Roll ... ...... 80 average
/O
Stapling Instructions
AMXCO Curlex alenket~
Use wire ~'tsples, ,0~1" in diam~er ~ greater,
"U" ~h~ ~h ~gs 8' in b~lh and a 1'
~. Si~ and gau~ ~ Itaples ~ed ~11
~ with ~1 ~dll~ns.
~in~ b ~ple a~ng
~ ~ ~ples in the ~nter ~ each b~n~
~uld ~ a~e~ lpac~ ~n ~ch
I
Hi-Velocity Curlex Blankets
Designed to control erosion in areas of high-
velocity water runoff, the Excelsior Hi-Velqcity
CuHex Blanket is · machine-produced mat O(
curled wood excelsior of 80% six-inch or
longer fiber length, with consistent thickness
and fiber evenly distributed over its entire area.
Each side is covered with black, extra heavy.
duty extruded plastIc mesh netting designed
lo last for yearJ and reinforce the root sy~lem
after the excelsior mat h~s decomposed. They
~re smolder, resistant-no chemical additives.
Installation Instructions
This blanket 1~ designed to withstand high-
velocity water movements In ditches and on
61opes. In ditches, unroll blanket in direction
o! water flow, When using two blankets side
by side in a ditch, do not put the seams in the
center of the ditch, Offset by 6 i~hes to 1 foot.
On elopes, start blanket 3 feet over crest of
elope or dig anchor ditches Il specified,
Blankets may be installed horizontally or var.
ticelly, whichever is easier.
HI-VELOCITY ROLL SIZE
Width ................ 48 in. (+/- 1 in.)
Length .................. ;.. 100 fl. mtn.
Area Coverage . .4(X)$q ft...(44 + sq. yds.)
Weight .............. 72 lbs. (+/- 7 lbs.)
HI-Veloctly filch liner appl~c, ation In Midwest
Stapling Inetructionl for
AMXCO HI-Velocity Curlex Blank, eta
Use wire staples, .091" in diameter or greater,'
"U" shl~l with legs 8" long or longer and
1' to 2" ~own. Size end gauge of sl~olea used
will vaq/ with soil typeS. Use lout ~taple$
across at the ~tart of each roll and continue
lo staple along the length ~{ Ihs roll at 2 ft,
intewals. When btankets ere placed along-
side each ~Xher, staple so a~ to catch the
edge of each roll. In addition to ~lapling the
edges of the blanket at the appropriate
Intervals (~ee drawing), place staples In the
center O~ the blanket halfway between the
outer etaple~,
/!
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Telephone 472-0621
Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
December Z9, 199Z
Ed Shukle~ ·
Len Harre~J/
Crosswalk ~e~mendation
! was requested at our December !7, i992 meeting to look at
the issue oF crosswalk safety for the City oF Mound From a
public safety point of view. ! have talked to a number of
people in order to get a historical perspective for the
positioning of the crosswalks and have been told that they
were done as a compromise For the loss oF on-street parking
For the business community. ! recognize that parking For
customers and support For our local businesses is critical,
but this response will only address the public safety
concerns I have regarding our citizens.
! have received several calls From citizens since the
unfortunate Fatal accident that occurred on December 15,
1992. The comments have ranged From removing crosswalks and
making people cross at semaphores, to adding lighting For
visibility, to stories oF others own close calls, and
questions oF why do we have so many crosswalks.
The Facts are that we have nine crosswalks at uncontrolled
areas along County Road #!5 (Shoreline Dr.) and County Road
#ilO (Commerce Blvd.) in less than a one square mile area.
The last traFFic Fatality was in !984 and also involved a
pedestrian in a crosswalk. A study of police department
reports and statistics reveals that there have been
seventeen crosswalk related accidents since January, i989.
Twelve oF those accidents involved rear-end accidents when
one driver was already stopped For a pedestrian in the
crosswalk. Five accidents involved pedestrians being
struck; three oF these involved semaphore controlled
crosswalks. Fourteen oF the accidents took place during the
daylight hours and only three at night. The police
department wrote 155 crosswalk violations during the period
From 1989 through !992.
! have made a point to travel the crosswalk area on
Shoreline Drive this past week at all diFFerent times oF the
evening to look at the lighting available. I do not see
lighting as the issue! When traffic is heavy there are many
distractions that cause visibility problems; headlights
coming at you, semaphore background For westbound traffic,
tail-lights For turning and stopping vehicles, business
lights, eastbound traFFic accelerating after the
intersection. When traFFic volume is low, I .had no problems
with visibility in the area. Our crime prevention oFFicer,
9!
dohn Ewald, has also come to the same assessment of the
area. The overall commotion in the area causes distractions
For drivers and drivers are basically not attentive enough
to the crosswalk. ! would also remind you that the state
raised the speed limit in this area to 35mph after the road
improvements.
An issue that also needs to be considered is that many
people perceive crosswalks as an "alley of safety". They
get a False sense of security when using a crosswalk. We
need to do a better job of educating pedestrians that, just
like driving defensively, they need to walk defensively. A
pedestrian in the right is no match For a moving vehicle and
the law does place responsibility on the pedestrian For
allowing a safe distance for a vehicle to stop before
entering a crosswalk.
My First choice, From a public safety perspective, would be
to remove mid-block crosswalks in the City of Mound For the
safety of our drivers and pedestrians. Place crosswalks
only where there are clear sight lines For drivers and
pedestrians. In the case of the crosswalk in front of House
of Moy; remove it. ! would also remove the crosswalk in
Front of the post office and make one crossing at Belmont
Lane. Belmont Lane is an intersection and i believe there
may be a greater possibility of adding some special crossing
controls to assist our pedestrians.
If the council does not Find that palatable and feels a
mid-block crosswalk is a necessity, then I would look at
having one crosswalk from the parking lot to the bus shelter
as a compromise. This may at least give a better sight line
For drivers and afford less distractions than are Found
farther west.
There were a couple of other areas of the City For which
was asked to assess the crosswalk situation. One area is
Commerce Blvd. north of Lynwood Blvd. I do not believe that
there is a need For all three crosswalks; Balsam & Commerce
Blvd., Church & Commerce Blvd., and in front of the library.
! recommend removing the mid-block crosswalk in Front of the
library. The other mid-block crosswalk is on the south end
of Commerce Blvd., by Penny-wise, and deserves consideration
For removal. This crosswalk gets most of i'ts traffic around
activities at Our Lady of the Lake Church and the church
annex when parking is the heaviest creating a situation of
limited visibility.
I hope that I have adequately addressed the issues that were
requested of me. I realize that my recommendations may be
controversial in the business community, but I hope that
everyone realizes that public safety has to be my priority.
I know that the Final policy decisions rest with the council
and that it will not be an easy process.
MOUND CROSSWALK ACCIDENTS
1992
07-11-92
08-06-92
09-14-92
10-07-92
12-15-92
1820 Hrs. Daylight 92-1175 5550 Shoreline Dr./Moy
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1145 Hrs. Daylight 92-1373 2300 Commerce Blvd/Auditors
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1525 Hrs. Daylight 92-1586 Co Rd. 15/Hardee's
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
2010 Hrs. Night 92-1715 Co Rd. 15/Post Office
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1650 Hrs. Night 92-2103 House of Moy
Pedestrian struck in crosswalk
1991
02-22-91
08-18-91
1715 Hrs. Night 91-0258 Co Rd. 15/Hardee's
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1535 Hrs. Daylight 91-0387 Commerce at Lynwood
Three struck waiking against light
03-29-91
04-04-91
07-03-91
07-03-91
10-12-91
1535 Hrs. Daylight 91-0441 Co Rd. 15/Hardee's
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1130 Hrs. Daylight 91-0473 Co. Rd. 15/SA
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1633 Hrs. Daylight 91-0999 Co. Rd. 15/Moy
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1830 Hrs. Daylight 91-1000 Co. Rd. 15/Moy
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1105 Hrs. Daylight 91-1666 110 & Co. Rd. 15 w/semaphore
Pedestrian struck in crosswalk
1990
03-05-90
1030 Hrs. DayliGht 90-0335 110 & Co. Rd. 15 i/semaphore
Pedestrian struck in crosswalk
09-26-90 1923 Hrs. DayliGht 90-1743 Commerce Blvd/Pennywise Shop
Pedestrian in crosswalk surrounded by parked vehicles
1989
01-09-89
03-10-89
08-28-89
1435 Hrs. Daylight 89-0055 Commerce/Royer,s
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1745 Hrs. Daylight 89-0360 Co Rd. 15/Moy's
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
1430 Hrs. Daylight 89-1501 Commerce at Balsam
Rear-end collision - vehicle had stopped for pedestrian
Last fatal pedestrian accident occured in June 1984 - Daylight hours
TO:
Chief Harrell
FROM:
Officer Ewald
SUBDECT: Crosswalks
DATE:
December 28, 1992
Over the last few days I have surveyed the lighting in the area
of Shoreline Boulevard between County Road #110 and Belmont
Lane. I have walked and driven the area several times and have
found the lighting to be excellent with the exception of two
shadow points, one crossing Shoreline Boulevard directly in
front of the main door of the Mound Post Office and the second
point crossing Shoreline Boulevard between the MTC bus depot and
the Post Office. The rest of the area is evenly lit.
Looking at various locations on Shoreline Boulevard between
County Road #110 and Belmont Lane for a location of a single
crosswalk, I believe the only safe location would be at the
intersection of Shoreline Boulevard and Belmont Lane. This would
mean that the crosswalks located at the Mound Post Office and
the House of Moy (5555 Shoreline Boulevard) would be removed.
If the crosswalk was to be placed at Shoreline Boulevard and
Belmont Lane it would have to be placed several feet west of
Belmont Lane so as not to interfere with the driveway entering
and exiting the parking lot located in the northwest corner.
Removing the crosswalks at the Mound Post Office and the House
of Moy might possibly create a greater problem with jaywalking.
As you know, because of current county rules and regulations
governing flashing lights, they cannot be used at the existing
crosswalks. Placing additional markings on Shoreline Boulevard
advising motorists of the crosswalks ahead might help, along
with the existing signs.
In conclusion, I don't believe that the existing crosswalks can
be made totally safe.
I
I'P:<)2970-01 (5-90)
II I I
No.
92-6
~bL NO.O1Z-WgU-Zbl5 Jan
_ I
6,93 13:32 No.O05 P.02
I I I _ II II I
Date
November 199Z
Abstracts:
Professor Emeritus Matthew J. Huber, Department of Civil and
Mineral Engineering, University of Minnesota.
For Further
Information
Contact:
Information Services, Minnesota Dept. of Transportation,
Room B23, Transportation Building, 395 John Ireland Boulevard,
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155. :
Telephone Number: (61Z5296-2385
Guidelines for the Installation of Crosswalk Marktna$. Steven A. Smith and Richard
L. Knoblauch.' Transportation Research Record No, 1141, Transportation Research
Board, Washington, D.C., 1987, pp. ]5-25.
The authors undertook this analysis as part of a larger study to develop more uniform
guidelines, and to prevent the misapplication or overuse of crosswalk markings. They
developed the final set of proposed guidelines after a process of surveying current
practice, examining past research, and review by a panel of 30 practitioners.
The authors proposed the following six principles for consideration in establishing
guidelines:
3.
4.
5.
6.
Crosswalks should not be marked where it is unusually dangerous for
pedestrians.
Locate markings at places expected to receive sufficient benefit, those with
sufficient vehicular and/or pedestrian volume.
Reflect the type of pedestrians involved (the very old or very young)'.
Supplement markings in higher-risk areas (higher vehicular volumes and
speeds) with advance-warning signs.
~ark crosswalks selectively, minimize proliferation.
Allow for consideration of variables such as nearby activities, sight
distance, speed, street geometry, pedestrian and.vehicular volumes.. , .
The final guidelines, developed from the above principles, are as follows:
Hr. Smith is with JHK and Associates, Alexandria, VA.
Mr. Knoblauch is with the Center for Applied Research;
VA. -- RECEIVED
H~NN LIT FUULIL NUKK5
I~L NO.b12-95U-2b15
Jan 6,95 13:32 No.O05 P.O$
92-6
Crosswalk markings should be installed at:
1. All signalized intersections with pedestrian signal heads.
2. All locations where a school crossing guard ts normally stationed. ·
3. All intersections and midblock locations satisfying minimum vehicular and
pedestrian volume criteria (expressed as a homograph wtthtn the article) and
the following basic criteria:
- Speed limit ~ 45 mph
- Adequate stopping sight distance
- For mtdblock croswalks, block length >~600.ft.
- Adequate croswalk illumination -
- Htnimal conflicting attention demands
All other locations at which there is a need to clarify the preferred
crossing location because the proper location for crossing would otherwise
be confusing.
The authors emphasize that these are guidelines only, that engineering Judgement has
a major role in every decision. They further emphasize that the application of
crosswalk markings does not fully address the pedestrian safety problem. The
discussion by Bruce F. Herms' is of particular value, providing added insight to the
analysis of pedestrian crosswalk problems. This article should serve as a useful
source for anyone reviewing or developing standards for pedestrian control and
safety.
~~~lI,ne . _ - 1 t morovements.
Urbant.k II. ransportatton £n Kay Fitzpatrick and Thomas
pp. 17 21, November 1991. gtneers, 1/ol. 61, No. 10,
~ ,n~u~e ot Iransportatton Engineers, Vol. 61,
Ivbalanced transportation system requires the most efficient '
~.at~ab~eAusua]ly a sharing of streets for both automok.~- ..4 ~_~s~_ of.~11, mo~ps
~,,= a,u uus opera:Ions, lhe
r~rst or these t~o arttcles ts a summary of the many activities tnvolved in providing
for~transtt vehicles and servtces into roadway planning, design and operations. The
second article specifically addresses the design of bus stops on urban streets. Those
Mr. Herms ts with the Engineering and Oevelopment-Oepartment-.of the Ctty of
San Otego, California.
Ns. Fitzpatrick and Hr. Urbanlk are assistant research engineer and research
engineer, respectively, at the Texas Transportation Institute.
~r. Roslnbum ts a transportation engineer with Parsons Brtnckerhoff Quade
and Dou91as, [nc. Mr. Grote is deputy director of the City of Phoenix
Public Transit Department. Mr. Jtckltng ts a senior planner with the City
of Tucson Transportation Oepartment.
2
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - DECEMBER 17v 1992
1.1
CASE ~92-069%
FRANK & ~NDREA ~NI~ENS, 4673 ISI,~/qDVIEW DRIVE~
LOT 17 & 1/2 OF 18~ BLOCK 1~ DEVONm PID %30-
117-23 22 0008, V]tRIANCR REOUEST
Councilmember Ahrens removed herself from the Council.
The Building official explained the request. He stated that a new
survey has been submitted showing the water and sewer easements and
it appears that there is sufficient room to construct the new
gazebo within the setbacks. The variance request is to recognize
an existing nonconforming structure on the property. He further
stated that if the Ahrens' should decide to cut down the size of
the gazebo, they would not need to request the variance. The
Planning Commission recommendation was in favor on a 7 to 1 vote.
Councilmember Jensen stated she was the one who voted against the
request because if the Shoreland Management Ordinance was in
effect, this structure would not be allowed. She further stated
she did not think this was the appropriate forum for addressing
this item. She stated she thought it should be discussed at a
regular City Council meeting in January.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Johnson to table this item.
Tho Council wanted to discuss this further. Johnson withdrew
his second, Jensen withdrew her motion.
Councilmember Jensen stated she felt considering this item at this
emergency meeting could give the perception to the general public
that the Council was doing something special for a Councilmember.
Mayor Johnson and Councilmember Jessen agreed.
Councilmember Smith stated he did not have a problem with the
request because it is recognizing an existing nonconforming
structure. It is not allowing another nonconformance. He further
stated that the Shoreland Management Ordinance has not yet been
enacted and did not feel that should be a concern at this point.
The Council discussed the fact that they have requested an
extension from the DNR to May of 1993 for the enactment of the
Shoreland Management Ordinance.
The applicant, Andrea Ahrens, stated the request was basically to
swap a current structure for the new gazebo.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Johnson to table this item
to tho January 12, 1993, Regular City Council Meeting. The
VOte was 3 in favor with Smith voting nay. Ahrens abstained.
Motion carried.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #92-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE RECOGNIZING
AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
AT 4673 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE
LOT 17 AND PART OF 18, BLOCK 1, DEVON
PID #30-117-23 22 0008
P&Z CASE NUMBER 92-069
WHEREAS, the applicants, Frank and Andrea Ahrens, have applied
for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming accessory
structures (garage) to allow construction of a conforming accessory
structure (gazebo), and
WHEREAS, the existing nonconforming garage was granted a
variance to be constructed in its present location by Resolution
#88-117, and
WHEREAS, there is an existing shed on the property which the
applicant has indicated will be removed, and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-2 Single
Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code
requires a lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 20 foot front yard
setback, 6 foot side yard setbacks for "Lots of record,., a 15 foot
rear yard setback, and accessory buildings require a 4 foot side
and 4 foot rear yard setback in the rear yard, and
WHEREAS, all other setbacks and lot area are conforming, and;
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
recommended approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
me
The City does hereby approve a variance to recognize an
existing nonconforming accessory structure (garage) which has
a front yard setback of 16 feet to the required 20 feet, to
allow construction of a conforming accessory structures
(gazebo).
The city easement must be located in the field by a Registered
Land Surveyor in order to verify the proposed structure does
not encroach into it.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE #92-069
PAGE 2
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below,
pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) of the Zoning Code
with the clear and express understanding that the use remains
as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the
provisions and restrictions of Sectio~.4~4.
· . ' ' ia~
'~ 'r -~eau/~or~~
af~~ ~ $onabl~ o f~hei~r ~~~~~/
~ Construction of a 11.5' x 11.5', octagon shaped ~
( gazebo to ~e setback 4 feet from the side and rearj
op~ty lines. /
This variance is granted for the following legally described
property: Lot 17 and the southeasterly 25.00 feet, front and
rear, of Lot 18, in Block 1 of Devon.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or
the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to
Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for
such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has
been filed with the City Clerk.
MINUTES OF A MF ETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 14, 1992
CASE ~92-069: FRANK & ANDREA AHRENS, 4673 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOT 17 ~
1/2 OF 18, BLOCK 1, D~vON, PID ~30-117-23 22 0008. VARIANCE.
The Building Official reviewed the applicant's request for a variance to
recognize an existing nonconforming detached accessory structure in
order to construct a conforming gazebo. The existing nonconforming
detached garage was granted a variance to be constructed in its present
location by Resolution #88-117.
The Current zoning code allows the proposed accessory building to be
located within 4' of the rear and side lot lines.
The applicant has had their surveyor locate an existing sewer and water
easement on the survey since the original report was written. It
appears that the gazebo could meet the 4 foot side and rear yard
setbacks without encroaching onto the easement. The gazebo was drawn on
the revised survey by the applicant.
Staff recommended approval of the variance request to allow the gazebo
to be constructed with conforming setbacks.
The Building Official added a comment that the proposed zoning code
modifications and shoreland ordinance would require the gazebo meet a 50
foot setback to the ordinary high water.
Mueller questioned the status of the existing shed. The applicant,
Andrea Ahrens, confirmed that the existing shed will be removed.
Mueller questioned the proposed floor elevation. Sutherland confirmed
that the floor will be elevated and will meet the minimum requirement of
933.5 and the construction will meet code.
The commission discussed the issue that the proposed zoning code
modifications will require that the shed be setback 50 feet from the
ordinary high water. Mueller does not feel the Planning Commission
could deny the request, but would like the City Council to consider this
issue. Jensen pointed out that there is room on the property for the
shed to be placed 50' from the ordinary high water and not be in
conflict with the easement.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by ross to recommend
approval of the variance as recommended by staff with the
oondition that the existing shed is to be removed. Motion
carried 7 to 1. Those in favor were: Clapsaddle, Mueller,
Johnson, #eiland, Michael, Hanus and ross. Jensen opposed.
Andrea Ahrens stated to the commission that if her property was
conforming she could construct the gazebo as proposed today, and the
reason her property is nonconforming is because a garage was constructed
in a nonconforming location with the City Council's blessing.
I I
CITY of MOUND
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM;
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
Planning Commission Agenda of December 14, 1992
Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building official <~~ '
Variance Request
Frank & Andrea Ahrens
CASE NO.
LOCATION:
ZONING:
92-069
4673 Island view Drive, Lot 17 & 1/2 of 18, Block
1, Devon, PID #30-117-23 22 0008
R-2 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND
The applicants request a variance to recognize an existing
nonconforming detached accessory structure in order to construct a
conforming gazebo on the property.
The existing nonconforming accessory structure was granted a
variance to be constructed in its present location by Resolution
~88-117.
According to the current zoning code, accessory buildings are not
subject to the 50 foot setback from the ordinary high water and may
be located in the rear yard with 4' setbacks to the rear and side
lot lines.
Each application for a permit or variance is typically forwarded to
other departments within the city for review. Sewer and Water
Superintendent, Greg skinner, has noted that there is a sewer and
water easement on the lakeside of this property and has requested
that the applicant have this easement located on the survey as
structures are not allowed to be placed on city easements.
printed on recFcled paper
Staff Report
4673 Island View Drive - Variance Request
Page 2
At the time this report was prepared, the exact location of the
sewer and water easement was unavailable, so placement and
evaluation to the easement could not be reviewed. It is expected
that this information will be available prior to the Planning
Commission Meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the ordinances in effect at the time of application for
this variance, staff recommendation would be that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of the variance request.
After review of the proposed zoning code modifications and
shoreland ordinance, a further stipulation should be considered
that the proposed gazebo be required to meet the 50 foot setback to
the ordinary high water. In addition, I would note that if the
gazebo was less than 120 square feet of projected roof area, it
could be constructed without a permit and be placed less than the
proposed ordinary high water setback under the current code.
This case will be heard by the Planning Commission on December 14,
1992 and by the City Council on January 12, 199~. The abutting
neighbors have been notified of this request.
JS:pj
! J
revised 4/2/92
RECEIVED
N OV 1 9 1992
VARIANC.~"~~I~, ATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
Planning Commission Date: I,"'/~--[4--qc"~. ,.
city Council Date:
site visit Scheduled:
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Copy to city Planner:
Application Fee: $50.00
Case No. _q~.~0~.
Copy to Public Works: ~
Copy to city Engineer: ...................................
Please type or print the following information: I/
Address of Subject Prope. rty /'~ 7,.~ J_'"~/~ 4 V~
Owner, ~ ~a~e ~0~~/~~~' ~/~, ~a~' ~°ne~
Owner'~r~~7~ ~/~~ V~~
Phone
Block /
PID No. ~0-
Use of Property: ~t'~~
%pplicant's Name (if other than owner)
Address ~/~
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
~o~/7 ~ ~.E. Y~
Addition
Zoning District
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, resolu~cion number(s) and
provide copies of resolutions.
1. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number
of stories, type of use, etc.):
, ,3 ' .a
revised 4/2/92
Variance Application
Page 2
Front Yard: (dS E W )
Rear Yard: ( N.TE W )
Lake Front: ( N S E W )
Side Yard: ( N S E__W )
Side Yard: ( N S E W )
Lot Size: --
Street Frontage
2. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk and
setback regulations for ,
Yes (), No O(). the zoning district in which it is located?
If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe
reason for variance request, i.e. setback, 10t area, etc.)
SETBACKS: required
(orr~ VARIANCE
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft
ft. ft. '
ft.
ft ~~L~sq ft sq ft
~sqft' '~.~ ft.
ft.
Does the present use of the property conform to regulations for the
zoning district in which it is located9 Yes a~
specify each non-conforming use: · ), No ( ). If no,
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject
its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted
district?
( ) too narrow ~) topography
( ) too small ( ) drainage
( ) too shallow ( ) shape
Please describe:
property prevent
in that zoning
soil
existing
other: specify
Se
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.
e
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the
relocation of a road? Yes (), No ~). If yes, explain
7. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance pe~.uliar
only to the property described in this petition? Yes (), No ~). If
1~o, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
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
'~quired by law.
_1
STRING~]
2X6
PER. IM ETEF,
JOIST5
INTEIKNAL
HEADER
2x6
RADIAE
JOIST
CENTE~
POST
DATTER
DOARDS
NOTCH
JOIST
HANGERS
DECKING
6 X 6 POST
OVERVIEW 0~" GAZEBO DECK
TOP
VIEW
(,ut off oorners T
on tho lonf~
pianos to form
an ootafonal
oylinde~ 16"
'""' ---'J 1-1/2"
6"
1-1/2"
CUT OFF
ARRISES
SXDE VXEW OF RAFTER
Rafter lenrth
is oqual to the
dlstanoe
stepped-off,
minus half the
hub width, plus
desired over-
bani length.
BUILD
.~ll-'-J CENTER OF
//" I J HUD
?~-1/4" .
II .,-~.._~.~:)~¢~ ~ I ---\
~C'?. -.~ ~-.*' ]'~ RAFTER HUI5
~ 16" OVERH~NG q
FLASHING
HUB
2X8 RAFTER _
ASPHALT SHINGLES
4X6 CAP PLATE
FELT
TONGU'
& GROOW
~HEATHIN(
lX~, FASCIA
PLUMB CUT
6X6 POSTS
LATTICE
(ON 5
WALLS)
LATTICE
SKIRT
ON ALL
8 SIDES
NAILER
FOR
LATTICE
~"FROM
GROUND
CLIP
DECKING
ATTACH
STAIRS
BETWEEN
POSTS
,i
I---- 16 .... ---I
CONCRETE
FOOTING
209
Augugst 23, 1988
RESOLUTION. 88-117
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE
FOR LOT 17 & S.E. 1/2 OF 18, BLOCK 1, DEVON;
PID %$0-117-23-22-0008
(4673 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE)
P&Z CASE NO. 88-?24
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a front yard setback
variance to construct a detached garage 17 feet from the prin-
cipal structure, 4 feet from the side lot line, and 14 feet from
the front property line, for lot 17 and the S.E. 1/2 of 18, block
1, Devon; PID #30-117-23-22-0008; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-2
single family zoning district, which is lakeshore property,
requiring a 20 foot front yard setback and a 4 foot side yard
setback for detached accessory buildings; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended approval of
this variance due to the topography of the lot and to afford the
property owner reasonable use of their land.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Mound, MN, as follows:
That the City does hereby authorize the nonconforming acces-
sory structure setback at 4673 Island View Drive; PID #30-'
117-23-22-0008.
The City Council authorizes the setback variance, pursuant
to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) with the clear and
express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, non-
donforming use, subject to all of the provisions and
restrictions of Section 23.404.
It is determined that the 6 foot front yard setback variance
will afford the owner reasonable use of their land due to
the topography of the lot; the improvement is hereby
authorized for the following alterations:
C~ns~ruction of a detached accessory building 24' x 24' in
size, 4 feet from the side lot line, 14 feet from the street
property line, and removal of the existing detached acces-
sory building, conditioned upon the submission of a
registered land survey of the property indicating the cor-
ners of the proposed garage elevation, the proposed eleva-
tion at the front of the garage, and the elevations at the
210
August 23, 1988
corner of the existing lot.
This variance is granted for the following legally described
property.
Lot 17 & S.E. 1/2 of 18, Block 1, Devon
PID ~30-117-23-22-0008
This variance shall be recorded with the county recorder or
the registrar of titles in Hennepin County pursuant to Min-
nesota Statute Section 462.3595, Subdivision 4.
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used·
5. The property owner shall have the responsibility for filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs
for such recording. The building permit shall not be issued
until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember
Jensen and seconded by Councilmember Johnson.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith.
The following Counctlmembers voted in the negative:
none.
Councilmember Abel was absent and excused.
Attest: City Clerk
2
PROPOSED RESOLUTION $92-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVEA V]%RIANCE RECOGNIZING
AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY BUILDING
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING ADDITION TO THE
PRINCIPAL DWELLING AT 5991 RIDGEWOOD ROAD,
THAT PART OF LOT 13v LOT 14 AND PART OF LOT 15, BLOCK 6,
THE HIGHLANDS, PID $23-117-24 43 0028
P&Z CASE NUMBER 92-070
WHEREAS, The applicant has applied for a variance to
recognize an existing nonconforming accessory building to allow
construction of a conforming addition to the principal dwelling at
5991 Ridgewood Road, and;
WHEREAS, the existing accessory building is nonconforming due
to a .63 foot encroachment into the public right-of-way and a 2.8
foot side yard setback, and;
WHEREAS, for lakeshore lots in the R-1 zone a 20 foot front
yard setback is required for accessory buildings, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1
Single Family Residential Zoning District which according to City
Code requires a lot area of 10,000 square feet, a 30 foot front
yard setback, 10 foot side yard setbacks, and a 50 foot setback to
the ordinary high water, and;
WHEREAS, all other setbacks and lot area are conforming, and;
WHEREAS, the nonconforming
substantial structure, and;
accessory building is a
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
unanimously recommended approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the city Council of the
city of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The city does hereby approve a variance to recognize an
existing nonconforming accessory building with a -.63 foot
front yard setback and a 2.8 foot side yard setback to allow
construction of a conforming addition.
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below,
pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) of the Zoning Code
with the clear and express understanding that the use remains
as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the
provisions and restrictions of Section 23.404.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
PAGE 2 CASE #92-070
It is determined that the livability of the residential
property will be improved by the authorization of the
following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to
afford the owners reasonable use of their land:
Construction of a 1-1/2 story 20' x 30' addition
onto the principal dwelling.
