Loading...
1996-03-26 AGENDA CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1996, 7:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS o 10. PAGE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 12, 1996 REGULAR MEETING .......................................... 949-952 CASE 96-06: ANTHONY AND JENNIFER PALESOTTI, 1969 LAKESIDE LANE, LOT 3, BLOCK 11, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID 18-117-23- 23 0049. VARIANCE FOR ADDITION ...................................... 963-978 CASE 96-08: JESSE ERICKSON, 2031 BELLAIRE LANE, LOT 64 & N 1/2 OF 65 & 67, MOUND ADDITION, PID 14-117-24 41 0036. VARIANCE FOR GARAGE ...................................... 979-988 RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ABUTTING STATUS OF PROPERTY LOT 1, BLOCK 31, SETON ...................................... 989-1001 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ................. SET BID OPENING FOR 1996 SEALCOAT PROJECT. SUGGESTED DATE: APRIL 23, 1996, 11:00 AM ......................... 1002 LICENSE RENEWAL: "BY THE WAY SNACK SHOP". CIGARETTE AND TRANSIENT MERCHANT ........................ 1003-1009 LAWFUL GAMBLING APPLICATION - RAFFLE WESTONKA SENIOR CITIZENS FOUNDATION .......................... 1010 PAYMENT OF BILLS ......................................... 1011-1019 947 11. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS: FEBRUARY 1996 FINANCIAL REPORT AS PREPARED BY GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR .................... 1020-1021 B. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 1996 ......... 1022-1028 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1996 ............................. 1029-1035 INFORMATION FROM THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES (NLC) RE: AMENDMENTS TO NLC BYLAWS .......................................... 1036-1043 ANNUAL PARKS TOUR IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1996. BEGINNING AT 6 PM. DOES THIS FIT YOUR SCHEDULES? ........................ Fo INFORMATION FROM GTE RE: GTE'S CAPABILITY TO PROVIDE LONG DISTANCE SERVICE TO ITS CUSTOMERS ....................................... 1044-1046 948 RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ABUTTING STATUS OF PROPERTY (LOT 1 ~ BLOCK 31 ~ SETON) WHEREAS, the Cit%' of Mound licenses and re~l~tes the number and location of docks situated on public commons ~ri~_bln the City; and WHEREAS, the ordinance code of the City allocates certain priorities to individuals requestin~ dock locations on public commons; and WHEREAS, the City has received a request from the owner of Lot 1, Block 31, Seton for a determination by the City restrains to what priority, ff any, the said lot would be entitled; and WHEREAS, the request was duly refex-r~l to this City Council for review and decision; and WHEREAS, this City Council has now reviewed the request of the owner, reviewed the materials and recommenclations provided by City staff and is fully informed regar~,~Z the matters at issue. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council as follows: I. Findinws. 1. Richard Jacobson is the owner of several lots located within Block 31, Seton; amo~g them is Lot 1, Block 31, Seton. 2. The Plat of Seton contains a dedication at Excelsior Road to the public. $. The lake shore portions of Excelsior Road have been treated as public 4. In 1984 a portion of Excelsior Road was vacated by official action of the City Council. The vacated portion of Excelsior Road ceased to be part of the public commons upon vacation. The vacated and unvacated portions of Excelsior Road, the location of Lot 1, Block 31, Seton and the assumed location of the Shoreline are all depicted on the attached Exhibit A. 5. Section 437.05, Subd. 7 (a) provides: a. First Priority. An abutting owner has first priority for a City designated location within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline. Docks shall be located in accordance with the dock location map. ,.TB~102003 II. Conclusions. 1. Lot 1, Block 31, Scion abuts upon the ExceLsior Road Commons at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 1. Under the circumstances presented here, abutment at that point is sufficient to qualifying the owner of Lot 1, Block 3 as an abuUing owner as the term is used in the above cited ordinance. 2. A line of shoreline is contained between the easterly extensions of the north and south lot lines of said Lo~ 1. That area is depicted on the attached Exhibit A. It is alor~ that line of shoreline that the owner of LOt 1, Block 31, Seton shall have priority for a designated dock location. a) c) d) e) Lot 1, Block 31, Seton abuts a commons The e~,-tended property li~es contain a shoreline At least part of the con?,~i~ed shoreline is not in private ownership No privately owned property lies between the abuttinc property and the public shoreline There are no com'~licting c!_~im-~ for priority status to the designated location which are of equal merit. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Cou~cilmember The following Coun~-~lmembere voted in the affh. mative: The following Councilmembere voted in the negative: ATTEST: Mayor City Manager Resolu~on approved: 3'JD 102003 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12, 1996 The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, met in regular session on Tuesday, March 12, 1996, at 7:30 PM, in the council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Persons in attendance: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz Jensen. Councilmembers Mark Hanus and Phyllis Jessen were absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Ed Shukle and City Attorney John Dean. Mayor Polston opened the meeting. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 1.1 RECYCLOTTO WINNER Mayor Polston announced that Charles Auger, 1769 Lafayette Lane, was the winner of 150 Westonka Dollars for his recycling efforts. 1.2 APPROVE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 27, 1996 REGULAR MEETING. Councilmember Jensen asked for a clarification on page 4 of the February 27, 1996 Minutes, related to a question that was asked by Councilmember Hanus who was concerned about keeping CDBG funds within the City, working to help those in need. She did not understand what this referred to. City Manager Ed Shukle explained that approximately $50,000 was allocated for the purposes of rehabilitating private property. He stated that these monies are used in Mound for this purpose and are awarded based on income guidelines established by HUD and Hennepin County. He explained that there is usually a waiting list and if the money is not spent over a 3-4 year period, would go back to Hennepin County. Every effort is made to try to spend the money within the City of Mound. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Polston and carried unanimously to approve the Minutes of the February 27, 1996 Regular Council Meeting. 1.3 CONTINUED DISCUSSION: RECOMMENDATION FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COW[MISSION RE: DETERMINATION OF ABUTTING STATUS FOR 4700 WILSHIRE BLVD. The City Manager explained that this had been on the February 27, 1996 agenda. The City Council had asked the city attorney to provide an opinion on whether this particular dock location would be considered an abutting dock to the property as listed above. The city attorney referred it to Mr. John Dean, Acting City Attorney, who then provided an opinion. Mr. Dean explained the request and how he could determine that it deserves an abutting status. He stated that under Section 437.05, Subd. 7A, that an abutting owner has first priority for a City designated dock located within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline. He further stated Minutes - Mound City Council March 12, 1996 that two elements are required: 1). That the property is abutting on Commons, and; property lines, when extended across the Commons, contain an area of lakeshore. several assumptions, which are as follows: 2). The He listed 3, 4. 5. The dimensions and street and lot locations shown in the official plat of SETON are correct. The lakeshore location depicted at page 814 of the February 27, 1996 council agenda is correct. Resolution No. 84-17 vacating a portion of Excelsior is in full force and effect. Richard Jacobson is the owner of at least, Lot 1, Block 31, SETON together with the west one-half of vacated Excelsior. Excelsior is a commons which is part of the City's dock program. The vacated portion of Excelsior is no longer part of the common. He further stated that the ordinance contains no definition for the term abutting. Consequently, the Council is free to select from among the possible definitions, the one which most closely accomplishes its objectives. Following the vacation of a portion of Excelsior, Lot 1, Block 31, SETON, touches the commons at its northeast comer. If the Council accepts the definition, the first element of the ordinance is satisfied. With regard to contained shoreline, Mr. Dean