This variance is granted for the following legally described
property:
That part of Lot 13, Block 6 described as beginning at a point on
the Northerly line thereof distant 20 feet Northeasterly along said
Northerly line from the Northwesterly corner of said Lot which point
is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence Southerly 187.5 feet to a
point which is 187.5 feet Southerly of the point of beginning and
37.5 feet Southeasterly from a point on the Westerly line of said
Lot distant 165.4 feet Southerly along the Westerly line of said Lot
from the Northwesterly corner thereof which point is marked by a
Judicial Landmark; thence deflecting to the right 13 degrees 3
minutes 20 seconds a distance of 60 feet which point is marked by a
Judicial Landmark; thence continuing along the last mentioned course
to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Westerly along the shore of
Lake Minnetonka to the Westerly line of said Lot; thence Northerly
along the Westerly line of said Lot to a point 165.4 feet Southerly
along the Westerly line thereof from the Northwesterly corner of
said Lot which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence
Northerly along the Westerly line of said Lot to the Northwesterly
corner of said Lot which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark;
thence Northeasterly along the Northerly line of said Lot to a point
of beginning, and Lot 14 and all of Lot 15 except the westerly 20
feet front and rear thereof in Block 6, "The Highlands", according
to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the
Register of Deeds in and for said County.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or
the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to
Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for
such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has
been filed with the City Clerk.
MINUTF~ OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 14, 1992
CASB ~92-070: DAVB ?AYLORm $9~1 RIDGEWOOD ROAD, LO~ 14 & P/13 & 15.
~LOCK 6m THE HIGHLANDS~ PID #23-117-24 43 0028. VARIANCR
The Building Official reviewed the applicants request for a
variance to recognize an existing nonconforming accessory building
in order to construct a conforming addition to the principal
dwelling.
The existing accessory structure in nonconforming due to a .63
foot encroachment into the public right-of-way and a 2.8 foot side
yard setback. A 20 foot front yard and a 4 foot side yard setback
is required in the R-2 zone. This nonconformance was previously
recognized by Resolution $85-127.
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the request to recognize the nonconforming accessory structure
to allow construction of a conforming addition onto the principal
dwelling.
The Commission clarified with the applicant that a garage was added
onto the principal structure in 1986. Jensen questioned if it is
not time the nonconforming detached garage be removed. The
applicant would like to keep the detached garage. The Building
Official stated that the nonconforming building is a substantial
structure. Mueller commented on the drop in grade from the street
to the house and stated that it may be advantageous to the owner to
keep the garage as in winter months it may be difficult to get out
of the driveway with a vehicle from the principal structure.
MOTION made by Mualler, seconded by Hanus to recommend
approval of the variance request as recommended by staff.
Motion carried unanimously.
CITY of MOUND
STAFF REPORT
534! MAYWOOD RC-'D
MOUND MINNESOTA 55~._:-'. 1687
~6!2i 472 0650
FAXi612 4T2-~62~.
DATE:
TO:
FROM;
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
CASE NO.
LOCATION:
ZONING:
Planning Commission Agenda of December 14, 1992
Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff ~.
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~~ ~,
Variance Request
Dave Taylor
92-070
991 Ridgewood ~oad
ot 14 & part of 13 & 15, Block 6 The Highlands
PID #23-117-24 43 0028 '
R-1 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND
The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize an existing
nonconforming accessory building in order to construct an addition
to the principal dwelling.
The existing accessory structure is nonconforming due to a .63 foot
encroachment into the public right-of-way and a 2.8 foot side yard
setback. A 20 foot front yard and a 4 foot side yard setback is
required in the R-2 zone.
This nonconformance has been recognized previously by the attached
Resolution #85-127.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed addition is conforming, and staff recommends the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the request to recognize
the nonconforming accessory structure in order to allow
construction of a conforming addition onto the principal dwelling.
This case will be heard by the Planning Commission on December 14,
1992 and by the City Council on ~. The abutting neighbors have
been notified of the request. 1-12-93
JS:pj
printed on recycled paper
! ]
revised 4/2/92
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
534L Ma~,~ood Roadv Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
NOV 2
Application Fee: $50.00
Case No.~,~--07 0
Site visit Scheduled:
Zoning Sheet Completed: /}l~0--~
Copy to City Planner: ~7--~-~
Copy to Public Works: '- ~.
Copy to City Engineer:
Please type or print the following information:
Address of Subjeq~t Property ~---9 F/ /~~~/C)~d
Owner's Name . . ~G (~r~ ~//~ Day Phone
Owner's Address
~pplicant's Name
Address
(if other than owner)
Day Phone
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
p v-o½
Zoning District ~ I Use of Property:
Has an application ever been made for zoning, varian~ conditional
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Q6) yes, ( ) no.
yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s)
provide copies of resolutions.
d--
Block
use
If
and
Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number
of stories, type of use, etc.):
' /~ [
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 (descr e
reason for variance request, i.e. setback, 10t area, etc.) _M~_~f~
required requested VARIANCE
(or existing)
fFront Yar~: ( N~E W ) ~ ft.
Rear Yard. (~S E W ) ~' ft.
~,Lake Front: ( N S E W ) ft.
Side Yard: ( N S ~W ) - ~/ ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E~) - ~/ ft.
Lot Size: -
Street Frontage sq ft
ft.
~-~ ft. -- ft.
ft. · ~% ft.
ft. ft.
_ ~.~ ft. ~-~- ft.
_ ~F~ - ft. -- ft.
sq ft sq ft
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 (,.9~existing
( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify
Please describe:
Se
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. ~1--0~0
®
Was the hardship created by ,
any 9~her man-made change such as the
relocation of a road? Yes (), No ~). If yes, explain
7. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a v~r~ance peculiar
only to. the property described, in. this petition~. Yes
no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
/ - f - , f - f -
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
quired by law.
Applicant's Signature
Date
t~ DG ~ vl OO U
I hereby certify that this ~s a true and corr
ginning and 37.5 fee~ ~utheaster].. f~m
~u h
~ erIy along the WesterI line f Y .neo. said Lot d .'
)y a Judicial Landmark; thence def~,~
'eet which ~lnt is marker
I I
Certificate of Survey for
DavidB. Taylor
in Lots 13, 14, & 15, Block 6, "The Highlands"
Hennepin County, Minnesota
×
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a s~rvey of the ~undar~es of that parc
of Lot 13, Block 6 described as beginning at a ~inC on the ~r%herly 1:ne %heregf distant 20 feet ~rCh-
easterly along said ~rtherly line f~m the ~rthwesterly corner cf sa~ Lot which ~inC is marked by a
Judicial Landmark; thence ~utherly 187.5 fee% to a ~int which is ~87.5 feet ~uCherly of Che ~inC of
beginning and 37.5 feet ~utheasCerly f~m a ~in% on %he Westerly line of sa~d Lot dislant 165.4 feet
~utherly along che Westerly line of said Lot f~m the ~rthwes~erly ccrner cher~f which ~1nt is marked
by a Judicial Landmark; thence deflecting ~ %he right ~3 degrees 3 m~p.Ces 20 seconds a distance of 60
feet which ~in% is marker by a Judicial Landmark; %hence continuing along %he last mentioned course %o the
s~re of Lake Minne~nka; thence Westerly along the s~re of Lake tqinne'mnka ~ the Westerly line of sa~d
Lot; thence t~rCherly along the Westerly line of said Lot ~ a ~int ~65.4 feet ~utherly along the West-
erly 1ne %her~f f~m the ~rthwesterly corner of said Lot which ~]PC is marked by a Judicial Landmark;
thence ~CrCherJy along the Westerly line of saJd Lot to the ~rthwesterly corner of said LoC whJch
is marked by a 2udicial Landmark; thence ~rtheasterly along %he ~rCherly line of said LoC ~ the ~int
of beginning, and Lot ~4 and all of Lo% ~5 except the westerly 2g fee% f~nC and rear Cher~f
Block 6, "The Highlands", according ~ the plat ~her~f on file or of record in ~he office of the Register
of Deeds in and for said ~unty, and of the location of all buildings, if any, ther~n, and of the p~-
~sed location of a p~sed addition. It ~es ~C pur~rt ~ s~w any ~ther imp~vements or enc~achments.
COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC.
Date 8-30-85
o i~n marker Mark S. Gmnberg R.g. t~. 12
. Judicial landmark found ~r~n R. ~ffin Reg. '~. 60~
~ S~t elevation ~ngineers and Land Surveyors
Long Lake, M~nne~Ca
P~he 472-4~41
October 22, 1985
RESOLUTION NO. 85-127
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE
AN EXISTING NONCONFORHING ACCESSORY BUILDING
SETBACK FOR PART OF LOTS 13, 1~ AND 15, BLOCK 6,
THE HIGHLANDS (PID 23-117-2~ ~3 0028)
5991 RIDGEWOOD ROAD
WHEREAS, David and Carmen Taylor, the owners of the
property described as part of Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block 6, The
Highlands, PID 23-117-24 43 0028, have applied for a variance to
recognize an exisitint nonconforming accessory building setback
in order to construct an addition to the principal dwelling; and
WHEREAS, the existing accessory structure is
nonconforming due to a .63 foot encroachment ipto the public
right-of-way and a 2.8 foot side yard setback; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-2
zone which according to the City Code, requires a 20 foot front
yard setback and a 4 foot side yard setback; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the
request and does recommend the variance to recognize the existing
accessory structural setback.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby recognize the existing
nonconforming accessory structure setback at 5991 Rldgewood Road.
The foregoing resolution' was moved by Councllmember
Jessen and seconded by Councilmember Paulsen.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Jessen, Paulsen, Peterson, Polston and Smith.
The following Councilmembers 'voted in the negative:
none.
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
JO,
I
CITY of MOUND
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND MINNESOTA 55364 ' 68'
(6~2 472 0600
FAX {6!2} 472-0620
CASE NO. 92-072
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
A REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF WINDSOR ROAD
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 Tuesday, February 9, 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 involves approximately 139 feet of Windsor
Road.
Ail persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above
will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
F~an6ene~C. Clark, city ~lerk
printed on recycled paper
I I
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 14, 1992
The Building Official reviewed the City Engineer's report on the
request to vacate a portion of Windsor Road. The improved portion
of Windsor Road extends approximately seven (7) feet in front of
Lot 15, according to a survey for Lots 3 & 4, Block 18, Whipple.
Staff recommended to vacate only that portion of the Windsor Road
right-of-way adjacent to Lots 16 and 17, Block 13, Whipple. It was
also recommended that the City retain a minimum 20 foot wide
utility and drainage easement centered on the portion to be
vacated.
The Building Official further informed the Commission that the City
Engineer stated that this area has only a 5 percent grade,
therefore, it is possible to construct a street in this area.
However, there is no evident reason to retain the street.
Weiland confirmed with staff that if the vacation was approved
there are no surrounding properties that would be landlocked.
It was questioned what the advantage would be to vacate this
street. One advantage would be that the abutting property owners
would gain land.
chair Michael opened the public hearing.
Glen Melena stated that he is not opposed to the street vacation,
however it may not be appropriate; he is concerned that if the Teal
Pointe development is approved the street may be needed in the
future to help with traffic. Hanus believes that this reduces
traffic when the street is not improved.
Rueb Hartman stated that he and Mrs. Robinson are opposed to the
street vacation, because once it is vacated, it is gone forever.
Paul Larson who owns lots 3 and 4 across the street is in favor of
the vacation.
The abutting owner to the south, Debbie Balli, stated that if the
street is vacated, she wants half.
The Building Official noted that the applicant had constructed a
shed upon the right-of-way, however, the shed has since been moved,
and this action may have inspired the application. Clapsaddle and
Weiland both questioned if gaining property is a reason to vacate
a street? It was noted that the vacation will not correct any
nonconformity.
MOTION made by ross, seconded by Clapsaddle to deny the
request to vacate & portion of Windsor Road as there is
an overriding public interest to retain the property.
Johnson commented that there is not need to retain the street and
he feels it would be a detriment to have another access onto the
already busy Tuxedo Blvd. Hanus does not see a benefit for the
City to retain the street. It was noted that the city currently
maintains the property and if a tree needs to be removed it is at
the expense of the city. Clapsaddle commented that if the street
were improved, traffic circulation could help the area.
MOTION to deny carried 5 to 2. Those in favor of denial
were= Clapsaddle, #eiland, Michael, Voss and Jensen.
Hanus and Johnson were opposed.
The Secretary informed the applicant that the City Council will
discuss a date for a public hearing at their January 12, 1992
meeting.
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
December 4, 1992
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
Mr. Jon Sutherlmnd
Planning and Zoning
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT:
City of Mound, Minnesota
Proposed Street Vacation
Windsor Road Case #96-072
MFRA #8902
Dear Jon:
As requested, we have reviewed the application to vacate a portion of
Windsor Road and have the following recommendations:
/~e applicants have asked the City to vacate Windsor Road adjacent to their
property, Lots 15, 16 & 17, Block 13, Whipple. The improved portion of
Windsor Road extends approximately seven (7) feet in front of Lot 15,
according to a survey submitted as part of a variance application for Lots
3 and 4, Block 18, Whipple. which is located across the street. Our
recommendation is to vacate only that portion of the Windsor Road
right-of-way adjacent to Lots 16 and 17, Block 13, Whipple. We also
recommend that the City retain a minimum 20-foot wide utility and drainage
easement centered on the portion to be vacated.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
US.
JC:jmk
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK R00S ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
An Equal Opportunity Employer
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - DECEMBER 8F 1992
1.7
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION
OF WINDSOR RO~D. [SUGGESTED DATE: JANU~Y 12t 1993m 7:30
P.M.]
The Council discussed this request. The City Attorney suggested
that a staff report be given on this before a public hearing is
set. The Planning Commission will be reviewing this at their next
meeting. No action was taken at this time.
APPLICATION TO VACATE
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
472-0600, fax: 472-0620
Case No. I~.Z- O"J2-
Date Filed 1!
Application Fee: $150
Applicant's Name .v~t~K ~L,):'~_ Z,//~j~/] /
Applicant's Address ~Z~ ~a~<~c ~/~,~; I~[¢u~,',g
Legal description of property owned by applicant:
Lot
Addition lt,l A, ,gO J'~
Street or Easement to be Vacated:.'7~
Reason for Request & Interest in Property:.
oC L o '+
Day Phone
IS 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 Date
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Recommendations from Utilities: NSP Minnegasco GTE
Recommendations from City Depts.: Public Works Fire Chief
Engineer Police Chief Other
IRO,V
.cra~a~-~. n
': ' ' ! E'XCEFTION o.
¢8.08
.. rO" El~n
DESCRIPTION: Lots 15, 16 end 17, except the North 2 feet,'
of Lot~ 17, Block 13, "Whilmpla'''
We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a surveY1~ o'
the boundaries of the land above described and of the location of all buildil~§~
f any, thereon, and all' visible encroachments, if any, from or. on said land.
Dated this 6t, h d~y ?,1~ "May 19'77. EG^M, FIELD & H~AK, I~IC. - -
(~3~) &}
M .I
'~ , ( '~),.'
( ;e,.~ z,~'.~;
(
! I
~" I::::lZ
t,4 1'4
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
DECEMBER 10, 1992
Present were: Lyndelle Skoglund, Brian Asleson, Tom Casey, Shirley
Andersen, Marilyn Byrnes, Mo Mueller, Carolyn Schmidt, and Dock
Inspector Tom McCaffrey.
Andrea Ahrens and Tom Casey were absent and excused.
,INTERVIEW CANDIDATE~ FOR COMMISSIO~
The following candidates were interviewed for the vacancy on the
Park and Open Space Commission:
A. STEVEN KIRSHBAUM, 4590 DENBIGH ROAD
B. MARY MOTYKA, 1545 BLUEBIRD LANE
It was recognized that both of the applicants own property that
abuts public shoreline and they both obtain annual dock licenses
from the City.
]~NKIN~ OF CANDIDAT~
The operation of the ballot was reviewed and it was clarified that
the candidate which is the first choice should be given a 1, and
the second choice should be given a 2, the candidate with the least
amount of points is thence selected. Byrnes commented that both
candidates were very good.
Tom McCaffrey totaled the ballots, and the results were Steve
Kirshbaum with a 7 and Mary Motyka with 11, therefore Steve
Kirshbaum received the recommendation for appointment.
NOV .3 0 1997
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
I1")
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
I11
MIN~TE8 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CO~MISBION - DECEMBER 17, 1992
The meeting was called to order in the City Council chambers at 7
AM. Members present: Paul Meisel, Mark Brewer, Ken Smith, Fred
Guttormson, Sharon McMenemy-Cook, Marge Friedrichs and Jerry
Pietrowski. Jerry Longpre arrived later. Also present: Mayor
Skip Johnson and the following City Council members: Liz Jensen,
Phyllis Jessen and Andrea Ahrens; Bruce Chamberlain of the
Noisington Koegler Group, Inc., LynDelle Skoglund of the Park and
Open Space Commission; Gino Businaro, Finance Director; Ed Shukle,
city Manager and Stan Drahos, EDC applicant.
Stan Drahos, applicant for the vacancy on the EDC, was present for
his interview with the Commission and City Council. Me indicated
his interest in the community and that he has been involved in many
community activities over the years. He further stated that he
wishes to see Mound developed and become more like other cities
around Lake Minnetonka. Following his interview, Mr. Drahos was
excused. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Guttormson and carried
unanimously to recommend the appointment of Stan Drahos to fill the
current vacancy on the EDC. city Council will take up this matter
on January 12, 1993.
Painting
"Professional Painting Pays"
DEC. ?, 1998
ED SHUKLE
CITY OF MOUND
53Ai MAYWOOD RD.
MOUND, MN.
REF: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Serving the area
since 1979
DEAR ED .~
THROUGH THE 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 PLACE 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 INCF~ELY~ ~
STAN DRAHOS
Member of Minnesota Painting and Decorating Contractors
5016 Woodridge Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364 · (612) 472-2092
RESOLUTION NO. 83-
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE I~YOR~'~ CITY MANAGER
TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT #ITHM~RK A. SALITERI~
FOR THE MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE
WHEREAS, the lease for the Mound Liquor Store expired on
December 31, 1992; and
WHEREAS, a new lease has been negotiated with Mark A.
Saliterman for the 2,855 square feet of space in the building; and
WHEREAS, this new lease will have a square foot price of
$7.50 which is the same as we have been paying; and
WHEREAS, this lease will run from January 1, 1993,
through December 31, 1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby authorize the Mayor and
city Manager to execute a lease agreement with Mark A. Saliterman,
with terms as specified above, for the Mound Municipal Liquor
Store, 2324 Wilshire Blvd.
RESOLUTION #93-
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION APPOINTING
ACTING MAYOR FOR 1993
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby appoint Acting Mayor
for the year 1993.
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
RESOLUTION ~PPOINTING CITY CLERKv
FRAN CL~RKv ~CTING CITY M~NAGER FOR 1993
BE IT RESOLVED, that the city Council of the city of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby appoint Francene C. Clark, city
Clerk, as the Acting city Manager for the year 1993, if the City
Manager is disabled, incapacitated, away on city business or away
on vacation. If both the City Manager and the city Clerk are
disabled, incapacitated, away on city business or away on vacation
then Len Harrell, Police Chief, is hereby appointed as Acting city
Manager.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 1993
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby designate the official
newspaper for the City of Mound for 1993.
I I
The
Laker
2365 Commerce Blvd., Mound, MN 55364
472-1140
The
Pioneer
December 30, 1992
To: Mound City Council
Re: Appointment of Official Newspaper
Dear Councilmembers:
As you make your appointments for 1993, we ask that you consider re-appointing
The Laker as your city's official newspaper.
The Laker is published each Monday. The deadline for legal notices is 4:30 p.m.
the preceding Tuesday. Our rate for publication of legal notices is $5.98 per column
inch (59.8 cents per line) for the initial insertion, and $4.12 per column inch (41.2 cents
per line) for each additional insertion. The column width is 2 inches (12 picas).
We have enjoyed working with you in the past and we look forward to continuing to
do so. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Bill Holm
Associate Publisher
The Laker
Sun-Current
MINNESOTA
SUN
PUBLICATIONS
Sun-Post Sun-Sailor
December 11, 1992
DEC 1 4 lgg2
City Council
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Council Members:
Please consider the Sun-Sailor as the city of Mound's official newspaper for the year
1993 at your January organizational meeting.
The rate structure for legals effective January 1, 1993 will be:
1 column width: $0.72 per line - first insertion ($7.92 per inch)
$0.42 per line - subsequent insertions ($4.62 per inch)
2 column width: $1.44 per line - first insertion ($15.84 per inch)
$0.84 per line - subsequent insertions ($9.24 per inch)
Notarized affidavits on each of your publications will be provided.
Minnesota Sun Publications will accept legal notices on diskettes. Your IBM or
compatible personal computer makes it easy for you to submit legal notices produced with
WordPerfect, Wordstar or MS Word word-processing programs. Files saved in ASCH are
also acceptable. As this represents as cost-effective and efficient method for us to
produce the copy for publication, we will offer a 15% rate discount on all notices
submitted on diskettes. We recommend that other municipal departments coordinate their
legal notice publishing needs with ihe city clerk's office as well.
All legal ads should be sent to our Bloomington office by Thursday noon preceding our
Wednesday publications. In order to expedite our service to you, please direct your
legals to the attention of '
Mendel Hedblom, Minnesota Sun Publications, 7831 East Bush
Lake Road, Bloomington, MN 55439. For your convenience our fax number is 896-4754.
Thank you for considering the Sun-Sailor as your official newspaper for the ensuing
year. We are honored and pleased to serve you and look forward to a mutually beneficial
working relationship with the city of Mound.
Donald W. Thurlow
Publisher
Bloomington Office: 7831 East Bush Lake Road ,, Bloomington, MN 55439 · Ph: (612) 896-4700
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A
$20,000 BOND FOR THE CITY TREASURER/FINANCE DIRECTOR
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby authorize the purchase of a $20,000
bond for the City Treasurer/Finance Director, Gino Businaro.
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
RESOLUTION ~PPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ~
$20,000 BOND FOR THE CITY CLERK
BE IT RESOLVED, that the city council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby authorize the purchase of a $20,000
bond for the city Clerk, Francene C. Clark-Leisinger.
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE OFFICIAL
DEPOSITORIES FOR 1993
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby designate the following banks and
financial institutions as official depositories for the City of
Mound in 1993:
Marquette Bank - Mound
First Bank
American National Bank of St. Paul
Marquette Bank - Minneapolis
Norwest
Dain Bosworth, Inc.
Shearson Lehman Hutton
Offerman & Co., Inc.
Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood
Prudential-Bache
Minnesota Municipal Money Market Fund
Merrill Lynch
Paine Webber
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City's deposits shall be
protected by Federal Deposit Insurance and/or collateral in
accordance with MSA Chapter 118.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Treasurer is hereby
authorized to open or continue an account or accounts with said
institutions on such terms as required by said institutions in the
names of the City, and to deposit, or cause to be deposited in such
account or accounts, any monies, checks, drafts, orders, notes or
other instruments for the payment of money, upon compliance by said
depository with this resolution and the law in such case provided.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the designation shall
continue in force until December 31, 1993, or until written notice
of its revision or modification has been received by said
institution.
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
RESOLUTION APPOINTING
TO THE P~%RK COI~ISSION; TO THE
PLANNIN~ CON14ISSION;
TO THE ECONOHIC DEVELOP)tENT CON)IISSION (EDC)
AS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES FOR L993
BE IT R~SOL~D, that the city Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby appoint the following Councilmembers
as Council Representatives to the following city Commissions for
1993.
to the Park Commission
to the Planning Commission
to the Economic Development Commission
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
January 12, 1993
RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING PERSONS:
GEOFF MICHAEL, MICHAEL MUELLER & FRANK WEILAND TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION;
MARILYN BYRNES & CAROLYN SCHMIDT TO THE
PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION; AND PAUL MEISEL
& JERRY PIETROWSKI TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -
3 YEAR TERMS - EXPIRING 12/31/95
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby reappoint the following persons to
the following commissions for 3 year terms expiring 12/31/95:
Planning Commission - Geoff Michael, Michael Mueller &
Frank Weiland
Parks & Open Space Commission - Marilyn Byrnes & Carolyn Schmidt
Economic Development Commission - Paul Meisel & Jerry Pietrowski
131
BILLS
January 12, 1993
Batch 2122
Batch 2124
TOTAL BILLS
$137,148.33
94,562.43
$231,710.76
Z
0
0
O0
I
~,-,
~Y
_.1
f~
I'M
0
OO
o'
oo
?
O0
,,4',-4
!
0
0 o
?..* _J
o
~Z
Q.
.,J ~
O0
O.
!
0
0
!
~0
I I
~-~Z
UJ ~
~-~_~
~JZ
r,'CC
Z
0
I,,-
Z
UJ
0
I
OZ
.jr,,'
i
0
~J
,
!
0
0
Z
00o
I I I
f'~o¢
! !,-
Z~
0
O0
O~
0
,,i ,-,
LLJ ..J
:'~'Z
On,-
Z
IAI
' I
· <
~Z
I,-
Z
0
·
0
Z
0 000000
I ~1 I I I I I
0000000
I il I /II I I
o
o00
0~0~
! !
oo
oo
O~
!
0
~4
i~.~
!
,-4
,.-,I
,,.,-I
!
0
,,4'
-4'
I
Z
Z
I
Z
0
a~c~
z z
o
0
~-~
Z
O
Z
-J
~ 0
e e ·
i i
I I I I I I I
Z
Z
.J
U.J
_J
'
Z
0
0
~ I
I~1 _,j
t~Z
0
-J
Z
0
!
!
0
Z
,mC
v~"~
OL,~
O.-J
OZ
..jn,'
0 oO
~0~0~
,-4,-I
~ ~ ~~ oo o ~ o oo o ~
g ...... jj ....
--1
0
Z
0
..3
-r-
000000
000000
0
0
0
0
Z
.J
0
Z
Z
0
Z
O.
I J
~. .
.-4
I,LJ
0
0
>-
Lid
Z '.t-
O
,-~
Z
c
,'~ Z
,.4
~ U
Z
Z
~ ..I _J
.~ 0
Z
(2'
,-I
LU
/5'7
Z
~J
r~
Z
0
~Ji
L
li~ I
ZZ
ZU
~ I
~Z
Z
C
Z,
N
o 0
! m
~ m
z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo o oooo ~ ~
~ JJ jj ~ ............
U
Z
~J n,' Pu
,?4 Z ~ :Z
Z 0
0 U
.<
0
m-,
T
LAJ
I,AJ
L~J I
ZZ
oo
!
0
b.lO
~,- U
~3 Z
~t~ 0
Z
Z
~ I
O-J
Z
o
Z
0
~ I
Z_J
WW-J
,...I ~0 ,.H 0,.
0
Z
~J
,r
~.z
O
Z
~ t
~Z
,,
~,o~
oO
oo
I,~aO
CITY of MOL!ND
January 7, 1993
To:
From:
Subject:
Ed Shukle
City Manager
Dreg Skinner
Water and Sewer Supt.
December Activity Report
Water Department
This month we pumped 23,220,000 gallons of water. We had 4
water main breaks and 1 gate valve repair. The DNR televised
well #4. They use this well for water observation. ! have
been trying to get them to take responsibility for this well
or let us sea] up the well. I am hoping that they can make a
decision by this summer.
I am looking forward to working with the Council on the Water
Dept. Improvement projects for 1993.
Sewer Department
We had another force main break this month. This was in front
of the PDQ store on Three Points Blvd. This road has taken a
beating in the last two months. We still have not completed
the L.S. Project. There are some electrical bugs that need to
be worked out.
ptinted on recycled paper
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road Telephone 472-0621
Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ed Shukle
Len Harrell
Monthly Report for December 1992
STATISTICS
The police department responded to 902 calls for
service during the month of December. There were 28
Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included 2
criminal sexual conduct, 2 burglaries, 2 aggravated
assaults, 16 larcenies, 4 vehicle thefts, and 2 arsons.
There were 41 Part II offenses reported. Those
offenses included 4 child abuse/neglect, 3 forgery/NSF
checks, 9 damage to property, 1 liquor law violation, 6
DUI's, 1 simple assault, 8 domestics (3 with assaults),
4 harassments, 3 juvenile status offense, and 2 other
offenses.
The patrol division issued 80 adult citations and 1
juvenile citation. Parking violations accounted for an
additional 95 tickets. Warnings were issued to 44
individuals for a variety of violations.
There were 3 adults and 1 juvenile arrested for
felonies· There were 11 adults and 2 juveniles
arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 24
warrant arrests.
The department assisted in 18 vehicular accidents, 4
with injuries. There were 37 medical emergencies and
77 animal complaints. Mound assisted other agencies on
13 occasions in December and requested assistance 6
times.
Property valued at $32,246 was stolen and $23,893 was
recovered in December.
1
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - DECEMBER 1992
II.
III.
IV.
INVESTIGATION
The investigators worked on five child protection cases
and four criminal sexual conduct issues. Other cases
investigated include snowmobile thefts, assault, NSF
checks, burglary, robbery, harassing communications,
arson, and violation of a restraining order.
Major cases included 2 death investigations and a
barricaded suspect situation.
Formal complaints were issued for minor consumption,
worthless check, and failure to yield to a pedestrian.
Personnel/Staffing
The department used approximately 77 hours of overtime
during the month of December. Officers used 10 hours
of comp-time, 70 hours of vacation, 25 hours of sick
time, and 32 holidays. Officers earned 35 hours of
comp-time.
Jason Swensen was hired in December and fills the
position vacated when Off. Todd Limond left to take a
job with Minnetonka Police.
~raining
Inv. Truax attended training in child abuse
investigation. Officer Huggett continued in the Wilson
Leadership course. Officers also received training in
emergency medical technician.
Police Reserves
The Reserves donated 285 hours during the month of
December.
OFFENSES
REPORTED
CLEARED
UNFOUNDED
DECEMBER 1992
EXCEPT. CLEARED BY
CLEARED ARREST
ARRESTED
ADULT JUVENILE
pART I CRIME~ 0
Homicide 0 0 0
Criminal Sexual Conduct 2 0 0 0
Robbery 0 0 0 0
Aggravated AssauLt 2 0 0 1
BurgLary 2 0 1 0
Larceny 16 0 0 0
VehicLe Theft 4 0 0 0
Arson 2 0 0 0
TOTAL
28
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
PART II CRIMES 0 0
ChiLd Abuse/NegLect 4 2 0
Forgery/NSF Checks 3 0 0 0 2
Criminal oemage to Property 9 0 0 0 0
Weapons 0 0 0 0 0
Narcotics 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 I 1
Liquor Laws 6 6
DWI 6 0 0
SimpLe AssauLt 1 0 0 0 0
Domestic AssauLt 3 0 0 1 1
Domestic (No AssauLt) 5 0 0 0 0
4 0 2 0 0
Harassment 2 0
Juvenile Status Offenses 3 0 1
PubLic Peace 0 0 0 0 0
0
Trespassing 1 0 1 0
ALL Other Offenses 1 0 0 1 1
TOTAL
41
11
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
PART !11 & PART !~
Property Damage Accidents 14
Personal Injury Accidents 3
Fatal Accidents 1
Medicaks 37
Animal CompLaints 77
Mutual Aid 13
Other Genera[ Investigations 683
TOTAL 828
Her~epin County ChiLd Protection 5
TOTAL 902
12
11
1
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
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
DECEMBER 1992
ADULT
6
4
0
7
0
28
0
0
21
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
95
0
3
1
1
0
175
JUV
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
DECMEBER 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
14
8
6
0
2
8
0
0
0
2
4O
3
21
JUV
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT
DECEMBER 1992
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
THIS
MONTH
Hazardous Citations 35
Non-Hazardous Citations 36
Hazardous Warnings 9
Non-Hazardous Warnings 23
Verbal Warnings 98
Parking Citations 95
DWI 6
Over .10 4
Property Damage Accidents 14
Personal Injury Accidents 3
Fatal Accidents 1
Adult Felony Arrests 3
Adult Misdemeanor Arrests 32
Adult Misdemeanor Citations 0
Juvenile Felony Arrests 1
Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests 2
Juvenile Misdemeanor Citations 1
Part I Offenses 28
Part II Offenses 41
Medicals 37
Animmal Complaints 77
Other Public Contacts 683
YEAR TO
DATE
710
323
138
421
1,143
557
64
45
84
21
1
52
417
113
48
95
45
340
712
289
896
6,983
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
835
280
32
450
1,273
341
79
51
96
33
0
60
310
8O
25
62
49
356
712
318
1,105
6,503
TOTAL 1,229
Assists 140
Follow-Ups 31
Henn. County Child Protection 5
Mutual Aid Given 13
Mutual Aid Requested 6
13,497
896
299
59
142
55
13,050
631
164
5O
123
46
RUN:
PRO03
PRO(~
TYPE
5-JAN-93
PROP INCIDENT SEQ TYPE
DESC NUMBER NO NO
INSTALLATION NAME -- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
ENFORS
PROPERTY - STOLEN/RECOVERED
11/26/92 THRU 12/31/92
DATE STOLEN OATE
STOLEN VALUE RECOVERED
RECOVERED
VALUE
PAGE
AUTO/TK
BIKE
CLOTH
CLOTH
CLOTH
CLOTH
CONSUM
SNO/ATV
SNO/ATV
SNO/ATV
SPT E~P
CURNCY
MV PRTS
EQP TLS
EQP TLS
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
ALL OTR
BICYCL
SNOgMO
SNOgMO
SNOUMO
92002164
92002150
92002024
92002031
92002097
92002164
92002027
92002131
92002137
92002170
92002130
92002026
92002067
92002032
92002166
92002027
92002056
92002078
92002086
12/27/92 $17,000 12/29/92
12/23/92 $75 12/23/92
11/30/92 $108 12/01/92
12/02/92 $150
12/14/92 $85
12/27/92 $505 12/29/92
11/30/92 $75 12/09/92
12/21/92 $4,000 12/31/92
12/21/92 $2,100 01/01/93
12/28/92 $7,000
12/21/92 $150
11/30/92 $640
12/09/92 $10
12/02/92 $115
12/27/92 $150
11/30/92 $30 12/09/92
12/05/92 $10
12/08/92 $28
12/12/92 $15
$17,000
$75
$108
$505
$75
$4,000
$2,100
$30
TOTALS: $32,246
$23,893
Run: 5-Jan-93 17:02 CFS08
Primary ISN's on[y: No
D~ Reported range: 11/26/92 - 12/31/92
'ange each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: A(l
Activity Resutted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: AIl
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: Ali
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Ca[Is For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE
NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION
INCIDENTS
9000 SPEEDING
9001 J-SPEEDING
9006 TEST REFUSAL
9010 BAC OVER .10
9014 STOP SIGN
9016 FAILURE TO YIELD
EXHIBITION DRIVING
9032 NO PASSING
9036 OBSTRUCTED VISION
9040 NO SEATBELT
9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER
9140 NO PARKING/WINTER HOURS
9200 DAS/DAR/DAC
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED
28
1
2
4
2
1
1
1
2
1
8
87
?
21
1
1
2
1
?
2
1
1
9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF
9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE
9309 FOUND/RUNAWAY
9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS
9313 FOUND PROPERTY
9 FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED
9410 FATAL ACCIDENTS
9420 DERELICT AUTO
Page
Run: 5-Jan-93 17:02 CFS08
Primary lSN's only: No
Date Reported range: 11/26/92 - 12/31/92
Time range each day: 00:00 - 2]:59
How Received: AIl
Activity Resutted: ALL
Dispositions: At[
Officers/Badges: ALt
Grids: At[
Patrol Areas: AL[
Days of the week: AIl
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Ca[Is For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 2
9440 H/R PERSONAL INJURY ACC. 1
9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 14
9562 CAT BITES 1
9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS 3
9700 MEDICAL/SU 1
9710 MEDICAL/ASU 3
9730 MEDICALS 30
9731 MEDICALS/DX 2
9732 MEDICALS/CI 1
9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED 3
9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT 5
9900 ALL NCCP CASES 5
9904 OPEN DOOR/ALARMS 8
9930 HANDGUN APPLICATION 5
9944 UNWANTED GUEST 1
9945 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 1
9980 WARRANTS 24
9990 MISC. VIOLATIONS 1
9992 MUTUAL AID/8100 4
9993 MUTUAL AID/6500 4
9994 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 4
Page
m ~
Run: 5-Jan-93 17:02 CFS08
Primary lSN~s on[y: No
Dar ~oorted range: 11/26/92 - 12/31/92
Ti~. ~ge each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: AIl
Activity Resulted:
Dispositions: AIl
Officers/Badges: AIl
Grids: AIl
Patrol Areas: AIl
Days of the week: AIl
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Ca[Is For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE
DESCRIPTION NUMBER OF
INCIDENTS
9996 MUTUAL AID/NARCOTICS
A3255 ASLT 3-SUBSTANTIAL INJURY-HANDS ETC-CHLD-ACQ
A5351 ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM
A5354 ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM
A5501 ASLT 5-THRT BOOILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-FAM
A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BOO ILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ
Ag( ERROR'THRT INFLT PRO DM'EXPLO INCEN-UNK RELAT
84430 BURG 4-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
BURG 4-AT FRC RES-D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON
ARSON 1-UNINHB-NO WEA-SG RESID-$20000 MORE
ARSON 3-FE-UNK COND-MTR VEN-$10000-$19999
CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD
TRAFFIC-GM-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
CSC 1-UNK ACT-PARENT-UNDER 13-F
CSC 3-UNK ACT-ACQUAINT-16-17-F
LIQUOR - OTHER
JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
JISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSiNG COMMUNICATIONS
OBSENITY-MS-OSSCENE LETTER ETC-ADULT
PROP DAMAGE-FE-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
4
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
B4930
C3211
:1211
:3082
3060
2500
3500
1021
;075
199
35O
1.
?72
i10
Page
5-Jan-93 17:02 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 11/26/92 - 12/31/92
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: ALL
Officers/Badges:
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
ACTIVITY COOE
DESCRIPTION
P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
P3310 TRESPASS-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY
TEO02 THEFT-OTHER-FE-UNKNO~N-SERVICES
TG029 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-OTH PROP
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP
TG061 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MAILS-MONEY
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
U3028 THEFT-MS-ISSUE IdORTHLESS CHECK-200 OR LESS
U3288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS
U3289
U3499
VA021
VA024
Y3230
THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-35000'OR MORE
THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO'MOTOR-35000'OR'MORE
VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-AUTO
VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-SNO~MOBILE
CRIM AGNST GOVN-MS'ESCAPE TAX-MTR VEH
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
NUMBER OF
INCIDENTS
8
1
1
1
2
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
**** Report Totals:
370
Page
Run: 5-Jan-93 14:55 OFF01
M(TJND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Primary ISN~s on[y: No Enfors Offense Report
Dar~ ' ~orted range: 11/26/92 - 12/31/92
Tir~ .~ge each day: 00:00 - 23:59 OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Dispositions: Att
Activity codes: AIl
Officers/Badges:
Grids: Alt
Page
ACT ACTIVITY ..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
CODE DESCRIPTION OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
A3255 ASLT I-SUBSTANTIAL INJURY-HANDS ETC-CHLD-ACQ 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0
A5351 ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM 2 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 50.0
A5354 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-I~ANDS-CHLD-FAM 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
A5501 ASLT 5-THRT BOOILY HARM-NO 14EAP-ADLT-FAM 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BOO[LY HARM-NO t4EAP-ADLT-ACQ 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
A9660 TERROR-THRT INFLT PRO DM-EXPLO INCEN-UNK RELAT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
B4430 BURG 4-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK 14EAP-UNK ACT 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
]4~ URG 4-AT FRC RES-D-UNK I~EAP-UNK ACT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0,0
:3211 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
'1211 ARSON I'UNINHR~NO 14EA-SG RES[D-S20000 MORE 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
3060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
2500 TRAFFIC-GM-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
3500 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 4 0 4 0 4 0 0 4 100,0
1021 CSC 1-UNK ACT-PARENT-UNDER 1]-F 1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
;0?5 CSC 3-UNK ACT-ACQUAINT-16-1?-F
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
199 LIQUOR - OTHER
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
350 JUVEN I IE-RUNA~/Ay
3 0 3 0 0 2 1 3 100.C
190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS 3 0 3 2 0 0 1 1 33.3
772 OBSENITY-MS-OBSCENE LETTER ETC-ADULT 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
10 PROP DAMAGE-FE-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
.~ROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 8 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0,0
TRESPASS-MS- PR I VATE-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
THEFT-501-2500- FE-BUI LD i NG.MONE¥ 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
Run: 5-Jan-93 14:55 OFF01
Primary ISN~s onty: No
Date Reported range: 11/26/92 - 12/31/92
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: Att
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges:
Grids: ALl
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES
ACT ACTIVITY PENDING
CODE DESCRIPTION ..................
Page 2
TEO02 THEFT-OTHER-FE-UNKNO~N-SERVICES
TG029 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-OTH PROP
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP
TG061 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MAILS-MONEY
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
U3028 THEFT-MS-ISSUE I~THLESS CHECK-200 OR LESS
U3288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS
U3289 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-35000-OR MORE
U3499 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO-MOTOR-35000-OR'MORE
VA021 VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-AUTO
VA024 VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-SNO~OBILE
Y3230 CRIM AGNST GOVN-MS-ESCAPE TAX-MTR VEH
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
0 1 1 0
0 2 2 0
0 7 7 0
0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0
0 3 3 0
0 1 0 1
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 0 0.0
0 0 1 100.0
**** Report Totats:
62
2 60 43 9
3 5 17 28.3
HOUND POLICE RESERVES
MONTHLY REPORT
DECEMBER, 1~.~.~
[_~ETA!LS_
NAME EMER RES COP~I H/F TRAIN INSTR RIDE MEET-
C/O SQUAD SERV BALL ING TION ALONG ADMIN ING TOTAL
Fo::..-:, J i m - - 2.0 1.0 -
Ge y e n - - 4.0 :::. 0 _ - "' - 15.0 1.0 1 '.-?. 0
Fo::<:, K _ - 3·0 - - - 15.0 1.0 23.0
Nor t on 5.0 - 2.5 - - - 15.0 1.0 1 '.-?. 0
Liljeberg _ - _ _ - - - 15.0 1.0 23 5
Lyng - - o.5 _ - - 15.0 - 1.=. 0
A1 lee _ = - - _ '- '
- - _ _ - 1.0 3.5
Berent 1.5 - 8.o 7.5 - - - - 0
Cole _ - - - _
- '2.0 11.0 _ _ - 1.0 18.0
Fleming - /--,.5 - - - 1.0 14.c)
Haarstad - 15.5 2.0 - - 6.5
Maas 5.0 6.5 6.0 2.0 - - - 17.5
Nassett - - 18.0 1 0 I 0 3'.-?.5
- - t?. 0 - ' ·
Nelson, S. - 10.0 - - - 1.0 1.0 11.0
'~unel i I. 0 - 14.0 - - - 10.0
-~num - _ - - :--:4.5 15.0 1 · 0 ~,5.5
Swenson _ - - - - _
Erdman _ - - - _ -
Ringate _ _ - - - _ _ -
- - - - 0
TOTAL 12.5 :B:--:. 5 4/_-,. 0 :2::E:. 5 0 0 52. 5
92 0 10.0 '-"-. =
· ' ~-.=,.J. 0
M__ONT~ y ACT I___V I T I ES AC T I VE RE.SE~yE___~S
Ride Alongs ~ ~1~ F-----]'eming R22 Haarstad, p.
Meetings RI Fo::.=:, d. R24 Maas, d.
Transports R3 Fox, K. R2 Geyen, I.
Reserve Squad R54 Erdman, T. R55 Nassett, S.
Hockey Games RIO Nelson, S. R5 Norton, L.
Dances Rll Qunell, D. R5'~ Berent, T.
Sleigh Ride R4 Liljeberg, R. R17 Cole, F'.
Oral Board R57 Lyng, L.
Accident Reconstruction ·
Crime Prevention
CITY of MOUND
January 5, 1993
TO: MAYOR~ CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
FROM= JOEL KRUMM, LIQUOR STORE MAN~GER ~/(,
RE= DECEMBER MONTHLY REPORT - 1992
It is over! It is finally over! I can now relax and enjoy a
sense of sanity that has been missing for over a month. I can
hardly wait until I retire, or am out of this business, so that I
can appreciate the holidays like the rest of the general public.
Our holiday sale that ran the last two weeks of the month and
that was advertised in the LakeK, was a huge success. Gross
receipts for the month were $144,882. That is a 17% increase over
December of 1991. It was also the biggest month ever in the
history of the store by $17,000! We also had our biggest day ever
on New Year's Eve. Sales were $18,363. That smashes last New
Year's Eve sales by 19% when receipts were $14,746. Sales for the
entire year were up 6% over 1991, but I will get more into depth
with that in my annual report.
We were closed New Year's Day and took our inventory on
Sunday, January 3rd. Nothing out of the ordinary to report on that
subject. Seems to get easier every year though. I suppose
practice makes perfect. That's it. No need to look back and rest
on our laurels. 1993 is here and there are bigger and better
things ahead.
JK:ls
CITY of MOUND
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
January 7, 1993
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~"'~ -
DECEMBER &992 MONTHLY REPORT
~ONSTRUCTION ACTIVITy
In December there were 15 building permits issued, four of which
were new dwellings, for a value of $533,692 capping off 1992 total
construction valuation at $4,902,210 which makes our biggest year
since 1988. Look forward to more details in my annual report.
There were 19 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous permits
issued for a total of 34 this month.
PLANNING AND ZONINC
The public hearing for the proposed PDA, Teal Pointe in the Whipple
Addition, was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council
and has been continued for further review by the Council. A minor
subdivision at 1720 Dove Lane was denied. We are currently working
the conditional use permit request for Headliners Bar and Grill at
the site of the old Jock Club, along with a street vacation request
on a portion of Windsor Road. A special council meeting was set
for December 17 to hear two variance requests. Work continues on
the zoning code modifications and shoreland management ordinance.
TRAINING & MEETINGS
I attended the regular monthly Building Officials Meeting.
JS:pj
printed on recycled paper
2,740,38,1
140,119
114,374
1,841,612
Tots] Flmily Unltl
SIOENTI&~
Noe~FImlly
424,240
, ~,~Mtsc Remodel
TOTA~
106,352
2,100
1,000
3,100
.533,692
122,351
57,232
320,217
4,902,210
Vw ?e D~
? I 7
15 { 15
534' 'dAY'A,DC, D ROAD
,M(_',_~,,D MINNESOTA 55364
January 6, 1993
TO:
FROM:
RE:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK
DECEMBER 1992, MONTHLY REPORT
There were two meetings in December with agendas, minutes and
resolutions to prepare.
I prepared the renewal notices for the licenses that will be
expiring at the end of February. I have all the licenses scheduled
on the computer for certain dates and specific meetings.
There is an IIMC Region 6 Meeting coming up in January in La
Crosse, Wisconsin, that myself and the director from Wisconsin are
in charge of conducting. We will be reporting on the Mid-Year IIMC
Board Meeting that was held in New Orleans in November.
The Cemetery Map was updated with all the changes that took place
in 1992.
I entered all the minutes from 1992 into the Clerk's Index Program
on my computer. This really works slick when you need to find
something later, just a few key strokes and you have the
information.
New files were made for 1993.
I am continuing to work on the Ordinance Book and enter it into the
computer when time allows. Eventually it will all be on the
computer and much easier to update in the future.
fc
07-Jan- 93
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCILAND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DECEMBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
INVESTMENTS
Balance:
Bought:
CP 4.08
Matured:
CP 3.93
CMO
The following is the December investment activity:
December 1, 1992
Shearson
Due 01-19-93
Shearson
Dain Bosworth
$5,134,266
994,667
(199.143)
(77,098)
Balance: December 31, 1992
$5,852,692
Joyce Nelson
Joyce Nelson has joined the finance department. She is replacing
Lois Sandquistwho retired on December 1, 1992.
Joyce will also continue her involvementwith the recycling program.
I am sure that she has the enthusiasm and the talent necessary
to perform her new duties with excellence.
Other Activity
December was a busy month for the finance department: - In payroll employee retirements and new hired had to be set up.
- Information concerning insurance was updated.
- Numerous calls from banks and investment institutionshad to
be dealt with.
- Reports relating to the approved budget were submitted
to the State Department of Revenue and to the State Auditor.
- Finally, everybody was kept busy with preparing for the closing
of the financialyear 1992.
I
CITY of MOUND
PARKS DEPARTMENT
DECEMBER 1992 MONTHLY REPORT
parks
With the 1993 budget being approved I have made contacts with playground
equipment companies for the improvements at Three points Park. I hope
to have a plan soon for the exact type of equipment and an order to the
company before the end of February.
I have already contacted the Minnesota Tree Trust, who helped up in the
past, to install the new equipment in May.
Hopefully, with no delays we can have the equipment ready for use by
June.
The bid specs were put together for the new 1993 one ton dump truck and
bids are due for opening on January 25, 1993. The 1978 one ton will be
going to auction in the spring, so by ordering now I will be sure to
have a truck for use by May.
Docks
Ail dock applications for 1993 have been compiled and mailed. As in the
past, we generally do not receive the majority of them back until the
end of February. When applications are received during the month of
March there is a $20 late fee and if they wait until April then they
chance loosing the site.
Skating Rinks
The three rinks, Three Points, Highland, and Philbrook, did not get a
good start with the weather until late December. Normally we are able
to keep ice through January and February with no problems as long as the
weather does not get too cold, so as to cause the flooding hoses to
freeze.
Trees
Without a good frost until late December, we could not look at removing
some of the trees we left for the winter season. We do this on trees
that are not an immediate hazard and if we wait till there is frost we
can get to them by the lake or across a lawn area without doing any
damage.
JF:pj
~ prlntedonrecycledpaper I ;3
TI{IS LAST %HIS' YEAR LAST YEAR
MONTH M~ TO DATE TO DATE
MONTH OF DECEMBER ] qq2
NO. OF CALLS 50 43 486 463
-- FIRE 13 7 104 82
MOUND 18 17 165 170
FIRE 0 2 13 12
MINNETONKA BEACH ~GENC_Y, 2 O 6 9
FIRE 0 1 16 28
MINNETRISTA
EMERGENCY 4 5 40 35
FIRE 2 2 24 28
ORONO 18
~ERGENCY 1 2 21
FIRE 0 1 3 1 ..
SHOREWOOD
~M~IRGENCY 0 0 1 1
FIRE 5 2 33 35
SPRING PARK
I~.'~--'RGI~'Y 5 4 56 39
FIRE 0 0 4 5
MUTUAL AID
]~1~ 0 0 0 0 ....
TOTAL FIRE CALLS 20 15 197 194
TOTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 30 28 289 269
COb~RCiAL 2 0 14 6 ....
RESIDENTIAL 9 9 75 69
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 1 2
GRASS & MISCELLANEOUS 2 2 38 45
AUTO 3 0 16 8
FALSE ALARM / FIRE ALARMS 4 4 53 59
NO. OF HOURS FIRE 424 246 2789 2240
MOUND ~M]~GENCY 332 308 3190 3317
TOTAL 756 554 5979 5557
FIRE 0 38 216 287
- MTKA BEACH E~ERGENCY 25 0 115 162
TOTAL 25 38 331 449 , ,
FIRE 0 13 429 804
- M' TRISTA M.~IRGENCY 80 93 750 655
TOTAL 80 106 1179 1459
FIRE 42 35 469 588 .,.
ORONO M~D~RGENCY 42 51 467 361
TOTAL 84 86 936 949
FIRE 0 8 134 8 , , ,
- SHOREWOOD ~4fIRGENCY 0 0 16 15
TOTAL 0 8 150 23 ....
FIRE 103 53 683 809
- SP. PARK ~G]R~~f 91 101 1164 568
TOTAL 194 154 1847 1377 ,,,
FIRE 0 0 220 360
- MUIUAL AID EMERGENCY 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 220 360
165 162½ 2040 1990
TOTAL DRILL HOURS
TOTAL FIRE HOURS 569 393 4940 5096
TOTAL EMERGENCY HOURS 570 553 5702 5078
1139 946 10,642 10,174
TOTAL FIRE & EM~GENCY }K)URS
bIUTUAL AID RECEIVED 0 0 3 5
MUTUAL AID GIVEN 0 O 4 5
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
MOUND, MINNESOTA
FOR MONTH OF DMZ~ER 1992
FIRE FIGHTERS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE
12/14 12/21
1 JEFF ANDERSEN X X 2 19.00, 2~ 48 6-CD 288.00
2 GREG ANDERSON (~ X 1 9.50 0 34 6.CD 204.00
3 JERRY BABB X X 2 19.00 2 20 6.CD 120.00
4 DAVID BOYD X X 2 19.00 2% 3_1 fi.CD 186.00
5 DON BRYCE X X 2 19.00 0 35 6.50 227.50
6 SCOTt BRYCE X X 2 19.00 1b 29 6.00 174.00
7 DAVE CAR! .qON ~ 1 1 9.50 2% 28 6.00 168.00
8 JIM CASEY X X 2 19.00 0 45 ~.00 270.00
9 STEVE COLLINES X X 2 19.00 2 30 ~,OO 180.00
10 RANDY ENGELHART X X 2 19.00 Ib 24 6.00 144.00
11 STEVE ERICKSON X X 2 19.00 2 37 6.00 222.00
12 PHIL FISK X X 2 19.00 0 9 6.00 54.00 ...
13 GERALD GARVAIS X X 2 19.00 2 26 6.00 156.00
14 DAN GRADY (~ X 1 9.50 0 45 6.00 270.00
15 KEVIN GRADY X X 2 19.00 2 42 6.00 252.00
16 CRAIC, HFNnkm.~4-~ X X 2 19.O0 1 47 6.00 282.00
X X 2 19.00 2½ 32 6.00 192.00
17 ?AiTL
18 DRAD TAND.qMAN ~_ X i 9.50 6 29 6.00 174.00
19 i~ON MAR.c~-~m~. X X 2 19.00 0 35 6.25 218.75
20 JO~N NA~]S ~ X 1 9.50 0 33 6.00 198.00
21 JAM~S N~ ~-~ X 1 9.50 4½ 30 6.00 180.00
22 MARV NET.~ON ~-~ X 1 9.50 0 11 6.00 66.00
23 BRET NICCUM X X 2 19.00 3 28 6.00 168.00
24 GREG PALM X X 2 19.00 1 28 6.00 168.00
25 MIKE PALM X X 2 19.00 2½ 40 6.00 240.00
26 TIM PAlM X X 2 19.00 2 34 6.00 204.00
27 GREG PEDERSON X X 2 19.00 2 25 6.00 150.00
28 TONY RASMUSSEN X X 2 19.00 0 31 6.'00 186.00
29 MIKE SAVAGE X X 2 19.00 7½ 19 6.00 114.00
30 KEVIN SIPPR~.L X X 2 19.00 2 36 6.00 216.®
31 RON STAI~ X X 2 19.00 5½ 28 6.00 168.00
32 TOM SWENSON X _ X 2' 19.® 0 ... 33 6.00 198.00
33 WM SW~SON ~ X 1 . 9.50 0 23 6.00 138.00
34 ED VANECEK X X 2 19.00 2 39 6,00 234.00
~ RICK WILLIAMS X X Z ]q.OO 15 27 6.00 162.00
36 TIM WILLIAMS ... X × 2 19.00 2 25 6.00 150.00
37 DENNIS WOYTCKE X × 2 19.00 1% 23 6.00 138.00
I(TrA~ 72½ 92½ 165 627.00 80½ 1139 ~ 6,860.2,
165 I~THS 627.0
8~ MA~ 1,167.0
~DrAL 8,654.2
MOUND FIRE DEPAR~IENT
DRILL
REPORT
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
Ptm}per Operation
Fire Streams & Friction Loss
}~use Burnings
Natural/Propane Gas Denms.
Ladder Evolutions
Salvage Operations
Radio Operations
House Evolutions
Nozzles & Hose Appliance
Hours Training Paid :
~ Excused X Unexecused 0 Present / Not Paid
Miscellaneous :
PERSONNEL
2~/~J. Andersen
~.~G. Anderson
J. Babb
~-f~D. Boyd
~__~D. Bryce
S. Bryce
~__I~D. Garlson
J. Casey
S. Collins
R Emgelhart
S. Erickson
P Fisk
~/~J. Garvais
~_~] 6rady
6rady
2-~-~C · Henderson
~YzP. Henry
~-~ R' Landsman · Marschke
0 J. Nafus
I~ J. Nelson
~_~M. Nelson
B. Nicctma
~/~. Palm
2~/~M. Palm
T. Palm
G. Pederson
T. Rasmussen
M. Savage
K. Sipprell
~ R. Stallman
~ T. Swenson
W. Swenson
E. Vanecek
R. Wi 11 i,'uns
~T. Williams
~I). Woytcke
D R I L L
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
scip]£ne 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
REPORT
Date D~"F.. Z lI 1997.
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
0 Present / Not Paid
,z-,z-lz
2~J.Andersen
~-~7~-zG.Anderson
J.Babb
D.Boyd
D.Bryce
_~=S.Bryce
D.Car]son
J.Casey
S.Co]]ins
~---~--~ R.Eng]ehart
2~ S.Erickson
.2~_P.Fisk
PERSONNEL
J.Garvais
D.Grady
K .Grady
C. Henderson
P.Henry
~ ~7~B. Landsman
_~ ~/~-R · Ma r schke
~-/~-J. Nafus
J. Ne ! son
M.Ne]son
_~-/~ B. Niccum
Z~/~ G.Palm
-~-~-~ M. Pa ] m
~//~T.Palm
Z_~,~G.Pederson
T.Rassmusen
~M.Savage
~---~-~K.Sippre]!
~-~--_~-__R.Stallman
.~Y~-T.Swenson
Z~z~W.Swenson
~-~-;/~E.Vanecek
.Wi I l isms
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
TOTAL MAINTENANCE FOR MONTH OF
J. ANDERSEN
~) G. ANDERSON
~,~ J. BABB
,~ D. BOYD
(%) D. BRYCE
//~ S. BRYCE
~,~ D. CARLSON
D J. CASEY
~, S. COLLINS
/.~. R. ENGELHART
~ S, ERICKSON
.~ P. FISK
. ,~ J. GARVAIS
~ D. GRADY
~ K, GRADY
. / C. HENDERSON
__~:~ r. HENRY
~ B, LANDSMAN
~ R. MARSCHKE
MEN ON DUTY
fO J. NAFUS
x/~ J. NELSON
O M. NELSON
___~ B. NICCUM
/ G. PALM
__~M. PALM
, ~ G. PEDERSON
~) T. RASMUSSEN '
~A M. SAVAGE
~. K. SIPPRELL
,_%~ R. STALLMAN
~ T. SWENSON
~. W. WILLIAMS
~. E. VANECEK
/~ R. WILLIAMS
~ T. WILLIAMS
~ //~ D. WOYTCKE
TOTAL blONTHLY HOURS
BOARD MEMBERS
David H Cochran. Chair
Greenwood
Tom Reese, Vice Chair
Mound
Douglas E. Babcock, Secretary
Spring Park
J. P. Boswinkel, Treasurer
Minnetonka Beach
Scott Cadson
Minnetrista
Albert (Bert) Foster
Deephaven
James N. Grathwol
Excelsior
JoEIlen L. Hurr
Orono
William A Johnstone
Uinnetonka
Duane Markus
Wayzata
George C. Owen
Victoria
Tom Penn
Tonka Bay
Robert Rascop
Shorewood
Robert E Slocum
Woodland
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 · WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEHONE 612473-7033
EUGENE R. STROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
JAN 5 1993
TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 4, 1993
FROM: TOM REESE, LMCD REPRESENTATIVE
SUBJECT: NOVEMBER/DECEMBER REPORT - LMCD
1.0 Eurasion Wi~tcrmilfoil Task Force,
1.1 The independent evaluation report required by the Lake
Management Plan was received this month. Evaluator was Robert Pierce, a
person of some experience in these matters. The report was generally
favorable toward the LMCD program and contained no unanticipated
information. Its recommendations will aid in the continuance and expansion
of the program.
1.2 Concern by the DNR on the manner of using ~uofidonc
(Sonar) to control EWM has resulted in the indefinite suspension of the
planned trial use in St Albans Bay. Three test enclosures in target lakes
where there exists an inventory of present species is the cu~ent Flan. There
is a chance that St Albans could be the site for one of these enclosures, but
tl-,is whole approach is suspect. This evaluation could extend the program
decision to as late as 1997. Delays of this nature do not Mt well with thc
various lake groups.
2.0 Lake Management Plan
2.1 Lake Access. Following the large, public difference of opinion
in how the access plan was being conducted, the committee regrouped and
is progressing in a more all inclusive manner. F~ur sub committees have
been formed to continue '..hz work. They are Steering, Access Siting,
/~.a'ements on Spaces, and Funding. Several meetings of these sub
committees are scheduled in an effort to move the ~ ork along.
2.2 The Shoreland Ordinances are nearing c,;mpletion. I ~m not
certain just where this stands.
2.3 The Biocentric study on l~e usage has i~cn received.
· 2.4 A Boating Safety program for lx~rsons convicted of major
boating violations has been established.
· 2.5 Work is underway in the establishing of a more comprehensive
manner of assessing water quality.
2.6 The DNR has drafted an interagency ag,'eement that se~s lLrth
the rules of dredging on thc l~tke. The rules as proposed seem lenient
enough, but they arc bom~d to c~u:~,2' some controversy.
3.0 Otber__G_~neral ll(/jn_2.s
3.1 Thc i;I;;a to study thc further reduction ii~ allowable boat noise
has been tabled until the 1993 boating season when empirical data can be
demonstrated.
3.2 The def'mition of navigable water is in the process of being
changed from 3 ft to 4 ft. This will have the effect of allowing docks to be
constructed under variance out still further into the lake.
3.3 The sunsetting of previously granted Special Density Permits
for multiple docks is under consideration. At present, it is possible to
obtain a multiple dock permit, and then not construct the docks for years,
and not pay any fees. In the meantime, the requirements could change.
3.4 Cochran has called a coordination meeting for Friday January
8th at 7:00AM. It is expected that all mayors and LMCD representatives
will attend.
4.0 Mound Specific Items
4.1 The Chapman Place variance was formally denied this month.
This seems to contradict some of the work of the Access Committee.
4.2 The non-conforming Parks Dept light on Priest Bay continues
to be used. The Parks and Open Space Commission initially indicated
strong support for control of light pollution. Mound was asked by the
LMCD to lead the way in this effort. I am disappointed that our light is
probably the most prominent offending one on the lake, and nothing has
been done. If the money cannot be found to change it, at least it could be
turned off. The lighting consultant that I supplied is aware of some less
costly altematives to capture the light beams by fixture angle and shrouding
tha[ought to be followed up. There are about 10 Minnetrista homes just
ac~ bss this narrow bay that have to look at that light through all hours of
da kness. We are not good neighbors in this regard.
~m Reese
Mound Representative - LMCD
cc. Gene Strommen
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Environment Committee
AGENDA
JAN ? 3993
8:00 am, Tuesday, January 12, 1993
LMCD Conference Room 160
Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata
Welcome and introductions, Chair JoEllen Hurr
Review of 11/10/92 minutes for additions or corrections
or accept as mailed.
Progress report on proposed ordinance prohibiting use of
non-encased molded expanded polystyrene flotation
material, per draft proposal of revisions to Orono
ordinance under consideration by LMCD Water Structures
Committee (per copy enclosed):
Trunk Highway 101/Grays Bay Bridge Replacement
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) proposed response
to MN DOT, with focus on outcome of public launch ramp:
Additional business recommended by the committee:
Informational note:
LMCD Board approved the committee recommendation that
cities and agencies enter into a one-year trial plan
to eliminate trash containers at their public access,
and engage in an education program to dispose of
trash properly. Communication to cities/agencies now
underway.
Other committee priorities addressing management plan
objectives are not ready for consideration at this
time.
7. Next meeting -- 8:00 am, Tuesday, February 9/
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Environment Committee
Minutes
8:00 am, Tuesday, November 10, 1992
LMCD Conference Room, Wayzata
Present:
Board members George Owen, Victoria; Dave Cochran,
Greenwood; Bob Rascop, Shorewood; Denis Bailey,
Hennepin County Lakes Improvement; Jay Blake,
Minnetrista; Fred Bruntjen, Excelsior; Carolyn
Dindorf, Hennepin Conservation District; Ellen
Klanderman, Tom Maple, Minnehaha Creek W~tershed
District; Consultant Bob Pierce; E~:ecutive
Director Gene Strommen, LMCD.
MINUTES. Owen opened the meeting in llurr's absence.
committee accepted the 10/13/92 minutes as mailed.
WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES REPORTS:
T h ~
a) Managing On-site Septic Systems -- Jay Blake, city
planner, reported that the city adopted final regulation~
for on-site septic systems. Minnetrista Ordinance #17~
was circulated. This ordinance governs a small section
on the lake from Kings Point Rd. to the Regional Park,
about ten homes on three acre lots. Blake added that the
western 2/3 of the community is also not served by sewer.
This is a ten-acre minimum rural development area.
Biennial septic system inspections are required.
New developments near the lake will be served by sanitary
sewer, including the Carlson and Pahl developments. The
entire area around the lake in Minnetrista will be
sewered, 100% of that east of Kings Poin[ Road. This
will bring the city into compliance with FCA rule~.
Blake noted there is evidence that sump pumps are being
pumped into sanitary sewers. Plans are to prohibit ~his.
Cochran questioned the inflow to Lake M~tonk~ [~om ~×
Mile Creek. Blake noted the SL. Paul Bible College
the area is now connected to sanitary sewer. Far~ are
now required to maintain a 50' buffer from the creek.
A local storm water management plan has riot yet been
developed. The practice of running storm wate~ down a
ditch to the lake is now being replaced by ponding
required for new developments.
b) Trash Containers -- A staff report on Lhe Flacemen~
Trash Containers at Public Lake Accesse~ ~a? [evie~ed by
the executive director. Staff recommend~±¢'n~
1) Survey cities and Ilennepin County in,.'i~Jng
information their annual trash hauling cost~
public accesses.
Environment Committee, Minutes, 11/10/92, F. 2
2) Invite response from cities and Hennepin County on
how they might view a one-year trial period during
which no trash containers would be placed at public
accesses.
3) In the event a trial period were acceptable to cities
and Hennepin County, arrange for access signsge to
enlist cooperation of lake users taking t~'~sh ~zith
them. Cities/county would monitor public cooperation
on at least a weekly basis to assure trash
accumulations do not occur and litter is removed.
4) Hennepin Parks is recognized as having a unique
arrangement, its public lake accesses contained
within a fully supervised park a~'ea. As 8 result it
may prefer to stay with its standard waste disposal
system.
5) Review the trial period results at the close of the
boating season for a determination on the prospect of
continuing the no-container program, or to reinstate
trash containers.
Retaining smaller 42 gallon trash containers at ~horeline
fishing areas and under bridges was recommended by
Bailey. County services the container~ frequently. The
committee agreed this helps control litter.
It was the committee's concensus that cities and llenneptn
County should be encouraged to remove trash containers
from public accesses on atrisl basis for one se~son, ond
that this removal be accomp~nied by ~]~ educ~tlonn].
campaign regarding proper waste disposal when using
public lake accesses.
c)
d)
Water Quality Goal -- no report at this time.
Independent Evaluation of Eurasian Wster Milfoil
Harvesting Program, Consultant Bob Pierce -- The
Executive Summary was reviewed by Pierce with attention
called to the various charts and graphs. The
questionaire results were also discussed. Pierce found
mixed responses ss people using the lake reported a great
experience, but found milfoil ae~thetic~311y unpleasing.
The people surveyed live on the lake '~nd ~,ere
contributors to' the " Save the Lake" EWM funding.
The Water Quality Report, included as sn appendi×, was
volunteered by Pierce as a significant addendum ~o the
evaluation. He found that much water quality information
on Lake Minneto~ka exists, but that 'it is.not well
organized, centralized or reasonably uccessible ~s a l~ke
management tool.
Environment Committee, 11/10/92, P. 3
Pierce concluded his remarks noting float weed hnrve:~ting
and use of more chemicals by lakeshor'e owners are not
desirable long-term goals for contro.l.ling EWe1. F~c, rce
optimistic that biological controls will evcntuully
provide a control compatible with maintaining 'the best
lake environment.
e)
Reduce/tie-up Phosphorus in Sediments to Frevent Use by
Aquatic Vegetation -- Maple reported that the ;'~CWD has a
capital improvement program in its 1~93 budget to ~ddress
this problem. Lake Langdon, Mound, i~ under
consideration. Other sediment problems are in Ferry
Pond, Maple Plain, and a pond in Excelsior behind the
Shorewood Yacht Club which drains into Lake ltinnetonka.
Monitoring the water quality before a~,,f ~fter trent,,ent
was recommended by Dindorf, Hennepin Conservation Dist.
f)
Wetland Survey -- Dindorf presented a digitized map of
Minnetrista and Orono/Excelsior Township area. Wetlands
down to one acre were identified. DHR goeu down to 2.5
acre for protected wetlands. Rascop suggested t],e cities
be provided a copy of the map to verify the data being
presented. He questioned some of the land use
designations, particularly in the Enchanted Island area.
Owen thanked Dindorf for the work done to date.
PUBLIC HEARING REPORT ON REGULATING UNPROTECTED FOLYT, TYRENE
FLOTATION MATERIAL FOR USE IN DOCKS, OTIIER WATER ~TRUCTURE~:
The committee reviewed provisions of an O~egon la~ zegul~ting
material used and a phase-out time. It iu specific on
conditions for encasement of foam material, with Frovii?i¢,ns
for making holes for attachment to structu~e~-. EeFlacement
of encasement which is damaged was discuzsed, Bailey
cautioned that the county would find it p~ohibitive %c, hove
to replace a buoy immediately upon having e::terior
The interior foam material from buoys gene~a].ly doe~ ,let
escape as fragments. Conditions under wh_!ct~ replacement
would be required will have to be specified. The committee
concurred with the Orono replacement time of 12/31/94.
MCWD NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE FOR PARTIES AFFECTEP III THEIR
PERMIT PROCESS. Maple reported this is u~,,J~ c,~,n:~i,Je: ntion
by the Board of Managers. It does expect to broaden the
manner in which notification is made on
MCWD COMMITTEE ON USE OF LAKE CHEMICALS WITIIaUT FERIIIT.
A committee is being established to address this issu~
according to Klanderman, meeting with DN~ .~nd L~CD
November 19. It is concerned about ti,is
NEXT MEETING is scheduled for Tuesday, Ja
Respectfully submit ted, i']ug~ne Strommcn, Executive Director
RECOMMENDED CH~GES TO 0RONO ORDINANCE REGULATING FOAM USE:
Styrofoam MOLDED EXPANDABLE POLYSTYRENE BEAD Dock Flotation
Prohibition. (Delete underline items, add items in CAPS)
Subd. 1 .
2)
3)
5)
Preamble. The City LMCD hereby determines that:
Disintegration of non-encased styrofoam MOLDED
EXPANDABLE POLYSTYRENE BEAD flotation blocks used in
docks, swimming platforms, buoys and other floating
structures in the City of Orono LAKE MINNETONKA has
led to the disintegrating particles washing up onto
THE LAKE SHORE shoreland in Orono in substantial and
unsightly quantities, endanKerinR DETRACTING FROM
the comfort and enjoyment of the affected property
owners. THIS HAS THREATENED THE LAKE ENVIRONMENT
AND CAUSED and causing environmental damage and
generally unsiKhtly undesirable public conditions.
Such disintegration is a natural characteristic
of the styrofoam described MOLDED EXPANDABLE
POLYSTYRENE BEAD MATERIAL when used for flotation
purposes, jn the City limits.
Such disintegration is accelerated by the actions of
aquatic animals and waterfowl and, in turn, WHICH
MAY constitute A a hazard to their well-being.
Additional health and safety concerns can occur
if such material is subject to EXTREME heat OR
FLAME, gasoline or other petroleum products, and
The use of non-encased styrofoam MOLDED
EXPANDABLE POLYSTYRENE BEAD MATERIAL for the purpose
mentioned above is PROHIBITED. ~ public nuisance
within the meaning of Orono City Code, Chapter 9,
Subsection 9.21.
Subd. 2. Definition. For the purpose of this §ectlon, Non-
encased styrofoam MOLDED EXPANDABLE POLYSTYRENE BEAD MATERIAL
means any brand of expanded polystyrene beads molded into a
block, sheet, billet or other shape which is not completely
encased in a permanent FULLY SEALED casing, coating or
container THE LIFE OF WHICH WILL AT LEAST EQUAL THE TIME THE
WATER STRUCTURE IS INTENDED FOR USE IN LAKE MINNETONKA. SUCH
CASING, COATING OR CONTAINER MUST BE capable of withstanding
action by ice or other elements, animals and normal activity
by users so that disintegration of the molded shapes into
smaller chunks or individual beads is prevented.
· Subd. 3. Use of Non-encased ~.t3rofoam MOLDED EXPANDABLE
POLYSTYRENE BEAD MATERIAL Prohibited.
A. It is a misdemeanor (or appropriate LMCD penalty) for any
person to use non-encased MOLDED EXPANDABLE etc
B. This ordinance shall apply to such uses after the
date of the adoption of this ordinance, except when
owners of such non-encased styrofoam MOLDED EXPANDABLE
POLYSTYRENE BEAD MATERIAL who are presently using them in
the City LAKE MINNETONKA for purposes forbidden
PROHIBITED by this ordinance FOR DOCKS AND FLOATING
PLATFORMS may continue to use them for such purposes in
existing structures currently containing them until
December 31, 1994. (RECONSIDER THIS DATE DEADLINE).
This exception does not include repair or replacement of
existing styrofoam MOLDED EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE BEAD
MATERIAL. BUOYS MADE OF MOLDED EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE BEAD
MATERIAL MAY CONTINUE IN USE FOR SUCH PURPOSES UNTIL
DECEMBER 31, 1997. IF A NEW BUOY IS INSTALLED IN LAKE
MINNETONKA IT MUST COMPLY WITH THIS ORDINANCE
IMMEDIATELY. A BUOY WHICH REQUIRES ANY REPAIR MUST BE
REPLACED WITH ENCASED PROTECTION DESCRIBED IN SUBD. 2 OR
WITH EXTRUDED CLOSED CELL FOAM OR OTHER NON-
DISINTEGRATING MATERIAL.
12/29/92
D R A F T
January 6, 1993
TO; MCWD Board of Managers
MnDOT
SUBJ: Trunk Highway 101/Grays Bay Causeway Boat Access
The issue of free public access by boat to Lake
Minnetonka has prompted a political controversy for over two
decades. Various positions have been taken over tha~ ~ime by
the State Legislature, the Governor's office, the DNR, the
Metropolitan Council, the LMCD, the MCWD, Hennepin Parks,
lakeshore cities, riparian owners, fishing lobbies, several
task forces, and others. In October, 1991, the I. MCD adopted
a Management Plan for Lake Minnetonka which was accepted by
the Metropolitan Council. The above stakeholders shared in
the development of that plan.
One major objective of the Management Plan was to
provide 700 parking spaces for cars and their tra'~.lers at
existing or new launch sites, and to environmentally upgrade
them. As the designated lead agency, the LMCD has formed a
task force with representatives of the stakeholders to
implement that objective. Progress to date includes
consensus on parking standards, and an inventory of existing
and planned sites, including a count of potential parking
spaces for car/trailer combina'b:i, ons. For the Grays Bay
Causeway our current inventory counts the 37 car/trailer
spaces and six single car spaces as agreed in the
Minnetonka/Wayzata settlement agreement.
-2-
LMCD POSITION:
'The LMCD requests that at a minimum the Site meet the
Parking Standards (which are enclosed) and contain no ].ess
than the parking count in the settlement agreement.
MnDOT alternative 1.B. appears to mee'b the minimum
acceptable solution to LMCD. We fu'rther urge the W~tershed
District and other agencies to seek solutions and designs
which would yield larger parking counts, while balancing
environmental impacts against the public benefi~ of access.
An increase in car/trailer parking would require some
increase in fill acreage. This would be a benefit to the
management goal provided that the need for flood storage be
either re-addressed or a satisfactory mitigation found.
Alternate 1.D or a comparable solution would be
beneficial and acceptable 'bo I..MCD if funding were available.
A historical background paper is enclosed to support our
position.
D R A F:' T
BACI/,GR(]UI:ID: GRAYS BAY CAUSEWAY BOA'F ACCESS
G I!:_' Iq E R A L H T S '1" 0 R ~ C A I... tF_' X C E R I:' T S
In 1982 the Governor,s offic;e appointed a 'task 'force to
fliake 'findiil!]S alid 'Pe(2(.3111fllel-!da-[;ioyi,s oil accec, sf~. O}le of illai'ly
COQC:IMSiOQS in tl'ieir report aclopted in May, 1983, iclen'bified
a I~eed 01'1 warm weel,.'.el'lds 1:'or more a(.'cess for "sma].l
boats" and that there ought to be 700 "reliable" parl..'.ing
spaces fo'r, ("ar/trailer (C/T) combina'bions at existing or
· future access. In February, ].9~3~ that task force adopted
resoZu~ion ~h~ch recognized 'bhe need 'for ~mproved expansion
of the Grays Bay causeway access as an ove'r'all public
benefit, meeting the needs of a regional constituency. The
'r'esolution u'r'ged Minnetonka~ Wayzata, 'bhe MCWD and o't;her
agencies -I;o al~p.r, ove a col'lcep'(; desigl-i il'lcorporatil'lg
task force recommen~atioi~s il~ the resolution. (See
A~;~achmen~ ~.)
In 1985 the Metropo].itan Council. forliled a task fo'cce '{;o
~ o o k a t t h e w h o ]. e s p e c t r u m o f L a k e M i n n e t o n k a m a n a g
i I'1C ~ U d i n g t h e a c c e s s i s s u e. 1' h e y 'r' e p o r t e (:l i n 1 9 8 6 b a c k 't; o
'bhe Iqe~;rol:)O].J. Cal.i Counei:l.,~ who made re(~omn)e~'ldatzions
Sta~e Execu~:i. ve Council. They conf:i, rmed the need for ti
C/T spaces~ al'id ca.[.ted 'for 'l;l'le I...HCD to become ~he lead agellcy
in managemen'~ of Lake Minlletol~ka and (:lire(:~-{;ed LI~ICI) to p'cepare
a Managemen.b I-:'lall.
- 2 -
'l'he Management PI. an 'for I...al.:.e I,linne't~orlka was developed
with the participation of the above cities and agencies and
adopted in (]etcher, 1991. One of the objectives of the plan
is to establ~.sh 700 reliable C/T parking at existing or
future access ramps. LMCD has subsequently formed a ~ask
force made up of all stakeholders to implement that goal.
CAUSEWAY HIS'I"ORY EXCERPTS
Hennepin County constructed the causeway in 1920 by
dredging. Considerable erosion of the area has taken place
since. In 1980 Hennepin Parks did a study of the access use
at the request of the ci'~;ies of Wayzata and Minnetonka. The
access was gene'ca].].y considered to be of REGIONAL
~IGNIFICANCE, and a candidate for improvemen'b- '1'he
study observed a maximum of 76 cars and 38 trailers at the
tha'b to
site on a w~.k~..nd I-~ennepin Parks took the position
serve "regional" needs, the site should accommodate a minimum
of 80 C/T combinations-
A 5/4/8J. memo to MCWD managers from its enginee'c cited a
4/29/81 meeting of concerned agencies. Of significance, the
engineer advised that the ])istrict Board of Managers
s~.~pported a 1980 concep~ plan by the City of Minne'bonka with
41 user spaces and 1200 cubic yards o'f 'l"ill below L. ake
Minnetonka 'flood level. (Attachmen'b B>
The MCWI) at. its ~./17/83 meeting approved a concept plan
nations and 55
pre.,~..~t~..d by MnDOf wl~ich prol:~OSed 48 C/T combi
single cars (computes to '75 equ:i, valent C/Ts) and
approxima'bely 20,00~] cub:i.c yards to be dredged and spoils
-3 -
D and E. Iqote tlqat Attachmelqt E refers to only 15,000 cub:i.c
y a r d ~. )
The cities of Minnetonka and Wayza'ba could not agree on
any devel, opmenb plan presented by MnDOT or others.. Therefore
in June, 1983, they appointed a three-person panel to sa, ek
resolution. TIq'ree separate 'repo'rts were issuecl (Sep'bembe'r
28, ].983; February, 1985; and June, 1985. l'o gain acceptance
by Wayzata, the final, report wa~;; sca.led down in parking count
and fill. area. (It is suggeste.~d '~hat these reports be read
by designers and implementing agencies for t.tseft.tl criteria.
LMCD has them on file.)
In mid 1986 the two cities reached a settlement;
agreement, which callCed for 37 C/T parking spacCes a~d six
c a r s.
DEC 1. 4 1992
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
12/11/92
TO:
Lake Access Task Force Spokespersons
and City/Agency Administrators
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Executive Director Gene Strommen
Task Force Report of 12/9/92 Meeting
Committee and Subcommittee Organization
Meeting Notices
The Lake Access Task Force report of 12/9/92 is enclosed
along with attachments to support the report. Please look it
over at your early convenience to familiarize yourself with
the proceedings as reported.
Committee/Subcommittees have been confirmed/established for
continuing the Task Force work as follows:
Steering Committee
Access Siting Subcommittee
Agreements on Car/Trailer Parking Spaces for
Cities/Agencies Subcommittee
Access Funding Subcommittee (to work with DNR)
If you did not sign up at the 12/9 Task Force meeting, please
telephone your committee/subcommittee preference{s) to the
LMCD Secretary Lisa Bird° 473-7033, at this time.
Meeting dates have been set as follows:
Steering Committee
7:00 pm, Tuesday~ December 29, LMCD Conference Rm.
Lake Access Task Force
7:00 pm, Wednesday, January 13, 1993
(Place to be confirmed, expect to be Mtka City Hall)
~ropose~ Meetinq (for those preparing to serve):
8:00 am, Friday, January 8, 1993
LMCD Conference Rm.
(please confirm your availability by calling 473-7033)
DEC 4 1992
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
December 11 1992
TO:
FROM:
Lake Access Task Force Participants
Task Force Chair Jim Grathwol
Executive Director Gene Strommen
SUBJECT:
Report on LMCD Lake Access Board,
Steering Committee and Task Force Actions
LMCD 12/2 BOARD ACTIONS ON THE TASK FORCE CHAIR SELECTION.
A letter from Orono Mayor Barbara Peterson on behalf of the
Orono Council asking for Task Force Chair Jim Grathwol's
removal as its chair was deliberated at length. Grathwol
acknowledged that his statement concerning the City of
Excelsior's position on not wanting a public access requires
more care on his part when talking about public access. He
also noted that the speed of acting on Task Force access
issues is a dilemma as to how fast is fast enough. After a
full range of public and board comments, the Board did affirm
that Grathwol should continue as chair by an 8 to 4 vote.
Chair Dave Cochran had Orono Board member JoEllen Hurr
present a letter to the Orono mayor and council at its 12/1
meeting. That letter outlined the Task Force progress to
date, but recognized Orono's concern with the chair's
service. Cochran offered in that letter to put Grathwol's
appointment to a secret ballot of the board. Cochran
requested that Orono city officials support the Task Force
following the board's decision on Grathwol. That decision
favored Grathwol.
Cochran followed with a response on 12/8 to the Orono mayor
and council regarding its 12/2 letter of concerns. Cochran
repeated the board's desire that the Orono mayor and council
continue in partnership with the multi-agency Lake Access
Task Force to complete the work which is now well underway,
much credit of which belongs to Orono officials.
LMCD BOARD ACTIONS ON TASK FORCE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The LMCD Lake Access Committee recommended approval of the
following Task Force Subcommittee recommendations subject to
Lake Access Task Force approval:
* Parking Standards, establishing criteria for c/t parking;
* Accept an inventory of 755 potential c/t parking spaces;
* Prepare an agreement through which cities/agencies will
identify car/trailer parking spaces which meet the Parking
Standards serving public accesses, with the goal of four
cities/agencies signing agreements by 4/15/93.
* Call a meeting of the Lake Access Task Force steering
Committee prior to the 12/9/92 Task Force meeting to
discus~ how to encourage cooperation and move forward with
LMCD REPORT TO THE LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE, 12/11/92, P2
the Task Force lake access objectives.
LAKE ACCESS STEERING COMMITTEE. A meeting of 12/8 reviewed
six resolutions prepared by the La~e Minnetonka Lakeshore
Owner's Association (LMLOA) Board. The resolutions addressed
concerns on conduct and role of its chair and the future
conduct of the Task Force. Two additional resolutions were
added by the Steering Committee, #7 and #8 which were offered
to the Task Force at its 12/9 meeting, being adopted as
follows:
1. That all actions of the Lake Access Task Force (LATF)
will be generated and coordinated through its
subcommittees for proper participation.
2. Each subcommittee will set a much more aggressive meeting
schedule so that the LATF can meet its goals.
3. Ail meetings, subcommittee or LATF, are considered public
meetings and all parties will be given at least seven (?)
days advance notice.
4. That the chairperson shall remove himself from his chair
position if he cannot go along with the Task Force goals
or effects the credibility of the Task Force.
5. The primary function of the chairperson will be to
organize and conduct meetings with the intent that all
points of view be heard. The chair or any member shall
not involve him/herself in stating a policy making
position on behalf of the LATF.
6. Major issues and goals shall be conducted under a "best
efforts" or concensus process. Procedural or business
issues may be conducted by Roberts Rules of Order.
7. A facilitator will serve at all LATF meetings and any
subcommittees as requested.
8. The current chairperson will continue.
Germanson presented an item he intended to present to the
Task Force in response to the Task Force agenda item of the
9/10/92 Subcommittee Supplemental Recommendations. Item "a"
calls for continuing the goal of 700 car/trailer spaces and
the allocation of those spaces by zone. An LMLOA set of
charts dealing with Boat Hours on Weekend Peak Use Days,
Shoreline Boat Storage, LMCD Shoreline Boat Count from '79 to
'92, and Boat Storage at Multiple Docks broken down by cities
and miles of shoreline served as the basis of a case LMLOA
suggests calls for a reduction of the 700 car/trailer parking
goal for Lake Minnetonka. The Steering Committee did not
discuss the report~ but acknowledged it as applicable to that
agenda item.
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE 12/9 MEETING ACTION ITEMS. Chair
Grathwol opened with a statement as to his understanding of
the responsibilities his roll as chair requires and
apologized for statements he has m~de which may have
misrepresented the Task Force.
LMCD REPORT TO THE TASK FORCE, 12/11/92, p. 3
STEERING COMMITTEE REPORT. The meeting then proceeded with
Facilitator Don Buckhout calling for the Steering Committee
report of 12/8 as relevant to recent issues raised concerning
the Task Force chair and operational procedures of the Task
Force. Committee Chair Bert Foster, Deephaven, presented the
concerns and resolution as recommended by the Steering
Committee, reported on P. 2. The Task Force reviewed the
report and accepted it and the eight resolutions as presented
by unanimous concensus.
PARKING INVENTORY. The inventory dated 10/5/92 which was
amended from the 9/10/92 Subcommittee report to reflect the
100 car/trailer spaces at the Hennepin Regional Park, from an
earlier count of 40 at W. Upper Lake and 28 at Halsteds Bay,
resulted in the discovery of addition errors in the columns.
The topic was tabled to correct the errors. It was later
reported that the Potential Certifiable c/t spaces should be
735, the Hennepin Regional Park total being amended by
agreement with the Park District and City of Minnetrista from
100 to 80 c/t spaces. The Additional Spaces Currently Used on
a Regular Basis to 2,000' was also corrected for Zone 5 to
total 101 and the Future Additional committed Spaces column
was reduced to 100 from 120 by the Regional Park change.
The Task Force accepted the inventory on a unanimous
concensus as a workable count for potential car/trailer
parking spaces, subject to meeting the adopted Parking
Standards, and subject to agreements with the cities/agencies
within which the existing public accesses are located.
DATA GAT}~ERING/STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE SUPPLEMENTAL
RECOMMENDATIONS OF 9/10/92. The following recommendations
were offered for approval to the Task Force:
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. Ail cities are urged to mare a concerted effort to
provide their shares of lake access car/trailer parking
spaces. The Subcommittee further encourages coordination
and cooperation among cities to meet zone goals.
LMLOA President Germanson presented data described earlier in
the Lake Access Steering Committee report concerning item
"a". LMLOA sees boat storage and use emanating from multiple
docks including marinas, along with lakeshore residents and
public access users as too great as allowed in the agreement
for 700 car/trailers for public access. LMLOA opposes
adopting the recommendation of continuing the goal of 700
car/trailer spaces. LMLOA legal counsel Chuck Dayton also
questioned as outdated a 1980 DNR Commissioner's order
establishing as a public access standard one boat per 20
acres of surface water.
LMCD REPORT TO THE LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE, 12/11/92, P4
Markell, DNR, pointed out that new boat density data for Lake
Minnetonka is now being assessed as a result of a 1992 study.
He confirmed that one c/t parki~g space for 20 acres of water
on lakes over 100 acres is still valid today. A 1:40 ratio
is used for out state lakes based upon normal use patterns.
Cochran pointed out that the 700 car/trailer parking
allowance is recognized in the Management Plan for Lake
Minnetonka. It is a basic.foundation for public lake access
which spans the 1983 and 1986 Task Force studies.
LMLOA stated concerns that public boat access will not be
reduced as lake use density increases. He proposed each
category -- marina/multiple docks, homeowners and public
accesses be balanced at 1/3 each. This could be done by
purchasing some marinas for public access as part of meeting
the current car/trailer parking access needs. He asked for
further study of this 700 car/trailer parking goal.
Kimball, DNR, pointed out that at a possible density of 2,000
boats representing a peak use may occur three to six times a
summer season under ideal conditions. Public access users
would actually provide about 1/3 of the use with 700 public
access car/trailer parking spaces.
Cochran and Carlson, Minnetrista, urged the Task Force look
at the practical considerations if a change were made to the
700 c/t goal. The Management Plan deals with the issue in a
spirit of fairness. Current a~d future LMCD board members
will be responsible for carrying out the Management Plan
accordingly.
Petit, Wayzata Council, concurred that a reactive posture by
LMCD doing its best as problems occur is advisable. He does
not believe reducing the 700 number solves the access
problem.
Because there was not concensus on adopting item "a" as
prepared by the subcommittee, the following amendment to item
"a" was proposed: "Continuing the goal of 700 car/trailer
spaces and the reasonable allocation of those spaces by zone
with a reduction considered among all access sources when the
growth of lake use density exceeds standards contained in the
Management Plan." "
However,. the LMLOA stated objections to this proposal.
group was unable to reach consensus on this proposal.
The
Germanson then proposed leaving the issue undecided and using
a formal mediation process to determine the appropriate c/t
parking space goal. This would include representer±yes of
lakeshore home owners, multiple/municipal dock owners/users
LMCD REPORT TO THE LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE, 12/11/92, P5
and public access users. However, some Task Force members
objected to this approach. The group failed to reach
concensus on the wording of item "a", it was agreed that
these three alternatives -- the original subcommittee
wording, the modified wording, and the mediation process
alternatives -- would be submitted to the LMCD Board for the
final decision.
ITEMS "b" AND "c" OF 9/10/92 SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS.
Item "b" was questioned by Kristi Stover, Shorewood Council.
An amendment was offered to revise the item to read:
" The current allocation and distribution of car/trailer
parking spaces for the lake does not correspond to allocation
goals and needs to be addressed." Group concensus accepted
this change, and to also accept Item "c" as recommended.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS. The Steering Committee
recommendations to establish the following subcommittees was
agreed upon by concensus, with Task Force members invited to
sign up for any and all the wish to serve on:
* Access Siting and Equitable Distribution
* Agreements on Car/Trailer Parking Spaces
* Access Funding (Working with DNR)
* Steering Committee
A Steering Committee meeting date was announced for 7:00 pm,
Tuesday, December 29, LMCD Conference Room 160, Norwest Bank
Bldg., Wayzata.
GUIDELINES/PROCEDURES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS. Buckhout advised
the necessity to establish specific guidelines, procedures
for future meetings. This will address important procedural
questions such as who the Task Force reports to, and to
review again who are the designated spokespersons. Buckhout
offered examples fro,, previous organizations to assist in
developing these guidelines.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS. The Model Parking Agreement was
recommended to be reviewed by the subcommittee for
presentation to the Task Force in 3anuary.
NEXT TASK FORCE MEETING. With the volume of business at
hand, it was agreed that the Task Force meet monthly. Wed.,
7:00 pm, January 13, 1993, meeting place to be confirmed, was
decided. At that meeting the Task Force will: 1) Review
subcommittee objectives; 2) Review the status of progress
toward those objectives; 3) Approve a draft of the model
parking agreement.
ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 pm.
pectfull~submit ted,
Eug~e R. Strommen, Execut±ve Director
L~L~
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
12/8/92
DEC 1 4
TO:
Mayor Barbara Peterson
Members of the Council
City of Orono
FROM: LMCD Chair Dave Cochra~~~ ~- ~
Progress made by the multiple-agency Lake Access Task Force
was highlighted in our memo of 12/1/92 presented to the
Council by LMCD board member JoEllen Hurr. As offered in
that memo, the continuing service of Jim Grathwol as chair of
the Task Force was submitted to the LMCD board for full
discussion.
As part of that discussion, the letter from Mayor Peterson on
behalf of the City Council was circulated among the board
members.
Certain points were raised in the letter which we believe
need clarification for our mutual understanding.
* The Council states that it is unclear as to the
relationship of the Task Force to the LMCD and its
Lake Access Committee. A multi-agency plan to ensure
availability of 700 reliable car/trailer parking
spaces is identified as a Management Plan policy.
The Task Force became this resource group based upon
the DNR recommendations made 1/16/92 to "implement
the public access siting process as called for in the
LMCD plan for management of Lake Minnetonka. The
task force will proceed immediately to meet the
plan's objectives." LMCD views this charge to the
Task Force as one of achieving designation of 700
car/trailer parking spaces around the entire lake,
meeting agreed-upon Parking Standards, which also
involves the possible siting of additional accesses.
The LMCD Lake Access Committee of the LMCD Board
serves to provide recommendations to the Task Force
chair as LMCD's representative. The Lake Access
Committee thus forms LMCD's position on the
Management Plan objectives for consideration by the
full Lake Access Task Force. The committee will have
as its agenda those aspects of the Management Plan
objectives and policies stated on pages 41-44. Its
agenda will not necessarily compete with, and at
times may parallel activities of the Task Force. For
example:
Mayor Peterson, Council Members, Orono, ~2/8/92, Page 2
* Widening and improving the. e~ficiency of
existing ramps ' ~ ~
* Optimizing the use of public lands for winter
access
* Facilitating handicapped access
* Examining water quality effects
* Determining aesthetic intrusions
* Minimizing effects on local traffic
These are some of the objectives which the LMCD would
address with recommendations to the Task Force as
necessary.
The LMCD agrees with the city that the Task Force is
to address "fair and equitable dispersion-
{distribution} of access points around the lake.
That was scheduled for the 10/21/92 Task Force
meeting and is re-scheduled for its 12/9/92 meeting.
The Council sees the Task Force study of car/trailer
parking spaces as a diversion from its responsibility
to study access ramps. Data Gathering and Standards
Subcommittee meetings in June both recommended the
need for identifying a car/trailer parking count.
This started in April as part of the Crappie Fishing
Tournament, and was extended as both a DNR and LMCD
staff responsibility to further develop. Council
member Sabbour contributed a valuable aerial photo
display as part of this data gathering. The
Car/Trailer Inventory Report of 10/5/92 totaling 755
potential car/trailer spaces is a result of this
effort. Access site explorations have been made on
a preliminary basis at two locations, Howards Point,
South Upper Lake, Shorewood and the former Mai Tai
Restaurant, Excelsior Bay, Excelsior.
The Council questions Jim Grathwol's "personal
agenda" regarding access ramps based upon the City o~
Excelsior opposing any car/trailer boat launch ramps
in Excelsior. Grathwol volunteered Excelsior City
Council public information while attending the
11/16/92 Orono Planning Commission meeting in
response to Chair Charlie Kelly's request to explain
the Excelsior City Council's position on public
accesses. The LMCD Board does not believe Mr.
Grathwol's expression of the Excelsior City Council
position on i'ts public access objections will
influence or determine the Task Force objectives.
Mayor Peterson, Council Members, Orono, 12/8/92~ Page 3
The Council asks that Jim Grathwol be replaced as
Task Force Chair and that an objective method of
screening out prejudices and pre-conceived
conclusions as to the Task Force activities be made
of a successor. The LMCD Board did hear a
constructive Task Force report earlier in its
business meeting of 12/2/92. That report, and a
thorough review of Mr. Grathwol's service as Task
Force chair, was concluded with a secret ballot to
determine if he should be re-appointed to continue in
that position. Council member Gabriel Jabbour and
LMCD Board Member JoEllen Hurr stated their
opposition to Mr. Grathwol's service. The Board
agreed by an 8 in favor, 4 against, vote that he
should continue to serve the Task Force as chair.
The Board continued to express its serious concerns
of the Orono City Council's position concerning Mr.
Grathwol's service. The Board agreed a Task Force
Steering Committee meeting would be scheduled for
7:00 pm, Tuesday, December 8, to address resolving
the manner in which the Task Force business shall
proceed with Mr. Grathwol as its chair.
Mr. Jabbour was added to this Steering Committee, as
well as Bert Foster, Deephaven. The Steering
Committee waS organized from persons volunteering to
serve on it in March, 1992. Other members are Don
Germanson, president, LMLOA; Doug Babcock, Spring
Park, and Lucille Crow, mayor, Excelsior.
The LMCD Board respectfully invites the Orono Mayor and City
Council to confirm a position that would allow it to continue
in partnership with the several agencies, organizations, and
cities in reaching a conclusion to the state call for fair
and balanced public access through boat launch ramps on Lake
Minnetonka. The LMCD Board reconfirms its pledge to
cooperate with the City of Orono in recognizing its concerns
for sharing the burden of access to the fullest extent
possible among all cities and agencies sharing access to Lake
Minnetonka.
Thank you for your open consideration of this important
responsibility shared by all the Lake cities.
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
December i, 1992
IEC'D DEC 1 1992
TO:
FROM:
Mayor Barbara Peterson
Members of the Council
City of Orono
/
LMCD Chair Dave C°chran..~,~j~~--~~vv~--
A multiple-agency Lake Access Task Force was formed in
cooperation with the MN DNR in January, 1992. It has moved
forward in meeting public access objectives as called for in
the L~CD Management Plan for Lake Min~etonka under the
leadership of Chair Jim Grathwol, Excelsior.
The Task Force formation was prompted in January by the
unexpected circumstances of a lakeshore property on Maxwell
Bay, Orono, being offered for sale to the MN DNR earlier in
1991.
This multi-agency cooperative effort has involved the
City of Orono, the remaining 13 Lake Minnetonka cities and
several public agencies and citizen organizations. The Task
Force goal is to implement the objectives for the public
access siting process as called for in the LMCD Management
Plan.
The initial Task Force meeting in March began the
process. Subcommittees dealing with Lake Access Standards,
Data Gathering and a Steering Committee were formed.
In April, DNR and LMCD staff met with city officials to
update lake access inventory data and acquaint themselves
with public access sites in cities where they are located.
An intern engaged by the LMCD conducted a detailed
measurement of on-street parking spaces extending to 2,000'
beyond each public access. From this information an
inventory was developed which subsequently identified 755
potential car/trailer parking spaces within 2,000' of
existing public accesses. These 755 spaces were not then,
nor have they yet, been examined in light of Parking
Standards developed by the Task Force subcommittees.
Concurrent with the car/trailer parking inventory, the
City of Orono, DNR and LMCD examined potential access site
options on Maxwell Bay. As a result, these three agencies
jointly submitted a grant request to the Legislative
Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) to fund a more
comprehensive public access on Maxwell Bay which would meet
City of Orono expectations. That grant request was favorably
acted upon by the LCMR in the amount of $944,000, subject to
1993 legislative approval.
Meetings of the Standards and Data Gathering
Subcommittee in 3une, 3uly, August and September resulted in
a Parking Standards recommendation for car/trailer parking.
The subcommittees also agreed upon the content of the
car/trailer parking inventory. Recommendations were also
proposed for Task Force consideration which:
LMCD Chair Dave Cochran,
a)
b)
c)
December 1, 1992, page~2
Affirmed the 700 car/trailer parking space goal,
allocating those spaces by zone.
Recognized that the distribution of car/trailer
parking spaces for the lake is not equitable.
Urged all cities to make an effort to provide their
share of lake access car/trailer parking space by
· coordination and cooperation among cities to meet
zone goals.
The Parking Standards for public access were adopted by
the Task Force at its October 21 meeting. It will meet again
December 9 to affirm the parking inventory, adopt a model
car/trailer parking agreement for cities/agencies, and
examine access distribution and its equitability among the 14
lake cities.
The purpose of the foregoing review is to identify the
Task Force progress for which Task Force Chair Jim Grathwol
has been responsible since January, 1992.
We are aware that some city council members question Jim
Grathwol's objectivity in dealing with the comprehensive Task
Force objectives. This question involves the City of
Excelsior passing a resolution in October stating that it
believes it has done more than its share of providing access
to Lake Minnetonka in ways other than an access ramp might
provide, and that the Excelsior City Council does not believe
its city should be considered a candidate for a public boat
launching site. Mr. Grathwol has expressed his
understanding of the city's position in this regard.
I am most favorably impressed by the Task Force
accomplishments to date. I also have full confidence in Jim
Grathwol's ability to continue his service as Task Force
chair. However, because the LMCD and MN DNR regard Orono's
cooperative role in the completion of the Management Plan
objectives for lake access significant to its successful
outcome, I will ask the LMCD Board at its Wednesday, December
2 Board meeting to either reaffirm Jim Grathwol as Task Force
Chair or that it consider a new chair to continue the Task
Force program.
I would then trust that the City of Orono would abide by
the LMCD Board's decision on the Task Force Chair. I would
further anticipate the City of Orono's active and cooperative
role on the Task Force, staying with the 13 Lake Minnetonka
Cities, agencies and citizens groups to continue the
important process assigned to this Task Force to achieve the
access objectives identified in the Management Plan for Lake
Minnetonka.
,-I 0
olo
o
~ ~ 0 ~0
~ 0
Z
0
LLI
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
· ·
·
·
·
·
u) '~3
· ,-~ o ~1
I- o .,~
0 '0 0 0
~ ~ 0 0
· ,-~0 4: '"~
DEC 1.. 4 199
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.
CI~44677
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 27 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 2 day of December , 1992__.
AT~E~T~
Douglas E. ~bcock, Secretary
David H. Cochran, Chairman
CI,~T, 44677
m ~
DEC 1 lgg2
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
900 E. Wayzata Blvd, Suite 160, Wayzata MN 55391
473-9708
L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE
JANUARY 1993
Friday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Monday
Tuesday
Thursday
Friday
Monday
Wednesday
8
9
12
13
18
19
21
22
25
27
Legal Holiday, Office Closed
Administrative Committee
3:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata
1993 Mayors' Priorities & Goals Preview
7:00 am,Lafayette Club, Minnetonka Beach
Water Structures Committee
7:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata
Environment Committee
8:00 am, LMCD Office, Wayzata
Lake Access Task Force
7:00 pm, Freshwater Biological
Institute, Navarre
Legal Holiday, Office Closed
Technical Review Committee
8:00 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata
Fee Study Subcommittee
3:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata
Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force
8:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata
Lake Use and Recreation Committee
4:30 pm, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata
LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting
7:30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall
12/29/92
DEC
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE
AGENDA
7:30 AM Saturday, January 9, 1993
Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E Wayzata Blvd, Rm 135
(Elevator handicapped access west entrance, Wayzata Blvd)
1. Staff recommendations for a proposed ordinance regarding use of
non-encased molded polystyrene foam as a dock flotation device
2. Subcommittee report on Facilities Licensed/Not Constructed -
recommending approval of the draft ordinance amending Sect. 2.05,
Special Density, Subd. 8, Renewals; with changes as noted
3. Draft Ordinance amending Sect. 1.07, Subd. 3 Length Variance; first
reading;
a. Chair suggestion to also amend Sect. 2.01, Subd. 2,a) paragraph
two, second sentence: change three feet to four feet from the
929.4' OHW; see code excerpt attached
4. Fees for New Multiple Dock License applicationsl staff
recommendation
5. Proposed amendment to Code Sect. 2.01, Subd. 3, Common Use of
Adjacent Dock Use Areas; staff report
6. Staff recommendation for definition of WSU measurement, amending
Resolution 76
7. Lake Minnetonka Dredging Joint Policy Statement between MN DNR,
MCWD and LMCD per 11/20/92 DNR outline on behalf of all agencies
8. DNR Permit application from Carlson Real Estate Co. to dredge a
navigation channel around a wetland in Minnetrista to provide lake
access to new development; staff report on dredging depths
exceeding proposed DNR/MCWD/LMCD policy
9. Hennepin County Regional Park - draft development plan with docks
and boat launch site, for information only
10. Additional business recommended by the committee
12/29/92
GENERAL FUND
Taxes
Intergovernmental
Business Licenses
Non-Business
Licenses and
Permits
Charges for
Services
Court Fines
Charges to Other
Departments
Other Revenue
tOTAL REVENUE
FIRE FUND
LIQUOR FUND
WATER FUND
SEWER FUND
DOCKS FUND
RECYCLING FUND
CEMETERY FUND
BUDGET
CITY OF MOUND
1992 BUDGET REVENUE REPORT
OCTOBER 1992
OCTOBER YTD
REVENUE REVENUE
83.33%
PER CENT
VARIANCE RECEIVED
1,188,250 0
820,900 3,432
3,260 40
593,661 594,589 49.96%
489,748 331,152 59.66%
3,169 91 97.21%
69,500 4,452
41,250 2,592
75,000 4,051
10,000 715
51,250 212
2,259,410
221,600 45,185
1,180,000 113,344
350,000 10,551
650,000 48,463
71,000 18
118,730 40,381
3,200 600
70,800 (1,300) 101.87%
13,056 28,194 31.65%
51,423 23,577 68.56%
13,570 (3,570) 135.70%
6,112 45,138 11.93%
15,494 1,241,539 1,017,871 54.95%
248,068 (26,468) 111.94%
978,671 201,329 82.94%
264,050 85,950 75.44%
520,192 129,808 80.03%
71,449 (449) 100.63%
77,474 41,256 65.25%
6,840 (3,640) 213.75%
12/08/92
G.B.
CITY OF MOUND
1992 BUDGET REPORT
EXPENDITURES
OCTOBER 1992
83.33%
BUDGET
OCTOBER YTD
EXPENSE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND
Council 67,280 2,814 52,820
Cable TV 1,380 132 980
City Manager/Clerk 166,790 18,149 139,479
Elections 14,800 761 5,626
Assessing 46,260 5 44,953
Finance 147,090 13,167 115,216
Computer 31,000 717 24,170
Legal 83,950 8,128 48,834
Police 744,890 79,156 633,125
Civil Defense 3,350 0 1,382
Planning/Inspections 127,000 11,802 122,292
Streets 402,900 41,630 332,139
Shop & Stores 20,180 1,364 10,515
City Property 90,150 24,177 84,572
Parks 132,990 15,051 116,640
Summer Recreation 31,610 0 9,894
Contingencies 20,000 1,058 10,840
Transfers 119,730 9,398 93,977
VARIANCE
14,460
400
27,311
9,174
1,307
31,874
6,830
35,116
111,765
1,968
4,708
70,761
9,665
5,578
16,350
21,716
9,160
25,753
PER CENT
EXPENDED
78.51%
71.01%
83.63%
38.01%
97.17%
78.33%
77.97%
58.17%
85.00%
41.25%
96.29%
82.44%
52.11%
93.81%
87.71%
31.30%
54.20%
78.49%
GENERAL FUND TOTAL 2,251,350 227,509 1,847,454 403,896 82.06%
Area Fire
Service Fund 221,600 16,724 163,258 58,342 73.67%
Liquor Fund 178,920 16,303 148,299 30,621 82.89%
Water Fund 353,060 22,807 296,019 57,041 83.84%
Sewer Fund 971,190 65,663 808,406 162,784 83.24%
Recycling Fund 100,900 8,249 78,404 22,496 77.70%
Cemetery Fund 4,230 916 3,792 438 89.65%
Docks Fund 46,850 1,275 32,175 14,675 68.68%
12/08/92
G.B.
GENERAL FUND
Taxes
Intergovernmental
Business Licenses
Non- Business
Licenses and
Permits
Charges for
Services
Court Fines
Charges to Other
Departments
Other Revenue
TOTAL REVENUE
CITY OF MOUND
1992 BUDGET REVENUE REPORT
NOVEMBER 1992
91.67%
NOVEMBER YTD PER CENT
BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCERECEIVED
1.188,250 0 591,802 596,448 49.80%
820,900 0 454,812 366,088 55.40%
3,260 5,546 8,715 (5,455) 267.33%
69,500 3,927 74,727 (5,227) 107.52%
41.250 0 13,023 28,227 31.57%
75,000 5,739 57,162 17,838 76.22%
10,000 1,834 15,404 (5,404) 154.04%
51,250 4,417 10,473 40,777 20.44%
2,259,410 21,463 1,226,118 1,033,292 54.27%
FIRE FUND
LIQUOR FUND
WATER FUND
SEWER FUND
DOCKS FUND
RECYCLING FUND
CEMETERYFUND
221,600 11,219 259,287 (37,687) 117.01%
1,180,000 95,448 1,082,967 97,033 91.78%
350,000 45,940 309,990 40,010 88.57%
650,000 52,908 584,375 65,625 89.90%
71.000 (5,720) 65,729 5,271 92.58%
118,730 3,527 81.001 37,729 68.22%
3,200 400 7,240 (4,040) 226.25%
12/15/92
G.B.
CITY OF MOUND
1992 BUDGET REPORT
EXPENDITURES
NOVEMBER 1992
91.67%
GENERAL FUND
Council
Cable TV
City Manager/Clerk
Elections
Assessing
Finance
Computer
Legal
Police
Civil Defense
Planning/Inspections
Streets
Shop & Stores
City Property
Parks
Summer Recreation
Contingencies
Transfers
GENERAL FUND TOTAL
Area Fire
Service Fund
Uquor Fund
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
Recycling Fund
Cemetery Fund
Docks Fund
NOVEMBER YTD
BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE
67,28O
1,380
166.790
14,800
46,260
147,090
31,000
83,950
744,890
3,35O
127 000
402 900
20 180
90 150
132 990
31 610
20 000
119 730
4,183
66
13,180
2,924
24
6,270
2,516
5,443
68,968
61
13,298
33,203
1,372
7,123
10,825
18,359
1 ,O35
9,398
2,251,350 198,248
PER CENT
VARIANCE EXPENDED
57,003
1,046
152,659
8,550
44,977
121,486
26 686
54 277
702 093
1 443
135 590
365 342
11 888
91 695
127 465
28 253
11 875
103 375
10,277
334
14,131
6.250
1 283
25 604
4 314
29 673
42 797
1 907
(8,590)
37,558
8,292
(1,545)
5,525
3,357
8.125
16,355
84.73%
75.80%
91.53%
57.77%
97.23%
82.59%
86.08%
64.65%
94.25%
43.07%
106.76%
90.68%
58.91%
101.71%
95.85%
89.38%
59.38%
86.34%
2,045,703 205,647 90.87%
221,600 21,991 198,671 22,929 89.65%
178,920 14,665 162,974 15,946 91.09%
353,060 29,344 325,363 27,697 92.16%
971,190 63,235 916,170 55,020 94.33%
100,900 10,068 88,472 12,428 87.68%
4,230 0 3,792 438 89.65%
46,850 336 32,511 14,339 69.39%
12/15/92
G.B.
10-Dec-92
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
AUGUST FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
INVESTMENTS
Balance:
Bought:
The following is the August investment activity:
August 1, 1992
Matured:
CP 3.84 Shearson
BA 3.88 Marquette
Balance: August 31, 1992
$6,248,816
(139,722)
(99,124)
$6,009,970
10-Dec-92
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SEPTEMBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
INVESTMENTS
Balance:
Bought:
The following is the September investment activity:
September 1, 1992
Matured:
CP 4.46 Marquette
CP 3.85 Shearson
Balance: September 30, 1992
$6,009,970
(199,638)
(199,954)
$5,610,378
10-Dec-92
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
OCTOBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
INVESTMENTS
Balance:
Bought:
Matured: CD 3.35
CP 3.35
The following is the October investment activity:
October 1, 1992
Marquette
Shearson
Balance: October 31, 1992
$5,610,378
(240,000)
(217,694)
$5,152,684
10-Dec-92
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
NOVEMBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
INVESTMENTS
The following is the November investment activity:
Balance: November 1, 1992
Bought:
CP 4.07
$5,152,684
Matured:
CP 3.37
TR 6.95
FICO 7.10
CMO
Shearson Due 01-08-93 497,833
Shearson
Dain
Dain
Merrill Lynch
(199,889)
(133,441)
(lOO,614)
(82,307)
Balance:
November 30, 1992
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THF.
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 14, 1992
Those present were: Geoff Michael, Frank Weiland, Michael Mueller,
Bill Voss, Jerry Clapsaddle, Mark Hanus, and Brian Johnson, City
Council Representative Liz Jensen, Building Official Jon
Sutherland, and Secretary Peggy James Bill Meyer was absent and
excused. ·
The following people were also in attendance: Debbie Balli, Reub
Hartman, John Oehlke, Bill Feehan, Mark Saliterman, Shelly Dorion,
Julie Lilledahl, Glenn Melena, Davey Taylor and Paul Larson.
MINUTES
The Planning Commission Minutes of November 23, 1992 were presented
for approval. Hanus referred to the first paragraph on page 5 and
commented he did not insinuate that because someone cannot afford
a permit that they should get special privileges, so he would like
that portion of the comment removed. What he was talking about was
that he does not think it is proper that because of a setback that
someone across the street is not subject to, that you should have
to incur a considerable cost such as for permits and frost footings
under a storage shed.
Paragraph one, page five, of the November 23, 1992 minutes were
changed by the Secretary as follows:
"Voss commented that Mound should not over-regulate. Hanus agreed
with Voss~ .
MOTION made by ross ~nd seconded by Weiland to approve
the Planning Commission Minutes of November 23, 1992 as
amended. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE 92-069: F_RANK & ANDREA AHRENS 4673 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE LOT 17
& I 2 OF 18 BLOCK I DEVON PID 30-117-23 22 0008. VARIANCE.
The Building Official reviewed the applicant,s request for a
variance to recognize an existing nonconforming detached accessory
structure in order to construct a conforming gazebo. The existing
nonconforming detached garage was granted a variance to be
constructed in its present location by Resolution #88-117.
The Current zoning code allows the proposed accessory building to
be located within 4' of the rear and side lot lines.
Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1992
The applicant has had their surveyor locate an existing sewer and
water easement on the survey since the original report was written.
It appears that the gazebo could meet the 4 foot side and rear yard
setbacks without encroaching onto the easement. The gazebo was
drawn on the revised survey by the applicant.
Staff recommended approval of the variance request to allow the
gazebo to be constructed with conforming setbacks.
The Building Official added a comment that the proposed zoning code
modifications and shoreland ordinance would require the gazebo meet
a 50 foot setback to the ordinary high water.
Mueller questioned the status of the existing shed. The applicant,
Andrea Ahrens, confirmed that the existing shed will be removed.
Mueller questioned the proposed floor elevation. Sutherland
confirmed that the floor will be elevated and will meet the minimum
requirement of 933.5 and the construction will meet code.
The commission discussed the issue that the proposed zoning code
modifications will require that the shed be setback 50 feet from
the ordinary high water. Mueller does not feel the Planning
Commission could deny the request, but would like the City Council
to consider this issue. Jensen pointed out that there is room on
the property for the shed to be placed 50' from the ordinary high
water and not be in conflict with the easement.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Voss to recommend
approval of the variance as recommended by staff with the
condition that the existinq shed is to be removed.
Motion carried ? to l. Those'in favor were: Clapsaddle,
Mueller, Johnson, Weiland, Michael, Hanus and Voss.
Jensen opposed.
Andrea Ahrens stated to the commission that if her property was
conforming she could construct the gazebo as proposed today, and
the reason her property is nonconforming is because a garage was
constructed in a nonconforming location with the City Council's
blessing.
CASE ~92-070: DAVE TAYLOR, 5991 RIDGEWOOD ROAD, LOT 14 & P/13 & 15,
BLOCK 6, THE HIGHLANDS, PID ~23-117-24 43 0028. VARIANCE.
The Building official reviewed the applicants request for a
variance to recognize an existing nonconforming accessory building
in order to construct a conforming addition to the principal
dwelling.
Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1992
The existing accessory structure in nonconforming dues to a .63
foot encroachment into the public right-of-way and a 2.8 foot side
yard setback. A 20 foot front yard and a 4 foot side yard setback
is required in the R-2 zone. This nonconformance was previously
recognized by Resolution $85-127.
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the request to recognize the nonconforming accessory structure
to allow construction of a conforming addition onto the principal
dwelling.
The Commission clarified with the applicant that a garage was added
onto the principal structure in 1986. Jensen questioned if it is
not time the nonconforming detached garage be removed. The
applicant would like to keep the detached garage. The Building
Official stated that the nonconforming building is a substantial
structure. Mueller commented on the drop in grade from the street
to the house and stated that it may be advantageous to the owner to
keep the garage as in winter months it may be difficult to get out
of the driveway with a vehicle from the principal structure.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Hanus to recommend
approval of the variance request as recommended by staff.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE ~92-071: BILL FEEHAN FOR HEADLINER'S BAR & GRILL, 5241
SHORELINE DRIVE~ LOTS 7 - 26, BLOCK 1~ SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT F~ PI[,
~13-117-24 34 0072. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING.
The Building Official reviewed the City Planners report on the
request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Class III Restaurant.
The proposed restaurant name is Headliner's Bar and Grill and is
proposed to be located in the shopping center adjacent to Jubilee
Foods in the space which was formerly used by Captain Billy's and
the Jock Club. Class III restaurants are defined as "liquor
service 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 must account for a
minimum of 50 percent of a restaurant's gross receipts on an annual
basis.',
In 1985 the City issued a conditional use permit to Captain Billy's
with a seating capacity of 157 people. The new proposal calls for
an operation which is very similar to the former use. The facility
will include dining room seating, a bar area, a dance floor, pool
tables and a game room. The proposed seating capacity is 154.
Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1992
The proposed use will require the issuance of a number of licenses
which must be approved by the Mound city Council.
In regards to land use, since the site was formerly used as a
restaurant/bar and apparently no major problems occurred, it is
reasonable to conclude that the proposed use is compatible with its
neighbors.
The shopping center requires a total of 143 parking spaces,
according to the Zoning Code, and the proposed restaurant will
require an addition 51 spaces. The shopping center has 158
existing parking spaces, therefore, a parking variance of 36 spaces
needs to be recognized. Unimproved, overflow parking exists
immediately east of the shopping center.
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the conditional use permit and parking variance for Headliner's
Bar and Grill.
Clapsaddle commented that the unimproved parking area should be
improved.
Michael referred to the Building Official's letter dated November
19, 1992 and the letter from Hennepin County Health Department
dated November 6, 1992 regarding code violations and compliance
requirements. Michael noted that a lot of the same correction
items were included in the 1985 resolution, and if these items were
not taken care of then, what kind of assurances do we have that
they will be taken care of this time? It was suggested that these
items could be included in the recommendation that compliance with
the health department's violations be required prior to the
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Mark Saliterman, owner of the building and half owner of the
proposed business, stated he will be in charge of administration
and since he has a major commitment in the business he will make
sure codes are complied with. He has already obtained the services
of a licensed mechanical contractor.
Mueller questioned how and who determined that 50 percent of gross
receipts accounts for food sales? And what happens if the food
sales only amounts to 20 percent?
Saliterman stated that they have removed dancing as use and this
may help in food sales. He cannot guarantee what the percentage of
food sales will be but they are spending money on kitchen
improvements because they plan to use it. Saliterman suggested
that the City review the food sales/operation after six months.
Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1992
Mueller suggested that the City Council address the fact that Bill
Feehan is noted as the "applicant,, on the application for
conditional use permit, and Mark Saliterman signed the form; who is
the responsible party and who should the permit be issued to.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing. There being no comments
from citizens present, Chair Michael closed the public hearing.
Clapsaddle questioned what the hardship is for the parking
variance. Voss questioned if more parking area could be paved.
Saliterman informed the Commission that there are bad soils in the
unimproved parking lot. Every year for the past three years they
have spread rock on the area and it sinks. Weiland commented that
there are underground springs in that area. Saliterman added that
when the shopping center was constructed it was required to have
larger than normal footings. It was noted that the shopping center
employees do park on the unimproved gravel parking area. Hanus
remarked that he believes the soil conditions constitutes a
practical difficulty for not improving the parking area and
provides reason to approve the parking space variance.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Weiland to
recommend approval of the ~onditional use permit as
recommended by staff, includ~ng the condition that all
code compliance items as stated in the Buildin
Official's letter dated November 19, 1992 and the letts~
from Hennspin County dated November 6, 1992 be complied
with and that the Building Official verify wit~ Hennepin
County that all conditions are complied with prior to any
occupancy. Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be heard by the City Council on January 12, 1992.
Commissioner Mueller was excused from the meeting.
~ASE ~92-072: NARK & JULIE LILLEDAHL, 3233 TUXEDO BLVD., LOTS 15,
~6 & 17, BLOCK 13, ~IPPLE. VACATE PORTION OF WINDSOR ROAD
PUBLIC HEARING.
The Building Official reviewed the City Engineer's report on the
request to vacate a portion of Windsor Road. The improved portion
of Windsor Road extends approximately seven (7) feet in front of
Lot 15, according to a survey for Lots 3 & 4, Block 18, Whipple.
Staff recommended to vacate only that portion of the Windsor Road
right-of-way adjacent to Lots 16 and 17, Block 13, Whipple. It was
also recommended that the City retain a minimum 20 foot wide
utility and drainage easement centered on the portion to be
vacated.
Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1992
The Building official further informed the Commission that the City
Engineer stated that this area has only a 5 percent grade,
therefore, it is possible to construct a street in this area.
However, there is no evident reason to retain the street.
Weiland confirmed with staff that if the vacation was approved
there are no surrounding properties that would be landlocked.
It was questioned what the advantage would be to vacate this
street. One advantage would be that the abutting property owners
would gain land.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing.
Glen Melena stated that he is not opposed to the street vacation,
however it may not be appropriate; he is concerned that if the Teal
Pointe development is approved the street may be needed in the
future to help with traffic. Hanus believes that this reduces
traffic when the street is not improved.
Rueb Hartman stated that he and Mrs. Robinson are opposed to the
street vacation, because once it is vacated, it is gone forever.
Paul Larson who owns lots 3 and 4 across the street is in favor of
the vacation.
The abutting owner to the south, Debbie Balli, stated that if the
street is vacated, she wants half.
The Building official noted that the applicant had constructed a
shed upon the right-of-way, however, the shed has since been moved,
and this action may have inspired the application. Clapsaddle and
Weiland both questioned if gaining property is a reason to vacate
a street? It was noted that the vacation will not correct any
nonconformity.
HOTION made by Voss, seconded by Clapsaddle to deny the
request to vacate a portion of Windsor Road as there is
an overriding public interest to retain the property.
Johnson commented that there is not need to retain the street and
he feels it would be a detriment to have another access onto the
already busy Tuxedo Blvd. Hanus does not see a benefit for the
City to retain the street. It was noted that the city currently
maintains the property and if a tree needs to be removed it is at
the expense of the City. Clapsaddle commented that if the street
were improved, traffic circulation could help the area.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 14, 1992
MOTION to deny carried $ to 2. Those in favor of denial
were: Clapsaddle, Weiland, MiChael, Voss and Jensen.
Hanus and Johnson were opposed.
The Secretary informed the applicant that the City Council will
discuss a date for a public hearing at their January 12,
meeting. 1992
,Z,,DSOR LOTS 3 .
WHIPPLE PID 25-117-24 21 0051. VARIANCE. 4 BLOCK IS
The Building Official reviewed the applicant,s request for a
setback variance of 10 feet to the required 30 foot front yard
setback in the R-3 zone. The subject lot is undeveloped and the
adjacent homes are also located less than the required 30 foot
setback.
The topography of the lot slopes towards the rear and getting the
house as close as possible to the front facilitates the
construction and placement of the house on the property.
Staff recommended approval of the 10 foot variance to the required
30 foot front yard setback in order to allow construction of anew
single family dwelling.
The Building Official added that if the proposed zoning code
modifications are adopted, the house would be conforming with a 20
foot front yard setback.
MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Hanus, to recommend
approval of the variance as recommended. The Planning
Commission finds that t~e proposed 20 foot front a
setback is consistent w~t +~_ __,_~ .... y rd
t ....... h ... --zg~ornooa and due to
ne topography oz the property it is more beneficial fo
c~nstru~t~on purposes to have the house
closer co the street. Motion carried unanimou;~
C_ITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE,S REPOR~
Liz Jensen reviewed the City Council meeting of November 24, 1992
and informed the Planning Commission that the Public Hearing on the
zoning code modifications and shoreland management ordinance has
been continued to January 26, 1993.
Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1992
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Johnson, to
adjourn the meeting at 9:33 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chair, Bill Meyer
Attest:
8
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF ~
MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
DECEMBER 10, 1992
Present were: Lyndelle Skoglund, Brian Asleson, Tom Casey, Shirley
Andersen, Marilyn Byrnes, Mo Mueller, Carolyn Schmidt, and Dock
Inspector Tom McCaffrey.
Andrea Ahrens and Tom Casey were absent and excused.
MINUTES
MOTION made by Skoglund, seconded by Byrnes to approve
the Park and Open Space Commission Minutes of November
12, 1992 as written. Motion carried unanimously.
~NTERVIEW CANDIDATES FOR COMMISSIOn,
The following candidates were interviewed for the vacancy on the
Park and Open Space Commission:
A. STEVEN KIRSHBAUM, 4590 DENBIGH ROAD
B. MARY MOTYKA, 1545 BLUEBIRD LANE
It was recognized that both of the applicants own property that
abuts public shoreline and they both obtain annual dock licenses
from the City.
PARK PROORAM ACTIVITIES FOR 1993
At the October Park Commission meeting, Jim Glasoe, Recreation
Coordinator for Community Services, requested ideas from the City
for special family-type activities that could be at the parks. It
was proposed that a subcommittee be formed to brainstorm for ideas.
Asleson, Byrnes and Schmidt volunteered for the subcommittee and
will meet to discuss possible activities, such as music in a park.
It was proposed that activities could be planned for parks other
than Mound Bay, such as Centerview, Swenson or Three Points. A
recommendation from the subcommittee should be forwarded to Jim
Glasoe at Community Services who coordinates the summer parks
program.
Park and Open Space Commission December 10, 1992
DISCUSS F~2IEILIT¥ OF TEST LIGHT AT HIG~!.~ND END PARK AS
RECOI~ENDED BY THE LMCD
A memorandum to the city Manager from the Parks Director regarding
the test light at Highland End Park was reviewed. The Commission
noted the total estimated cost to install the light of
approximately $1,800. It was the consensus of the Commission that
this expense was not budgeted for 1993 and that they would not
object to the testing of the light if there was no cost to the
city.
The Commission requested that the Parks Director write a letter to
Tom Reese informing him that the funds are not available at this
time to install the test light and that they do not object to the
testing if the cost were not so high.
It was suggested that the LMCD could provide choices for different
types of lights with varied costs.
PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION WORK RULE~
MOTION made by Asleson, seconded by schmidt to adopt the
Park and open Space Commission Work Rules with the
following amendments:
B.3. "Ail public hearings shall be held at thc city Hall
B.lS. ,,Motions can only be made by members recognized by
the Chair~ and the motions shall be initiated with
the phrase "I move that · · .".
Motion carried unanimously.
Schmidt requested that copies of the Work Rules be provided for the
Commissioners in plastic sleeves.
UPDATE ON NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS PLAN
chair Skoglund noted that the city Planner will be present at the
January meeting to discuss the plan.
Schmidt questioned why the Planner feels that an area adjacent to
park property cannot be designated as an NCA area. Some other
concerns were expressed, and these will be discussed with the
Planner in January.
Park and Open Space Commission
December 10, 1992
LMCD Re resentative,s Re crt and Meetin Minutes
Skoglund commented that it may not be necessary to copy all the
LMCD information for the all Commissioners as it results in a lot
of wasted paper. Byrnes stated that she feels it is important to
receive Tom Reese's monthly report, however, the information which
does not pertain to Mound may not be needed. Skoglund suggested
that one person receive a copy of all the LMCD information and that
person could share any relevant information that pertains to the
City of Mound.
Byrnes believes that Tom Reese should attend one meeting per year
to inform the Commission of current and future LMCD activities, and
to give the Commission an opportunity to discuss issues they are
concerned about.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Asleson, to have
staff supply the Commission with the LMC
Repre~entatlve,s report and only pertinent LMCD material~
pertaining to Mound in thei- ~--~-- .......
· . - w-v~.u~, ana provlae onl
the Chair with the entire -acka-e A, ........ ~
r . ~ v~. ~mum ml~u=es ana
other materials. Motion carried unanimously.
Dock Inspector,s Repor~
Tom commented that he is preparing to mail the dock application
forms for 1993.
~RANKIN~ OF CANDIDAT~
The operation of the ballot was reviewed and it was clarified that
the candidate which is the first choice should be given a 1, and
the second choice should be given a 2, the candidate with the least
amount of points is thence selected. Byrnes commented that both
candidates were very good.
Tom McCaffrey totaled the ballots, and the results were Steve
Kirshbaum with a 7 and Mary Motyka with 11, therefore Steve
Kirshbaum received the recommendation for appointment.
The Park and Open Space Commission meeting of December
10, 1992 adjourned at 8:47 p.m.
December 14, 1992
Ms. Joyce Nelson
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Dear Ms. Nelson,
This letter will confirm the meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Recycling Group (LMRG)
and Knutson Services on Friday, December 11, 1992. Our discussions affirmed the
LMRG stance for adjustments to existing reycling contract with mutual agreement being
reached on revenue sharing and collection fee revisions. The language to the
recycling contract shall be amended to read (the changes are in bold Italics):
Section 2. Payment
Fees paid for curbside recyling services will reflect an adjustment of $.10 for collection
in 1993 and $. 10 for collection in 1994.
EXHIBIT A
Curbside -
$1.80 per stop per month for weekly collection or $1.55 per
stop for bi. weekly collection during calendar year 1993 and
$1.90 per stop per month for weekly collection or $1.65 per
stop for bi-weekly collection during calendar year 1994.
Section 4. Revenue Sharing
Revenue sharing will be continued with section A and B being modified to read:
A. Knutson will pay to the City, on a monthly basis, 2/3 of the
exceeded ULSM price listed below.
GARBAGE and RECYCLING COLLECTIONS
Since 1961
Pdnted on recycled paper with soy ink. · An Equal Opportunity Employer
Newspaper- loose, unbaled
Cardboard- loose, unbaled
Glass - mixed, unsorted
Cans . mixed, unsorted
'Plastic bottles . mixed, unsorted
ULSM PRICE PER TON
$15.00
$ 20.00
$ $0.00
$570. O0
$ 36.00
B. Negative ULSM: Occurs when the ULSM is below zero (unsorted
plastic bottles shall commence at a negative $.075.) resulting
in Knutson having to pay for the disposal of the material. The City will pay
to Knutson 2/3 of the material disposal fees on a monthly basis. The City
reserves the right to require collected materials to be delivered to a
location within the seven county metro area specified by the City.
C.- D.(language unchanged)
The provisions to Section 4 will take effect retroactively to July 1, 1992.
The above adjustments are emblematic of the positive working relationship between
Hennepin County, the Cities of the LMRG, and Knutson Services. It will allow for
continuation of the exceptional recycling programs that have been developed.
Knutson Services appreciates your consideration in these matters and assures that
your service expectations will be exceeded.
Respectfully,
Mark Heieren
Sales Manager
cc: Paul Kroenig - Hennepin County Recycling D.F. "Wally" Wall- General Manager- CFO
Dan Schermann - Knutson Material Recovery Facility
Crossroads To Service
DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX AND PUBLIC RECORDS
A607 Government Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0067
December 9, 1992
~[c'o DEC 1 1 19~
Francene C. Clark-Leisinger, Clerk
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Dear Ms. Clark-Leisinger:
Enclosed is a copy of Hennepin County Resolution No. 92-10-417R1 which was
approved by the County Board on October 27, 1992. This resolution revises the
county's review and evaluation process of new tax increment financing plans
being proposed by cities.
Please communicate to each member of your city council. A copy of the
resolution has also been sent to each HRA director in the county. Questions on
this issue may be directed to me at 348-5668.
Sincerely,
Patrick H. O'Connor, Director
Property Tax and Public Records
Gerald W. Pahl, Manager
Administrative Support Division
PHO:GWP:sw
Enclosure
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal opportunity employer
I
01,t03
RESOLUTION NO.
92-tO-917R1
The following resolution was offered by the Ways and Means Co~Lmittee:
WHEREAS, 9.6 percent of the Hennepin County tax base will be captured in
1993 by tax increment financing districts in the county, thereby increasing the
county tax rates that property taxpayers must pay for essential or mandated
county services; and
WHEREAS, tax increment collections are projected to increase from $115
million in 1992 to $130 million in 1993 and will not decrease significantly until
the year 2009; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Tax Increment Act provides an opportunity for the
· County Board of Commissioners to review and comment on any proposed tax increment
financing district, including the opportunity to meet with-the tax increment.
authority and present the Board's views at the required public hearing on the
matter; and
WHEREAS, additional tax increment districts will likely be created in the-
county in the Future;
8E IT RESOLVED, that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners reaffirms
its preference that:
1. Cities use tax increment as a financing tool of last resort, targeting
public assistance to renewal and redevelopment projects of greatest need
and lower income housing projects of demonstrated need.
o
Existing tax increment districts and those created in the Future should be
completed and terminated in the shortest time possible, thereby increasing
the tax base of the city, school district and county.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that county staff is directed to review and
evaluate the tax increment financing plan for each new proposed district or
modification to an existing district and prepare a report for the County Board.
The report should briefly explain the proposed action, indicate the potential
fiscal and economic impact on the county and recommend whether or not the County
Board should present comments at the public hearing on the plan. Copies of the
report will be sent to the school districts, municipalities and other taxing
authorities involved in the proposal.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to e'ach
City council and the governing body of each authority with tax increment approval
powers in Hennepin County. This Resolution supersedes Resolution No. 80-8-729R
approved 8/26/80. '
OCT 2 '7 1992TM
'RESOLUTION NO.
92-Lo-gL7 R1 (Cont.)
The question was on the adoption of the resolution, and there were
~even YEAS and No NAYS as follows:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
YEA NA~ OTHER
Peter McLaughlin
Randy Johnson _X..
· John Keefe x
Tad Jude
Judy Makowske
Mark Andrew
John E. Derus, Chairman
RESOLUT I ON ADOPTED~_~_~_~. ~
ATTEST: C1 erk-of(~he
December 4, 1992
Dear Mayor:
National
League
of
Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20004
(202) 626-3000
Fax: (202) 626-3043
DEC
Officers
G,eqaa E Hood
S"arpe James
Do~'a[a g Borut
I am writing as the new President of the National League of
Cities to ask for your assistance in shaping a national economic
recovery program that would provide immediate stimulus with long
term economic benefits to your local and our national economy.
Last week, delegates to the Congress of Cities adopted the
enclosed NLC economic recovery plan in New Orleans. It calls for
a focused stimulus package to be enacted by the administration
and new Congress in the first 100 days to set the nation on a
path of economic recovery as part of an overall plan to reorder
federal budget priorities. In order for the plan to be
successful, it must rely on tried and tested programs and
existing delivery systems that can produce the most efficient
action and results in our cities and towns. We are convinced
that local governments are the-key to effective implementation of
any national strategy to get the economy moving again.
The NLC Board of Directors discussed our proposal with former
mayor and former NLC President Henry Cisneros of Governor
Clinton,s transition board and Gene Sperling, the transition
team's deputy economic advisor, in New Orleans before taking
action on it. Mr. Sperling described the plan as "very
thoughtful.,, He said that the transition team is on a fast
track, so that the more specific the information and examples we
can provide about our recommendations, the more helpful it would
be in shaping a final plan for President-elect Clinton to present
as early as next month.
Mr. Sperling asked, for instance, if there were certain types of
infrastructure spending which could be implemented more rapidly
than others, but provide long term economic benefits. He asked
what types of expenditures among our recommendations could result
in new jobs in our cities within a very short time period, but
would ensure long term economic benefits.
PaSt Presidents: Tom eradley, Mayor Los Ange,es Ca,torq,a ·Ferd L. Harrison, Mayor ScolJano Neck Nor? Carohna · Cathy Reynolds, Counc;iwoma=.at Large De'~er C3 :'acc · Directors:
D. Burney, Jr., Mayor Augus!a Marne ·Jon C. Burrell, E.~ec~t,ve D~'ector Mary~ang Munic,Dai League · Patricia Castillo, ?ayo, Suqny~ale Ca ic.~ a * Peso Chavez,
N~ Me~:cc · ~ D. ~le, Mayor 5eaveqon O,ego~ · ~hn G. Cu~n, C,%, Co.nc, Pres~oent Rochester N~ York · ~th ~lls D~is, A]derma~ E.a~slo~, ~:,,r,o,s · Thomas G Fi~immons,
Southflera M~cmgan . Charles K. H~ama, Mayo, Rognes~e- '.' ?'ese:a · William Ja~ckl, Execulwe D~rector Assoc,atron 3' ~aho Cit,es · ~w~nce J, Kelly, Mayo, Da,::-a
· Bob Knight, Mayo- W~chr;a Kansas · Chrtslophe~ G. ~k~, Exec.~we g ,ec~o~ Marne Mumc~pai Assoc,ahon · Ga~ Markenson, Execut,~e g,'ector M~ssour, M.'~rc ~a ~ea;.e · Jeffrey
J Rillalline R Wllkins, Coo~c,'woman Muskego~ He,g-~s ~J g-: ia~ . Alice K. Wolf, Ma~or Camb,:~:]e. Massachusetts · Robe~ G. ~ung, Jr., '.'ayor Henaers?
Page Two
December 4, 1992
We were very fortunate to have had the opportunity to meet with
the key transition team members and have input in this process.
To take advantage and to make an effective presentation to the
new Congress, we will need to act swiftly.
Consequently, I would ask you to write a letter of support for
our proposals to both President-elect clinton and to your U.S.
Representatiwe and two Senators. Your letter will be most
effective if you can provide specific examples of new investments
this plan could mean for your community, how many jobs these
investments might create, how quickly, and how that would improve
your local economy.
Please send a copy of your letter to your state municipal league
director, so that the leagues can help us coordinate our efforts
with each state Congressional delegation and to me at NLC
headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Recognizing that cities have their own unique needs for their
neighborhoods and communities, we in Minneapolis have a number of
examples which we believe will enhance the quality of life and
neighborhood livability of our city. Examples of this in
Minneapolis include construction or rehab of day care and
preschool and park facilities which will meet the long term needs
of children and families. An adjunct jobs programs would assist
in the staffing of these and other programs.
We have a unique opportunity and a responsibility as leaders to
be a part of effecting changes in our country. I look forward to
this chance to work both with you and the new administration and
Congress in contributing. Thank you in advance for your help.
sincerely,
Donald M. Fraser
President
Mayor of Minneapolis
Enclosure
A supplemental appropriation of $2.5 billion to ensnre full funding of the
nation's new highway and public transportation laws this fiscal year. An
immediate announcenle,~t Mil enable states and local governments to designate
the most critical projecls, so they will be ready fOr coustroction immediately
upon enactment, and so that any funds not oblighted within six months' would
revert lo the federal Treasury. ' -
Would your city have eligible, ready-to-go projects i. f the new administration and
Congress acted on this proposal immediately ? What kit~ds of eligible projects couM provide
the quickest new employment., construction or maintenance, for instance ? How wouM any
examples you have really provide long term ec'ommfic benefits? Or are environmental
challenges and the fi'deral regtdatory requirements under the sut.7'bce transportation` law' so
cumbersome that, as the Wall Street Journal estimates, il wouM take over a year before pou
couM actually spend uny o./'thi.v arh[itiot~ct/ money in your communiO, on meaningful, eligible
transportation projects ? ' - ~
A streamlined version of the vetoed urban aid iax bill that will proVide'immediate
assislance Io lhe nation's cilies and lowns. Key compoqeitts of the legislation
should be: pernlanenlly reauthorizing lhe expired municipal lax programs;
crealing the dislressed cities flexible block graul and national pnblic-private block
grant programs; crealiug urban aud rural enlerprise zones; providing all
dislressed commuuilies Mth aulhority to issue municipal economic developmenl
bonds; offerhlg ince,llives 1o leverage bank inveslnleuls iu ommumtles; a'nd
simplifying lhe cosily reslriclions oil municipal bond aulhorilY.
Does your ciO, have either tax-~5¥el~lDt 177otTgage revenue or small issue industrial
development bonds ready to go to nlclrkel that have been put on hold since municipal
authority to issue expired last June ? If so, hciw qu'ickfy cou[~l those' bonds 'be 'ix~Ud(l, how
many jobs wouM they create in a short time frame, and what 'kind of long term benefits
wouM they bring to your coliiilltlllio~ ? If eifl~er the exist[l!g arbitrOge restrict;ohs Or
disincentives for local banks m pttrcha.ve )'oltr traditional 'public pt,'Pose bon"ds were eased,
how would you use the .~'avittgx to bemJit yoltr local ec'onol~?y ? Were there other changes in
the vetoed tax bill lhat would huve nteattt imrnedi(tte and poxitive opportunities.for 3'our {'iix' .'
sa- $3 billion in oue-time snppleulental fuuding for lite Commnnity Development
Block Grant (CDBG) progran~ to be obligated by' September 30, 1993, ~vilh $1
billiou targeled to children under the age of six. This family intervention block
grant should be the first step in lhe crealion of a new childreu's human
investment Il'IISI. Il could be used to complement a fully-fqnded Head Starl
program.
"~ if the amount of CDBG fun-ding You receNed'in i992 Were' ~t°ubi¢d '~"~ou'~c'~i~i~':'''
spend two-thirds o.f the new and aqditiomll funding for a];y ~elig[bie CD. BG purpose and one-
third fi~r any purpose directly ?elated to helping ch'ildren under the~,age'~f six, what kinds of
projects couM you imph, ment the most quickly? 'Are there priority housing or infra~tr~tu're''-'''
projects on the shelf in your city just held up for htck. of fundin~ ? .W. ould.regu(~{q.~, of legal,,
changes be required !n order to be able to move rtlpid, ly. ahead?.. .
$1 billion in supplemental funding for'the 1993 summer youthe~p!oyment
program so that every community has a partnership program wit, h~loqal
businesses in place well before the school year ends.
if your conlmtlnity received the .willie amount oJ'supplenlental summer youth,., ;,:.
unemployment filnds a.s' laxt .~'unlnlt'r, but's;'ell in advance of the. day your scho~lx l~t hut.this.
time, how many jobs wot/Id that c,'e,tte ? What kind eV'j°b.~· would that create"-.W°hld(he,be.·
jobs provide training or./ill/leeds in.vottr cmnmtmity l/la/ would translate into long., te~ ,...
hem/fi/x? Can ynu prqje('t Ifil/Il percent t)l' /low many o['thoxe eligible in your ci~ can be.
employed at the curl'ent ./itndi/Ig /eve/?
,'..} ','~' .
$5~ aillion'in snpplemenlal funding to provide incentives for commun~ ... .....
developmenl banks and bank-run Community development corporations to make
comaunily reinveslmenl loans for job ~realing pri~ate investment in a~!
dislr~ed commu nil les
~e new federal banking law authorizes a so-called greenhmng prov~smn;Wh]ch
provides an economic incentive to encourage banks ~o make loans in low in'°me 6~' minority
neighborhoods by l~rmitting a credit against its required t~derai deposit iasu~aqce Premmm,
but Congress has not funded this provision, l[' i/ wcre.limd~td, do you thihk yo~? lo~'al'bank
cur,','.t/y ,',,,,,n,e,',.'i,,/ ,,r m,,rt, .xe 'those
your ci~ ? What kinds q/' Ioan.~' wot,hi in Iow income or mim, rity neighbOr~d~ '~n ~ur ci~
would have the earliest, poxitive impact? ..
Enaclmenl of lhe l,ocal Pa~lnership Act, providing $3 billion. in emergency fu'n~"
to the nation's cilies and towns lo initiate ready-to-go capital projects, ~pec~l!y
for unfunded fe(leral nmndales, such as Ihose reqnlred by the federal Cle~n.
Water Acl. This initialive should require lhat any funds not obligated by.
September 30, 1993, reve,t lo a federal infrastructure revolving I°an fund.
This proposal, passed last year by the House Government Operations'c0mmi~iee,'¢u'i '
never acted on by the full House, would provide flexible funding directly to n.early.ev~ city,
and town just like the old General Revenue Sharing program.. What projects, ~spacially
public wo&~' ~pe p/'t~et't.~' or p/'~ects to comply with uq/imded fi, deral mandete~,.,~ou~ your
ci~ be ready to begin work on most rapidly ? How many new jobs -. both for q~t~ruqt~on
and long te~ - wmt/d those e.rtm~)~h'.~' /n('(/n t~, ),ottr community.? .
These six economic stimulus priorities reflect programs and local development projects which
we think are ready to move. We believe the better the information and examples of these
from the local level that we can provide to the Clinton transition team and the Congressional
leadership, the more effectively we can promote prompt action at the national level to ensure
the most rapid increase in jobs at the local level that would stimulate long term economic
benefits.
SHERIFF
DON OMODT
REC'D DEC 2 3 1992
6 COURTHOUSE
(612) 348-3744
~ce~er 21, 1992
Fire Chief Don Bryce
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
5341 Maywood Road
Mound MN 55364
Dear Chief Bryce:
On behalf of Sheriff Don Omodt and the members of the Sheriff's Water
Patrol, I would like to extend our sincere and deep appreciation to the
members of your fire department for their outstanding assistance during
the ice rescue on Saturday, December 19th, 1992, in Smith's Bay of Lake
Minnetonka. Both of our departments - as well as Orono Police and Long
Lake Fire - responded to a snowmobiler through the ice. It was later
determined that this was approximately 3/4's of a mile offshore - in a
very thin area of ice - in the large part of the lake. Deputies from
our department were able to quickly get out to the victim, but due to
the size of the victim and the great difficulty of the ice conditions,
they were not able to bring the victim - who was in a water rescue
basket - onto stable ice for transportation to shore. Members of your
fire department quickly responded and were able to assist our deputies
in the safe removal of this victim to shore, and an awaiting air
ambulance.
In particular note are four individuals. Unfortunately I do not have
the names of your two firefighters who were in the cold water rescue
suits, who put themselves at great risk to assist our deputies in
rescuing this person. Our deputies have informed me that they could
not have possibly performed this rescue without the skilled help of
your firefighters in their cold water suits.
continued next page .......
Minn Stat. 387.03 "The sheriff shall keep and preserve the peace of his county..."
D~cember 21, 1992 - letter
~OUND FIRE CHIEF BRYCE
Page 2
I would like to commend Brett Niccum and Murray Sinner, for unselfishly
providing their assistance with snowmobiles. Both these individuals-
at great risk to themselves - helped transport our personnel, other
rescuers, and eventually the victim, to safety. They put themselves at
great ri~k without the initial protection of a life savin device
assist with this rescue. Of ~ar~-,,~ .... ~ ....... g - to
. ~ ~aL ~,uue were zrom our ~wo deputies
who first performed this rescue. They stated if it had not been for
firefighters Niccum and Sinner,. they could not have been h sic
able to get across the ~reat d--~ ..... ~ ~ ......... P y . ally
. = ~.,~= u~ ~ue uo ~e victim, without
physically exhausting themselves, which would have not have allowed for
such a prompt rescue.
I would like to commend all the members of your fire department who
responded and assisted at this call. I would also like to commend you
and your department for your willingness to work with our division for
water rescue training. Having all rescuers at the same training
level; who have trained with the same equipment; and knowing each
other's capabilities, made this rescue a tremendous success. I would
like you to commend your department in the spirit of cooperation that
exists between our agencies.
Sincerely,
DON OMODT, SHERIFF
_B~ .C_a_p.~ain Larry Peterson
Sheriff's Water Patrol
CC'
Inspeg~r_kostle
WJC/now
BELSER.WTR
4901 Manitou Road, Tonka Bay, l~,~,innesota 55331 (612) 474-7994
FAX 474-(-)538
January 4, 1993
JAN 6 19 3
Honorable Skip Johnson
Mayor, City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364-1687
Dear Public official:
Many communities recently received notice from the
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) that their
wastewater charges for 1993 will be increasing. The MWCC
currently serves 105 metro municipalities, including 13 in the
Lake Minnetonka area. As you can see from the attached
spreadsheet, Lake Minnetonka area communities have taken the
brunt of the latest increases. For example, Minnetrista's
rates will be increasing 78%, Wayzata's 60%, Tonka Bay's 54%,
Shorewood's 47% and spring Park's 46%. Our area has the
distinction of having five of the six largest percentage
increases of all 105 metro communities for 1993. In addition,
many of these same communities have received notice that their
1994 rates are expected to increase 60% or more.
We should all be outraged that the MWCC has, without
justification, dumped additional costs onto our communities
leaving us no choice but to pass along these outrageous
increases to our residents.
This fall. two meetings were held among our cities to discuss
. ' 'ses similar inflow and infiltration problems and
the lncre~ ~ -- --~at each city was doing to address these
update each ~ne~w~..~o~ ~enresentatives from MWCC to
roblems, we a~u .~,,*~_ ~L~ ..... ~e~ flow measuring
~xplain their cost alloca=lon ~nu -~ ....... r
methods.
The cities of Shorewood and Tonka Bay are both contesting the
MWCC's wastewater flow estimates and I hope other cities in
similar situations are pursuing this matter and not simply
accepting their estimates and sending a monthly check.
Part of the problem with the MWCC is that we do not believe
their wastewater flow estimates are accurate, thus we are
providing more than our fair share of revenue and directly
subsidizing the rest of the system. However, the purpose of
this letter is to focus on the other side of the ledger, i.e.
excessive qrowth in staff and spendinq which also results in
increased sewer charges levied by the h6CC against all cities.
Page Two
January 4, 1993
Enclosed you will find excerpts from the MWCC's 1993 Summary
Budget. You will notice that the MWCC is planning to hire a large
number of staff in 1993, bringing the total number of employees to
1,195. With increases in staff come increases in benefits and
equipment needed for the new employees, further magnifying the
costs. The total increase in employee salaries for 1993 is 5%.
Employee benefits are increasing 13%. Does the MWCC realize the
tough economic times that our entire nation is going through?
While cities are forced to cut budgets, MWCC staffing and spending
continue to grow at an alarming rate. The 1992 Stanton Salary
Survey indicates that many MWCC jobs have the highest pay and
benefits of any comparable government jobs in the Twin Cities.
Why? The MWCC has no accountability to its cities and their
constituents. Have you ever seen MWCC employees driving anything
but brand new vehicles? Our experience tells us no. Why? Here
again, lack of accountability. Why should the MWCC try to stretch
their (our) dollars as far as they can when no one is overseeing
them and holding them responsible for their spending decisions.
We all talk about reducing costs and increasing efficiencies. What
incentive does the MWCC have to achieve these two goals?
Something in this system is failing and it is about time that, on
behalf of our residents, we do something to address it. The 1993
budget has been adopted, however, now is the time for us to make
our feelings known not only to the MWCC, but to the Met Council
and, most importantly, our state legislators. We need to explain
to them what is going on with this organization. In addition, we
need to focus on the budget process for 1994 by attending the MWCC
budget meetings and making our feelings known.
If we do nothing now, we will all be in a much worse situation in
the future. Now is the time to make your feelings known so that
change can be enacted and this organization held accountable to the
public it is suppose to serve.
Please review the enclosed information and pass it along to other
elected officials and staff in your city. Thank you for your
attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Mayor
cc/enc: Governor Arnie Carlson
Met Council Chair Dottie Reitow
Senator Ed Oliver
Representative Tom Workman
Senator Gen Olson
Representative Steve Smith
Lake area newspapers
Enclosures
EXCERPTS FROMMWCC 1993 SUMMARY BUDGET
Budget Message
July 21~ 1992
·..We believe the low rate of increase_ in the
oper~tin_g budget s_h0ws that 9~_c0mprehe.nsi__ve_~-
' no surp_ ri ._s~s"_app_rpa _eh i_s.b_elp~__g to control costs.
· It is also consistent with fiscal r_espg_ns.~_i_!_it_y, at a
our state and local gov .emm___ents ye
- e__mp~h~_izing fiscal restraint....
Our object!v_e__i_s_lo- eliminate 'surprises' for
't~ agenc¥_a,3_d its customer-communities, and
charges_ to communitses. We believe the 1993
_Oper_atjn_g B~udg_e.t sh o_w_s th_a_t ~is _stra__tegy is work:.
Major Chan~es Budffeted in 1993
Prog. 100: Potential funds for information man-
agement initiatives were transferred to the Cl~ief
Administrator's budget pending review of prio~i-
ties, costs and benefits by an internal task force.
Thc candidate initiatives include staff and soft-
ware for automated time and attendance; for net-
work administration and for data base
administration. $243,900
Prog. 2300: The budget total is negative, to reflect
forecasted savings for self-insurance of workers'
compensation (versus purchased insurance). The
budget would allow the MWCC to continue and
expand the self-insurance initiative begun in 1992.
It adds a risk specialist/manager and consulting
~e~vices for self-insurance, and deletes the fore-
casted savings. The budget shown in the table
reflects this negative value. ($268,530)
Prog. 2900: Because of the agency's high priority
on equal opportunity and diversity management
activities and the needs generated by the MWCC's
large and decentralized workforce, ad__d_ed staff
.w_as: b__u...dgeted, in ~.i_s.~_ea,_including an
o_~pc~.~_u_nity_consUltant and an administrative
g!_e_r k. 1;74,969
Prog. 2500: The added budget is to a_dd a
for financial and accounting ~ervices. It reflects
the growing significance of financial management
for the MWCC. $59,150
Program 3800: To support maintenance in the
expanded regional plant system, the budget would
tdd a staff engineer. $44,982
~rogram 4100: Add six staff for expansion of
Seneca WWTP, redistr~uted from other plants
per labor agreement. ~$_2~_4~438.
Program 3200: To assist with field work as the
NuuaLime and N-Viro residual solids re-use pro-
grams grow, the budget permits the RSM pro-
gram to add an environmental scientist. This
would free the current environmental scientist to
manage outreach programs and should reduce
overtime. '$38,280_
Program 3200: After two years of funding
through the capital budget while under develop-
ment, the N-Viro program for the southwest area
is funded through the operating budget beginning
1993. $1.4 million
Program $100: The budget_ad_drs__~ operations
coordinator {in lieu of a lf2-time administrative
-assistant). The intent is to undertake work to free
the administrative manager to monitor training
effectiveness in the department. ~
Program 3901: To provide more management ~t
the Metro WWTP, add three staff magag~ de-
lete the operations coordinator and janitor.
Program 3902: Delete 16 assistant operators
from this program in accordance with labor nego-
tiations and add five staff in accordance with labor
agreement. The budget shown in the table reflects
this negative value. ($577,177)
Program 3902: Budget for secondary N-Viro
handling at Metro WWTP. $40,748
Program 3903: To comply with reporting re.
quirements for air permits at the Metro WWTP,
~epla _ce part-time student engineer with a fulirtime
engineering aide. $11,802.~__
Program 4200: Start-up of the expanded plant in
1991 produced larger quantities of sludge, which
will be transported to Seneca or Metro for treat-
ment. The budget in 1993 provides for ~three
ad._~di_ti_on_a_~ _driye~rs- and two additional leased
trucks. $21___~9,68!.
Program 4200: The budget permits the additi.___~
of thr_ee_ s_ta__ ff to serve plant expansions: two as-
Sistant operators and one lubricator. $143,258
Program 3300: The budget would a~Jd a 1/2-
time secretar~ to support the regional maintenance
clerical staff and provide afternoon receptionist
coverage. $16,380
Program 4800: For the expanded Stillwater
WWTP, a_dd an operator but delete overtime and
this plant's share of the lead pipefitter..$_3_5 _~_ .7~
z
;t
Submitted by:
Barbara S. Arney
Government Training Service
April 18, 1991
INTRODUCTION
A goal setting retreat was held at Mound City Hall on Saturday,
April 6, 1991 with Department Heads and City Council. Barbara
Arney, Government Training Service, was the facilitator for the
retreat. The facilitator met with the City Manager prior to the
session and established the following goals:
o Review process on goals established by the Council in
1989 (at the last goal setting session)
o Write a Mission Statement
o Establish joint goals for 1991-1993
o Develop an action plan to achieve goals
o Provide stronger communication between Department Heads
and Council
REVIEW OF SUCCESSES/PERSONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS QF pAST YEA%
-> Capital Improvement Plan establishes
-> Public Works Building
-> Increased efficiency of snow removal
-> Increased sales at liquor store
-> Got elected as Mayor
-> Newsletter
-> New edition
-> C.R. 15
-> Fire rescue truck
-> Implemented drug program
-> Stoplight at Commerce and Linwood
-> Got this Job
-> Old IP garage--improvement
-> Back-ups in finance
-> Recycling
-> Earthday Committee: tree planted
-> Progress on Lost Lake
-> Elected IIMC
-> EDC: implement downtown study; retaining businesses
-> Dealing with six Councils on fire issues
-> Mound Crime Prevention (facilitated)
-> Expansion and remodeling of City Hall;
committees
-> Board of ICBO
-> Upgrade of equipment in Parks
-> Adopt A Park
-> Improve inventory system
-> Signage in Parks; better equipment
-> Sign at entrance of City
-> Public Works employees did their own improvements in garage
-> Expansion in recycling
-> RR/Business cooperative team
-> Re-elected Liz
-> Computerized Fire Department
-> Fitness program to Police
use of citizen
REVIEW OF 1989 PRIORITIES
1. IMPROVED COMMUNICATION WITH ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT
o Conducted one performance appraisal of the City Manager.
In the process of developing a new format.
o Committee of the Whole (COW) has been a success for
increased Council communication; Staff needs feedback
on Council decisions when they oppose Staff recommen-
dation.
o Citizens--survey completed; will develop a suggestion
box. - -
o Commissions--improved communication from last meeting;
no longer feel a need for written job descriptions.
o LGA--Council need to be involved at LMC at the state
level rather than just the national level.
2. IMPROVED IMAGE
o Mission Statement--is now being developed.
o Truth in Housing is being worked on by the Planning
Commission.
o Marketing efforts--increase information on results of
the survey.
o EDC Task Force (now a commission) is developing recom-
mentations.
3. REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY
o Lost Lake and Outdoor Storage are in process.
4. ROLE OF CITY IN HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
~takeholder Analysis
Before writing a Mission Statement, the group identified who
the stakeholders were in the City and on what criteria those
stakeholders judged the performance of the City. They then
rated the City based on how they perceived the stakeholder
would rate the performance: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L).
o Employees
-> Proactive Council = M
-> Budget = H
-> Equipment = H
-> Provide necessities to do your job - H
-> Benefits and training = H
-> Salary = L (Comp. Worth)
-> Listening = H
-> Support employees rather than
residents = ?
-> Council meetings ~ H
o Residents
always defending
-> Taxes = L
-> Services--The City is there when you need them = H
--Quality of service = M
-> How employees handle a confrontation/customer
relations = M
-> Parks = M
-> Communication = M
-> How employee represents the City on his/her own
time = ?
-> Equipment = H
-> What's in the streets = M
-> Litter = M
-> Empty stores downtown = L
-> All government employees
o City Officials
-> Who gets appointed to positions = M
-> Agreements with Commissions = H
-> Following recommendations of the Commission = H
-> Personal gain vs. City = H
Taxpayers Who Are Not Residents
-> Customer relations
-> Taxes
-> Services
o Visitors
-> Attractions = L
-> Lake access to and from = L/M
-> Parks (geese) = L/M
-> Police = L
-> Appearance = L/M
-> Housing appearance/storage = L/M
-> Lake perspective of Mound = L/H
-> Affluence = L/H
o School District
-> Police ~ H
-> Services m H
-> DARE - H
-> Building - L
LMDC
-> Level of staff support = H
-> Agree with them = L
-> What representative does - H
o Surrounding Communities
-> Fairness of policy m M
-> Zoning = L/H
-> How much communication inter-city - M
-> Level and quality of service - H
-> Housing = L/H
-> Potential for consolidation of services = L
-> Businesses ~ M
o Potential Customers
-> Schools
-> Parochial schools
-> Neighborhoods
-> Realtors
-> Proximity to employment
-> Transportation
Mission Statement
The following statement was agreed upon and would be handed
out for feedback from those members not in attendance and
then voted on at an official Council Meeting.
"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,
flourishing community."
GOALS AND ACTION PLAN FOR 1991-1999
1. ISSUE:
ACTION:
How can the City of Mound improve customer service and
employee morale given budget constraints and compar-
able worth?
Council and Manager meet to discuss informational
meeting with departments.
2. ISSUE:
ACTION:
ISSUE:
ACTION:
4. ISSUE:
ACTION:
5. ISSUE:
ACTION:
How can the City budget deal with $200,000 of revenue
cuts and maintain services?
Finance Department and Council are working on this.
How can we redevelop downtown to attract businesses?
City provides low-cost interest loans; work with EDC.
How can we redevelop our residential community to make
Mound an attractive place to live?
1991--Truth in Housing; Zoning; Rental licensing
1992--Low interest improvement loan
1994--Direct Housing code
1996--Blight removal through scattered site acquisi-
tion; proactive in enforcing existing code
How do we provide recreational opportunities and tie
the City and Lake Minnetonka together?
1991--Lost Lake; Mound Bay Park; fishing contests;
outdoor storage; Milfoil; geese; new weed
1992--Community center; teen-youth bike paths
MINUTES - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - DECEMBER 17, 1992
The meeting was called to order in the City Council chambers at 7
AM. Members present: Paul Meisel, Mark Brewer, Ken Smith, Fred
Guttormson, Sharon McMenemy-Cook, Marge Friedrichs and Jerry
Pietrowski. Jerry Longpre arrived later. Also present: Mayor
Skip Johnson and the following City Council members: Liz Jensen,
Phyllis Jessen and Andrea Ahrens; Bruce Chamberlain of the
Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., LynDelle Skoglund of the Park and
Open Space Commission; Gino Businaro, Finance Director; Ed Shukle,
city Manager and Stan Drahos, EDC applicant.
It was moved by Smith, seconded by Guttormson and carried
unanimously to approve the Minutes of the November 19, 1992 regular
meeting.
Stan Drahos, applicant for the vacancy on the EDC, was present for
his interview with the Commission and city Council. He indicated
his interest in the community and that he has been involved in many
community activities over the years. He further stated that he
wishes to see Mound developed and become more like other cities
around Lake Minnetonka. Following his interview, Mr. Drahos was
excused. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Guttormson and carried
unanimously to recommend the appointment of Stan Drahos to fill the
current vacancy on the EDC. city Council will take up this matter
on January 12, 1993.
A discussion led by Bruce Chamberlain regarding the promotional
packet under Mound visions. The contents of the packet were
discussed and suggestions were made from both the Commission
members and Council members. The commission adjourned to the
conference room and the City Council remained in the chambers to
have a special City Council meeting dealing with three items.
The EDC spent further time discussing the contents of the packet
and adjourned at approximately 8:45 AM. The next meeting of the
commission will be January 21, 1993, at 7 AM, at City Hall. Fred
Guttormson will bring the rolls.
R~t fully,
City Manager
submitted,
ES:is
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1993 Report to the Mayors
Agenda
7:00 am, Friday, Jan. 8, 1993, Lafayette Club
Welcome and self introductions of all persons present.
Overview of the purpose of todaY's report, Chair Cochran:
a. Introduce four major work priorities for 1993
Invite ~eedback and response from mayors/council
members in attendance on topics presented . . . or on
pny p. ther ~opic ~ city representative may wish to
brinq up . . . ·
[COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS MAY BE BROUGHT UP AFTER EACH
PRESENTATION, AND ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS
RAISED OH ANY OR ALL OF THE FOUR TOPICS OR OTHER
ITEMS AFTER THE LAST PRESENTATION]
Topics to be reported upon and the board member reporting
ao
Annual budget for 1993 -- Treasurer -- and Mayor --
Scott Carlson, City of Minnetrista
be
Eurasian water milfoil control program, EWM Task
Force Chair Tom Penn, City of Tonka Bay
Lake access study, Lake Access Task Force Chair Jim
Grathwol, City of Excelsior
Lake use related to the 1992 Biocentric Study, Lake
Use and Recreation Committee Chair Bert Foster, City
of Deephaven
e
Open forum on any of the above reports or other item of
interest to persons assembled.
Recommendations for a future progress report meeting with
the mayors and city representatives . . . set month ?
set day?
Closing note of appreciation for everyone's attendance.
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
January '93 Budget Presentation to Mayors
1993 Budget as Amended by Board 10/28/92
1991 1991 1992 1993
REVENUE Budget Actual Budget Budget
LMCD Communities Admn Levy $103,825 103,825 107,230 60,000
Reserve Fund Allocation Ca) -0- -0- -0- 43,432
Court Fines 35,000 54,851 38,000 45,000
Licenses & Permits Cb} 65,000 101,815 85,000 117,300
Interest, public funds 8,000 13,930 8,000 7,000
Shoreland Rules, DNR Agreement 45,000 20,000 20,000 -0-
Shoreland Rules, DNR, Admn/Cons. 15r00~ 10~000. 10r000 -0-
Sub-Total, Administration $271,825 304,121 268,230 272,732
Ca} '93 budget increased by $27,700 reflecting multiple dock
license fee reduction from $15 WSU to $10/WSU.
{b} '93 budget decreased by $27,700 per note "a" above.
EW Milfoil Program:
ao City Contributions 63,000 63,000 63,000
b. Other Public Agencies 102,000 30,000 170,000
c. Private Solicitation 85,000 36,331 17,000
d. Reserve Fund Allocation -0- -0- -0-
e. Interest, Public Funds -0- -0- -0-
Sub-Total, Milfoil 250,000 129,331 350,000
9. TOTAL REVENUE $521w 825 433, 452 518~ 230
63,000
--0--
37,000
35,000
5,700
140~700
413,432
DISBURSEMENTS
Administration:
4. Personnel Services Total 115,300 119,669 121,500
8. Contractural Services Total 17,675 15,136 15,680
17. Office & Admn. Total 19,850 21,564 23,750
19. Capital Outlay Total 3,000 3,789 2,000
23. Legal Total 40,500 53,517 43,300
32. Consulting/Studies Total 66,500 20,505 --50,500
33. Total Administration ~62,825 ~34, 180 256,730
34. Contingency/Miscellaneous
(5%) 9,000 1, 285~ 11, 500_
Total Admn, Contingency
42. EW Milfoil
43. TOTAL ADMN,
Harvesting Program
EWM DISBURSEMENT
271,825 235,465 268,230
263,315 94,818 250,000
138,700
16,032
23,300
5,000
52,200
_37,500
272,732
-0-
272,732
140,700
$535, 140 330,283 518,230 413,432
i
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT/MN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
1992 Joint Study
WORK COMPLETED ON LAKE MINNETONKARECREATIONAL
RESEARCH DURING SUMMER 1992
The following is a listing of the major topical areas of work conducted during the
summer boating season. The results of this work will be presented in an
executive summary that is scheduled to be completed this March.
Boat Numbers, Density and Movement: Determined from aerial counts the
number and distribution of boats by management area at peak times on fair
weather weekdays (N=7) and weekends/holidays (N=12). Data are compatible
with previous efforts dating back to 1984. Boats were classified by activity
status. About half the boats during any given flight were inactive (not producing
a wake, or beached, or rafting, or at a transient dock).
Obtained for 3 weekend afternoons photographs of the entire lake for
documentation and further analysis (e.g., number of boats within so many feet of
shore).
Source of Boats: Determined from aerial observation and coordinated riparian
resident interviews the contribution to total boats observed in the aerial flights
from four sources: public access, marina/private access, riparian resident and
undetermined. For the first time, the riparian resident contribution was
separated from the aggregate category "riparian resident and all other" in which
the riparian contribution was reported in previous years. The attempt will be
make to determine the contribution of one final source (municipal docks) from
the aerial photographs. If successful, this should significantly reduce the size of
the "undetermined" source of boats.
Distribution of Boats from Public Access: To determine how public access users
are distributed on the lake at peak times on weekends, 407 origin-destination
interviews were conducted. Once analyzed relative to the distribution of all boats
from the aerial flights, these data will indicate the extent to which public access
boaters use the same areas of the lake as other boaters. In addition, this
information will indicate how far public access users travel from the launch
ramp, which will be useful in anticipating the effects of future access
development on different parts of the lake.
Boater and Boating Characteristics: Based on in-person interviews with 309
public access boaters and 300 marina boaters, and on mail surveys returned from
330 riparian residents, the study collected the following:
Demographics of boating party, including residential location, household
income, size of party, age composition of party, safety training of boat
operator, and length of time respondent has boated on Minnetonka.
Boat type, length, engine size and on-board safety equipment.
Major activity of boating trip.
Boater Experience; Based on in-person interviews with 309 public access boaters
and 300 marina boaters, and on mail surveys returned from 330 riparian
residents, the study collected the following:
Boater satisfaction with the trip.'
Boater's expectations of crowding prior to trip, perception of crowding
during trip, and whether the boater would return if the same conditions were
encountered.
Problems boaters encountered on their trip, including problems related to
safety and conflicts with other boaters.
Public access user's perception of adequacy of the access facility, including
improvements needed.
Boater's awareness of surface water controls, the need for greater
enforcement of existing controls, need for further controls and effect of
controls on trip enjoyment.
Boater desires for additional facilities/opportunities for beaching, anchoring,
lakeshore waysides, restaurants and purchasing gas.
Whether boaters encountered and were checked by an enforcement officer.
1/6/93
3
g~tl~ ~a'lh~ Wa~'/'a~ ~lxa.~m
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Eurasian water milfoil infestation is, and continues to be, a major
problem on Lake Minnetonka insofar as both aesthetics and
recreational purposes are concerned. The LMCD harvesting and
control program is certainly a beneficial tool in lake management by
helping to alleviate this problem until a more permanent solution can
be found. However, milfoil surface matting will most likely be more
prevalent in 1993 with stabilized or decreasing lake water levels and
more normal summer mean temperatures.
1.) A plan needs to be developed concerning how the harvesting will
be accomplished in 1993 and beyond. This would be especially true
if more areas with increased milfoil growth are to be harvested in
the next few years. From survey results, it appears that many areas
such as the west portion of Grays Bay and the north shore of Smiths
Bay should be harvested as aesthetics are equally as important as
recreational use of the lake.
2.) The problem of most consequence is lack of experienced and
qualified people to do the actual harvesting work on the lake. More
emphasis is needed in finding and hiring a project manager and/or
supervisor with the necessary skills to efficiently run the program on
some type of continuing basis. It is probably impossible to do this
harvesting properly starting with new people each spring who are
not adept or qualified to do this type of work.
3.) Equipment maintenance is, and will continue to be, a major
expense as it is used more extensively and as it ages. The
importance of this maintenance along with modification cannot be
overemphasized.
4.) Biological controls are possible and probable and more emphasis
should be placed on this important ele~nent of Lake Minneton 'lka
management. Chemicals, in abundance, besides being harmful, are
not a long term solution to the milfoil problem.
5.) Information and ecological data regarding water quality needs to
be obtained for the lake; and, equally important, information already
available needs to be assimilated, analyzed, and compiled for a useful
lake management tool in controlling EWM and other lake water
quality problems.
4
MECHANICAL HARVESTING EFFECTIVENESS
It is somewhat difficult to accurately make an assessment of the
effectiveness for harvesting in 1992 as the summer season was
unusually cool which probably inhibited the growth of the Eurasian
water milfoil to some extent. The water levels for this recent year
were also considerably above those of the previous three years; in
fact, the all time low was in 1990 at 925.4 feet above sea level at
Grays Bay dam and in late March, 1992, the lake level was 930.0 -
an Increase of 4.6 feet. The lake did subside, however, in 1992
t°ward the ordinary high water level of 929.4 feet above sea level at
the dam outlet. These higher water levels would influence the
nuisance value of the EWM in a positive way (less growth) for 1992
as the milfoil would have less interference on water recreation such
as swimming and boating as in the previous three years. However,
this negative growth effect of the milfoil will probably not happen in
1993 or subsequent years as the littoral zone lake depth where the
weed is growing will remain the same or decrease.
Public access monitoring was done numerous times in 1992 and
these accesses were found to be relatively clear of milfoll growth.
The following chart exhibits examples of inspection and clean-up of
major public areas of boat launching sites and egress points from the
lake.
JAN 8 199J
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Lake Access Task Force
Agenda
7:00 pm, Wednesday, January 13, 1993
Freshwater Biological Institute . . N 0 T E
2500 Shadywood Rd., {County Rd. 19} Navarre
CHANGE
e
Welcome, roll call of designated Task Force spokespersons
and guest introductions, Chair Jim Grathwol
Review of agenda, call for consideration of additional
items not on the agenda, Facilitator Don Buckhout
Review of Task Force Operating Guidelines as provided in
draft outline, consideration for adoption;
Review of Steering Committee and subcommittee objectives
as recommended by the Steering Committee:
a. Steering Committee
b. Car/Trailer Parking Agreements Subcommittee
c. Equitable Distribution and Access Siting
d. Funding (no objectives proposed at this time,
additional consultation with MN DNR advised.)
Recommendation for next Task Force meeting date;
Adjourn
(Revised by Steering Committee 12/29/92)
The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD), at the suggestion of the
Department of Natural Resources, and in furtherance of its lake management plan, has
formed a task force to discuss boat launch ramp access and car/trailer parking at Lake
Minnetonka. To facilitate its discussion of these issues and other matters associated with
the conduct of its business, the task force adopts the following guidelines.
1. The name of the task force will be the Lake Access Task Force.
The purpose of the Task Force shall be to advise the LMCD and other responsible
government units on the following objectives:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Develop a plan for public boat launch ramp access at Lake Minnetonka;
Recommend action to achieve the LMCD lake management plan goal of
700 reliable car/trailer parking places for Lake Minnetonka;
Recommend minimum parking standards for car/trailer parking;
Develop an inventory and grading system for existing and proposed boat
launch ramps and car/trailer parking;
Recommend interagency agreements conforming existing car/trailer
parking to minimum parking standards;
Evaluate proposed additional boat launch ramp access and car/trailer
parking acquisition and development;
g)
h)
Recommend investigation of potential new sites for boat launch~s~~~/'~
and car/trailer parking;
Develop recommendations for encouraging equitable distribution of
access and coordination and cooperation among agencies involved.
3. Membership
a)
The task force membe~'ship shall be one individual representative from
each of the following organizations, units of government and agencies:
City of Deephaven
City of Excelsior
City of Greenwood
City of Minnetonka
City of Minnetonka Beach
City of MinneU'ista
City of Mound
City of Orono
City of Shorewood
City of Spring Park
City of Tonka Bay
City of Victoria
City of Wayzata
City of Woodland
Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore
Representati¥~
Howard Bennis
.lohn Anderson
Alan M. Albrecht
Tim Bergstedt
Tom Markle
Scott Carlson
Skip Johnson
Gabriel Jabbour
Kristi Stover
Jerry Rockvam
Veto Haug
Peter Hill
Barry Petit
Nick Duff
Don Germanson
.Owners Association (LMLOA)
Hennepin Parks Doug Bryant
Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District
Hennepin County
Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District
Fishermen Advocating
Jim Grathwol
Emily Ann Staples
Tom Maple
Gary Larson
Intelligent Regulation (F.A.I.R.)
MN Sporffishing Congress
Dept. of Natural Resources
Maxwell Bay Citizens Group
John Schneider
Mike Markell
Bev Blomberg
b)
Each individual representative shall be selected by the member
organization, unit of government or agency. Alternate representatives
may also be designated in the event that the primary representative is not
available to attend a meeting. However, individual representatives should
be selected with consideration given to the Task Force need for
consistency of individual representation throughout the process. Members
may replace their individual representative at any time and should notify
the task force chair or designated staff upon doing so.
c)
New organizations, units of government or agencies may be added to the
task force membership with the approval of the task force and in
accordance with conditions established by the task force at that time.
d)
All meetings of the task force and any associated subcommittees are open
to the public. Notices indicating the time and place of meetings will be
provided to interested persons. The chair will provide appropriate
,' ~ 1
opportunities for presentation of oral and written statements by thc public
at task force and subcommittee meetings. However, it should be noted
that time for public comment may be very limited and the public will be
encouraged to direct comments and suggestions through appropriate
member representatives.
4. Procedures
Task force members agree to engage in a good faith cffort to achieve task
force objectives through an open, creativc process. Individual
representatives are responsible for keeping their constituents informed of
the work of the task force and to solicit their input prior to key task force
decisions.
b)
The task force may establish subcommittees as needed to address specific
issues. Membership of subcommittees is not limited to persons or groups
represented on the task force. Subcommittee recommendations will be
submitted to the task force.
c)
d)
Task force and subcommittee meetings will be scheduled with sufficient
time and adequate notice between meetings to provide members with an
opportunity to consult with and obtain advice. Materials to be discussed
will be circulated at least 7 days in advance of task force and
subcommittee meetings.
The LMCD representative shall serve as the Task Force Chairperson. The
primary functions of the Chairperson will be to develop the agendas for
·
" : :: ,"-"-.'"-
task force meetings and to organize and conduct meetings with the intent
that all points of view be heard. The Chairperson shall remove
hirn~erself from this position if he/she cannot go along with task force
goals or if he/she affects the credibility of the task force. The Chairperson
or any other individual representative or alternate shall not state a
policymaking position on behalf of the task force unless authorized to do
so by the consent of the task force.
e)
The LMCD will obtain a facilitator to assist the task force in the conduct
of its business. The facilitator will serve at the discretion of the task force.
The facilitator will be responsible for helping to ensure that the process
runs smoothly, for preparing draft and final meeting summaries, and
helping parties resolve differences and achieve consensus on issues
addressed by the task force.
f)
Meeting Summaries. Preparation of summaries of the task force decisions
will be supervised by the chairperson and the facilitator and, after review
and approval by the task force, will be published as the work of the task
force. Meeting summaries, along with meeting notices and agendas, will
be mailed to the task force list of interested persons.
g)
Staff. The LMCD and the Department of Natural Resources will provide
staff support for the task force at their discretion.
h)
Decision Making and Agreement.
(i) Caucuses. Any individual representative may request of the chair or
facilitator at any time, a caucus for the purpose of consultation and
decision making.
(ii) Polling. Any individual representative of a member may request a
non-binding, non-recorded indication of objections to a matter under
consideration for the purposes of determining tentative support for that
matter.
(iii) Consensus. The task force and subcommittee decisions will be made
by consensus, except for procedural matters unrelated to objectives listed
in Item 2 above, which may be decided by a simple majority at the
discretion of the task force. Consensus means the lack of dissent by any
individual representative. In those cases where the Task Force does not
reach consensus the matter will be referred to the Steering Committee in
order to seek resolution by appointing a delegation to meet with dissenting
parties, ff the Steering Committee resolution process is unsuccessful, the
Task Force will solicit reports from the majority and minority parties and
submit them to the LMCD for a final determination.
Location:
1.
LAKE MINNETONKA LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
STEERING COMMITTEE
MEETING SUMMARY- DECEMBER 29, 1992
LMCD Offices, Wayzata
The meeting was convened at 7:00 p.m. by Bert Foster, Chair-
LMCD(Deephaven). In addition to Mr. Foster, those members present were:
Gordon Kimball-DNR; Don Germanson-LMLOA; Dave Cochran-
LMCD(Greenwood); Jim Grathwol-LMCD(Excelsior); Doug Babcock-
LMCD(Spring Park). Others present: Gene Strommen-LMCD Executive
Director; Don Buckhout-Task Force Facilitator.
Review of Draft Task Force Operating Guidelines:
The committee members reviewed the draft Task Force Operating Guidelines
developed by Jim Grathwol and Don Buckhout. Most of the discussion centered
on the provision for consensus decision-making. It was decided to add a role for
the Steering Committee to seek resolution of issues on which the Task Force fails
to reach consensus by appointing a delegation to meet with dissenting parties in
order to seek to resolve the differences.
There was also discussion about adding new members to the Task Force. In
particular, the instance of membership and participation by organized citizen
groups that are formed for a special interest purpose, such as to express opinions
on a new access ramp in their community, was discussed. It was decided that the
Operating Guidelines allow for addition of new Task Force members, such as
these groups, according to terms established by the Task Force at the _time the
request for membership is received.
Finally, it was agreed that the Task Force is defined as being advisory to the
LMCD and possibly to other governmental units.
The Committee agreed to submit the draft Operating Guidelines to the Task Force
for review and adoption at the January 13 meeting.
Task Force Meeting Agenda:
It was agreed that the agenda for the next Task Force meeting should be:
Review of Task Force Operating Guidelines
Review of Subcommittee Objectives
Review of Draft Model Parking Agreements
Subcommittee Objectives:
The Steering Corrimittee developed a list of preliminary Subcommittee objectives
for each of the three new subcommittees, plus the Steering Committee. These
will be reviewed by the Task Force and referred to Subcommittees for further
consideration and amendment. It was felt that it would be more efficient for the
subcommittees to have some initial objectives to start with and the intent of the
Steering Committee is that these could be modified as the subcommittees see fit.
Steering Committee Objectives
1. Discuss and Recommend matters relating to policy, procedures and
agendas to thc Task Force.
2. Appoint delegations to seek resolution of issues on which the Task
Force is unable to reach consensus.
Car/Trailer Parking Agreements Subcommittee Objectives
1. Based on thc parking space inventory, recommend types of
agreements needed to make existing parking acceptable under the
standards.
2. Consider the priority parking space agreements needed to meet an
April 15 deadline.
3. Recommend standards for quality (a grading system) of parking
spaces and access ramps.
Note: This subcommittee would not work directly with municipalities to
develop parki*ng agreements but would encourage appropriate
agencies to do so.
Equitable Distribution and Access Siting Subcommittee Objectives
1. Consider and make recommendations on equitable distribution of
siting, sharing or' local contribution for access and parking,
suitability of additional sites, and park and launch agreements with
private marinas.
2. Review and make recommendations on suitability and feasibility
of additional potential access sites (e.g. Howard's Point, Mai Tai,
Advance Machine)
3. Review and make recommendations regarding the development of
proposed access facilities (e.g. Hennepin Parks, Gray's Bay
Causeway)
Secure Funding Subcommittee
No proposed objectives yet; need additional consultation with the DNR
Review of Draft Model Parking Agreement~
This agreement is still being developed by Gordon Kimball and Gene Strommen.
Don Gerrnanson requested that the Steering Committee send representatives to
meet with the LMLOA Board at their January 11 meeting to discuss further the
issues related to the 700 car/trailer parking spaces goal that was not resolved at
the December 9 Task Force meeting. Mr. Germanson requested that Jim
Grathwol from the Task Force and Dennis Asmussen, Mike Mark, Il, and Gordon
Kimball from the DNR be present. Other Steering Committee members that will
attend are Bert Foster and Dave Cochran and possibly an additional member yet
to bc named.
7. Thc meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
9~..~tfully submitted, ~._/~ ~,
n Buckhout, Task Force ~cilitator
STEERING COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE OBJECTIVES FOR DISCUSSION
Steering Committee Objectives
1. Discuss and recommend matters relating to policy, procedures and
agendas to the Task Force.
2. Appoint delegations to seek resolution of issues on which the Task
Force is unable to reach consensus.
Car/Trailer Parking Agreements Subcommittee Objectives
1. Based on the parking space inventory, recommend types of agreements
needed to make existing parking acceptable under the standards.
2. Consider the priority parking space agreements needed to meet an
April 15 deadline.
3. Recommend standards for quality (a grading system) of parking spaces
and access ramps.
Note: This subcommittee would not work directly with municipalities to
develop parking agreements but would encourage appropriate agencies
to do so.
Equitable Distribution and Access Siting Subcommittee Objectives
1. Consider and make recommendations on equitable distribution of
siting, sharing of local contribution for access and parking,
suitability of additional sites, and park and launch agreements with
private marinas.
Review and make recommendations on suitability and feasibility
of additional potential access sities (e.g. Howard's Point, Mai Tai,
Advance Machine).
Review and make recommendations regarding the development of proposed
access facilities (e.g. Hennepin Parks, Gray's Bay Causeway).
Secure Funding Subcommittee
No proposed objectives yet; need additional consultation with the DNR.
1/13/93 Mtg.
x. ~,~ o o - _
~' ' ~:::~ ~ ~zc Coz
o ~ o o~
~0 ~ ~ O0 0
~ ~o ~ ~o zzpz
ZmZ
~0~0
~0~~z
oz~
~ ~ ~ ~C~0~
~oc~ ~ o ~
o~o~ ~ ~,
O~ ~0
0 ~ m
m
CITY of MOUND
I
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364-~687
i612) 472-0600
FAX i612~ 472-0620
January 8, 1992
TO:
Ed Shukle
City Manager
FROM:
Joyce Nelson
Recycling Coordinator
SUBJECT: December's Recycling
In the meetings that we've been having with Knutson Services and the cities
of Mtka. Beach, Wayzata, Spring Park, Excelsior and Shorewood, we have stressed
the fact that we've haven't been getting our tonnage report in time.
Ail of the cities have agreed to the .10¢ increase for 93 and 94. Spring Park is
thinking about 94. We will still be getting some of the revenue sharing.
There has been several calls for containers, they take a real beating in the
winter months.
We've mentioned to Knutson that they were not leaving tags on the unwanted
or not properly separated materials.
printed on recycled paper
Northern
Gary R. Johnlon
Vice President and General Counsel
Hollies M. wm~o~
socre~ry
De¥id A.I..Iwrenco Jlck F. Sjoholm
D~rector--L~ D~re~or --L~w
Writer's D,rect Dial Number 330-2868
JAN ! 1 1993
States Power Company
Law Department
414 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
Telephone (612)330-6600
Fax No. (612)330-5827
January 7, 1992
Gene R Sommers
Ralph S Towler
Stephen C Lapadel
Haro~l J 8agley
James L AIIman
Oonnelk3a L Roce
Chert L 8r~x
Michael J Hanson
Michael C Connelly
John W Hame
Chendra G Houston
Audrey A Zibelmen
TO: MUNICIPALITIES AND COUNTIES IN NSP'S
ELECTRIC SERVICE TERRITORY
RE: Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
Docket No. E-002/GR-92-1185
On November 2, 1992, Northern States Power Company CNSP") filed for an electric
rate increase with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission ("PUC"). The
Commission has accepted NSP's filing and issued a Notice and Order for Hearing.
A copy of this notice is enclosed, as directed by the Commission.
The Commission has referred this filing to the Office of Administrative Heatings for
evidentiary and public hearings. At a preheating conference held December 18,
1992, Judge Richard C. Luis set January 22, 1992 as the last day to file petitions to
intervene as a formal party to the case. Petitions should be addressed to Judge Luis
at the Office of Administrative Heatings, 100 Washington Square, Suite 1700,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-2138, and served on NSP. Other procedural matters
are discussed in the PUC's Notice and Order for Hearing. Also enclosed is NSP's
Notice of Application for Rate Increase. If there are questions, feel free to call the
undersigned.
Audrey Zibelman
Senior Attorney
Notice to Counties and Municipalities
Under Minn. Stat. § 216B.16, Subd. 1
BEFORE THE
MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
STATE OF MINNESOTA
In the Matter of the Application of )
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, )
Minneapolis, Minnesota, for )
Authority to Change its Schedule )
of Electric Rates for Retail Customers )
Within the State of Minnesota )
.NOTICE OF APPLICATION
FOR RATE INCREASE
DOCKET NO.
E002/GR-92-1185
On November 2, 1992, Northern States Power Company (NSP) filed notice of an
increase in its electric rates with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission pursuant to
Minnesota Statues §216B.16. The Company' proposed a schedule of new rates to take
effect on January 1, 1993.
If the Commission suspends the proposed rates so they do not go into effect, it
must permit the Company to put interim rates into effect on January 1, 1993, until a final
rate level is determined. NSP has filed a schedule of interim rates based on the
Commission Order in the preceding NSP electric rate case.
The Commission will determine the amount of increase in rates it will allow on or
before September 2, 1993, and final rates reflecting that determination will be
implemented thereafter. If the final rate level is less than the interim rate level, the
amount collected during the interim period attributable to that difference will be refunded
to customers with interest.
Examples of the effect of these increases on typical bills are as follows:
I I
Average Monthly Bills
Residential Service
Use Present'
250 KWH $ 17.79
500 KWH $ 36.08
750 KWH $ 51.88
1000 KWH $ 67.67
Small General Service
Interim Proposed
$18.74 $ 20.73
$ 38.01 $ 39.97
$ 54.66 $ 57.70
$ 71.30 $ 75.43
Use
500 KWH $ 38.18
1000 KWH $ 69.77
2000 KWH $132.93
$ 40.23 $ 41.42
$ 73.51 $ 75.83
$140.06 $144.67
General Service
Use(KWH/Demand (KW)
10,000/50 $ 661 $ 696 $ 722
30,000/75 $1,417 $1,493 $1,544
400,000/1,000 $18,625 $19,623 $20,315
* The present rate levels identified in this application represent the rates authorized
in Docket No. E002/GR-91-001.
The Department of Public Service is conducting an investigation of NSP's books
and records. Individual customers will be notified when public hearings are scheduled.
The proposed rate schedules and a comparison of present and proposed rates may
be examined by the public during normal business hours at the Department of Public
Service, 121 7th Place East, Suite 200, St. Paul and at Northern States Power Company
offices located at 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis; 2302 Great Northern Drive, Fargo; 421
Wabasha St., St. Paul; 825 Rice St., St. Paul; 1700 E. County Road E, White Bear Lake;
3000 Maxwell Ave., Newport; 2763 First Ave. N.W., Faribault; 3930 Pepin Ave., Red
Wing; 3515 Third Street. N., St. Cloud; 5050 Service Drive, Winona; 500 W. Russel St.,
Sioux Falls; 4501 68th Ave. N., Brooklyn Center; 5309 W. 70th St., Edina; 210 Lime St.,
Mankato; 5505 County Road 19, Shorewood; 1505 Washington Ave., Montevideo; and
3115 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville.
If you wish to intervene or testify in this case, contact the Minnesota Office of
Administrative Heatings, Suite 1700, 100 Washington Square, Minneapolis, Mn. 55101-
2147 or contact Public Utilities Commission, 121 7th Place East, Suite 350, St. Paul,
Minnesota, 55101-2147 or phone (612) 296-7124.
BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Don Storm
Tom Burton
Cynthia A. Kitlinski
Dee Knaak
Norma McKanna
Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
C~mmissioner
In the Matter of the Application
of Northern States Power Company
for Authority to Increase Its
Rates for Electric Service in
the State of Minnesota
ISSUE DATE: December 14, 1992
DOCKET NO. E-002/GR-92-1185
NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
I. Proceedings to Date
On November 2, 1992 Northern States Power Company's Electric
Utility (NSP or the Company) filed a petition seeking a general'
rate increase of $119,000,000l, or 8.98%, effective January 1,
1993. On December 14, 1992 the Commission issued its Order
Accepting Filing and Suspending Rates in the matter.
A copy of the Company's rate increase proposal is on file in the
offices of the Department of Public Service, 121 7th Place East,
Suite 200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2145, and is open for public
inspection during regular office hours.
Copies are also available for public inspection' at the Company's
office at 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401.
1 In its No~ice of Change in Rates the Ccmpany stated its
proposed rate increase was $119 million; the accompanying
schedules and workpapers supported an increase of $119.138
million. In its ORDER ACCEPTING FILING AND SUSPENDING RATES the
Commission found that the Notice of Change in Rates controls and
that any final rate increase cannot exceed tke amount set forth
there.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
II. jurisdiction and Referral for Contested Case Proceedings
The Commission has jurisdiction over proposed rate changes under
Minn. Stat. § 216B.16 (1990). If the Commission is unable to
resolve all significant issues regarding the reasonableness of
the proposed rates on the basis of the filing itself, the
Commission is to refer the matter to the Office of Administrative
Hearings for contested case proceedings. Minn. Stat. § 216B.16,
subd. 2 (1990).
The Commission finds that it cannot satisfactorily resolve all
questions regarding the reasonableness of the proposed rates on
the basis of the Company's filing. The Commission will therefore
refer the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings for
contested case proceedings.
III. Proposed Rates
The Company proposes rate increases by customer class as follows
($1,000's):
Customer Class/
Revenue Cateqory
Residential
Commercial/Industrial
Other Sales to Public Authorities
Street and Protective Lighting
Late Charges
Present Proposed
Rates Rates
$460,894 $512,363
836,207 902,344
9,228 10,116
17,322 17,637
3,664 3,993
Total Retail2
$1,327,315 $1,446,453
The Commission has suspended the Company's proposed rates by
separate Order. By further Order, the Commission will direct the
Company to place an interim rate schedule into effect. Interim
rates are subject to refund if the Commission ultimately orders a
lower overall revenue increase than is recovered through interim
rates. Minn. Stat. § 216B.16, subd. 3 (1990).
2 This figure does not include local franchise fees, which
are collected for local governments and do not affect net
operating income. This figure also does not reflect the
Commission's finding in its ORDER ACCEPTING FILING AND SUSPENDING
RATES that the rate increase cannot exceed the amount set forth
in the Company's Notice of Change in Rates, $119 million.
IV. Issues to be Addressed
Parties shall address the following issues in the course of the
contested case proceedings ordered herein:
(1)
Is the test year revenue increase sought by the Company
reasonable or will it result in unreasonable and
excessive earnings by the Company?
(2)
Is the rate design proposed by the Company,
including its proposed restructuring of
interruptible rates, reasonable?
(3)
Are the Company's proposed capital structure and
return on equity reasonable?
(4)
Is the Company's proposal for imDlementinc SFAS
106 reasonable?3 ' ~
(5)
What are appropriate rates for standing by
with capacity and how do general service and
standby service demand charges relate to one
another during customer system outages?
(6)
Should any adjustments be made to the Company's
proposal to include refuse derived fuel generating
facilities in rate base and to recover their
operating costs from ratepayers?~
The parties may also raise and address other issues relevant to
the Company's proposed rate increase.
V. Procedural Outline
A. Administrative Law Judge
The Administrative Law Judge assigned to this case is Richard C.
3 See, two Commission Orders: In the Matter of the
Accountinq and Ratemakinq Effects of the Statement of Financial
Accountinq Standard No. 106, Docket No. U-999/CI-92-96, ORDER
ADOPTING ACCOUNTING STANDARD AND ALLOWING DEFERRED ACCOUNTING
(September 22, 1992) and ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION, GRANTING IN PART AND DE}~ING IN PART PETITIONS
FOR CLARIFICATION (November 2, 1992).
~ The Commission consolidated the record of its
investigation of the Company's refuse-derived fuel activities
with this rate case record in an Order dated October 30, 1992.
In the Matter of an Investiaation Regardina Northern States Powe~
Company's Refuse Derived Fuel Activity, ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT
AND CONSOLIDATING RECORD.
3
Luis. His address and telephone number are as follows: Office
of Administrative Hearings, Suite 1700, 100 Washington Square,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-2138; (612) 349-2542.
B. Hearing Procedure
Hearings in this matter will be conducted in accordance with the
Administrative Procedure Act, Minn. Stat. $§ 14.57-14.62 (1990);
the rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings, Minn. Rules,
parts 1400.5100 to 1400.8400; and, to the extent that they are
not superseded by those rules, the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure, Minn. Rules, parts 7830.0100 to 7830.4400. Copies
of these rules and statutes may be purchased from the Print
Communications Division of the Department of Administration, 117
University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155; (612) 297-3000.
Under these rules parties may be represented by counsel, may
appear on their own behalf, or may be represented by another
person of their choice, unless otherwise prohibited as the
unauthorized practice of law. They have the right to present
evidence, conduct cross-examination, and make written and oral
argument. Under Minn. Rules, part 1400.7000, they may obtain
subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses and the
production of documents.
Any party intending to appear at the hearing must file a notice
of appearance (Attachment A) with the Administrative Law Judge
within 20 days of the date of this Notice and Or~er for Hearing.
Failure to appear at the hearing may result in facts and issues
being resolved against the party who fails to appear.
Parties should bring to the hearing all documents, records, and
witnesses necessary to support their positions. They should take
note that any material introduced into evidence may become public
data unless a party objects and requests relief under Minn. Stat.
S 14.60, subd. 2 (1990).
Any questions regarding discovery under Minn. Rules, parts
1400.6700 to 1400.6800 or informal disposition under Minn. Rules,
part 1400.5900 should be directed to Margie Hendriksen, Special
Assistant Attorney General, 121 7th Place East, Suite 350, St.
Paul, Minnesota 55101-2147, (612) 296-0410.
The times, dates, and places of public and evidentiary hearings
in this matter will be set by order of the Administrative Law
Judge after consultation with the Commission and intervening
parties.
4
C. Intervention
Persons wishing to become formal parties to this proceeding shall
promptly file petitions to intervene with the Administrative Law
Judge. They shall serve copies of such petitions on all current
parties and on the Commission. Minn. Rules, part 1400.6200.
D. Prehearing Conference
A prehearing conference will be held in this matter on Friday,
December 18, 1992 at 9:30 a.m. in the Large Hearing Room, Public
Utilities Commission, 121 7th Place East, Suite 350, St. Paul,
Minnesota 55101. It will be combined with the prehearing
conference in the Company's gas rate case, which was filed the
same day.5 Persons participating in the prehearing conference
should be prepared to discuss the standard issues of time frames,
scheduling, discovery procedures, and similar issues. They
should also be prepared to discuss coordinating proceedings in
the two rate cases.
Although the two cases will be tried separately, by separate
Administrative Law Judges, the cases do involve some of the same
issues, witnesses, customers, and parties. The two
Administrative Law Judges have urged interested persons to
consider ways of avoiding duplicative hearings and minimizing
scheduling ccnflicts, such as holding joint public hearings and
combining evidentiary hearings on specific issues. The
Commission urges full cooperation with these efforts by all
parties.
E. Time Constraints
The Commission is required to act on the Company's filing within
ten months, or the proposed rates are deemed approved. Minn.
Stat. ~ 216B.16, subd. 2 (1990). This ten-month period can be
extended for two months, if the parties submit a settlement which
is rejected by the Commission. Minn. S~at. § 216B.16, subd. 2
(1990).
The Commission asks the Office of Administrative Hearings to
conduct contested case proceedings in light of these time
constraints and requests that the Administrative Law Judge submit
his final report by July 2, 1993, to allow the Commission
adequate opportunity for thorough consideration of the case.
5 In the Matter of the ApPlication of Northern States Power
Company for Authority to Increase Its Rates for Gas Service in
the State of Minnesota, Docket No. G-002/GK-92-1186.
The Commission notes that the statutory deadline for the final
Order in this case falls within 20 working days of the statutory
deadline for the final Order in an earlier case filed under Minn.
Stat. § 237.075 (1990).6 Assuming the earlier-filed case was
complete on the date of filing (or before the date this case was
filed), the Commission can extend the rate suspension period and
Order deadline in this case by 20 working days, if necessary.
Minn. Stat. ~ 216B.16, subd. 2 (b) (1990). Similarly, this case
and the Company's general rate case for its gas utility were
filed on the same day, making available, if necessary, another
20-working day extension. At this point it is unclear if either
or both of these rate cases will require an extension of the
standard 10-month rate suspension period.
vi. Application of Ethics in Government Act
The lobbying provisions of the Ethics in Government Act, Minn.
Stat. §§ 10A.01 et seq. (1990), apply to general rate cases.
Persons appearing in this proceeding may be subject to
registration, reporting, and other requirements set forth in that
Act. Ail persons appearing in this case are urged to refer to
the Act and to contact the Minnesota Ethical Practices Board,
telephone number (612) 296-1720, with any questions.
VII. Ex Parte Communications
Restrictions on ex parte communications with Co~missioners and
reporting requirements regarding such communica-ions with
Commission staff apply to this proceeding from the date of this
Order. Those restrictions and reporting requirements are set
forth at Minn. Rules, parts 7845.7300-7845.7400, which all
parties are urged to consult.
ORDER
A contested case proceeding shall be held on the Company's
proposed rate increase. The proceeding shall begin with a
Prehearing Conference on Friday, December 18, 1992 at 9:30
a.m.
This Order will be served on the Company, which shall mail
copies of the Order to all municipalities and counties in
6 This complex filing by U S WEST Communications carries
three docket numbers: P-421/EM-91-1002; P-421/EM-91-1000; P-
421/EM-91-328. The filing was made October 30, 1992.
its service area and to such other persons as the Department
of Public Service may request.
Public hearings shall be held in this matter at locations
within the service area of the Company.
The Company shall give the following notices of the
evidentiary and public hearings:
b)
Individual written notice to each customer, which may
be in the form of a bill insert, and shall be served at
least ten days before the first day of hearings.
Written notice to the g6verning bodies of all
municipalities and counties in the area affected and to
all parties in the Company's last two rate cases.
These notices shall be mailed at least ten days before
the first day of hearings.
c)
Display advertisements in legal newspapers of affected
counties and other newspapers of general circulation
within the Company's service area. These
advertisements shall appear at least ten days before
the first day of hearings. They shall include the
heading RATE INCREASE NOTICE, which heading shall
appear in bold face type no smaller than 30 points.
d)
The above notices shall contain the information
required in Minn. Rules, part 7830.3200, subp. 2. The
Company shall submit proposed notices for Commission
approval prior to publication or service.
The Commission authorizes the Executive Secretary to enter
Orders on behalf of the Commission varying' time requirements
for the filing of pleadings and other documents and
determining the conduct of this proceeding, according to the
standards set forth in Minn. Rules, part 7830.4400. Any
party adversely affected by such an Order may file a motion
for reconsideration, vacation, or modification, no later
than ten days from the date of its enury or one day before
any filing deadline or occurrence of an act directed in such
Order. Such motions will be heard by the Co~,-umission.
6. This Order shall become effective immediately.
Richard R. '~faster '
Executive Se~etary
(S E A L)
7
BEFORE THE MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Suite 1700
100 Washington Square
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-2138
FOR THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES CO!~ISSION
121 7th Place East Suite 350
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2145
In the Matter of the
Application of Northern States
Power Company for Authority to
Increase Its Rates for
Electric Service in the State
of Minnesota
MPUC Docket No. E-002/GR-92-
1185
OAH Docket No.
~OTICE OF APPEARANCE
Name and Telephone Number of Administrative Law Judge:
Richard C. Luis
(612) 349-2542
TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE:
You are advised that the party named below will appear at the
above hearing.
NAME OF PARTY:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
PARTY'S ATTORNEY OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE:
OFFICE ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY:
DATE:
8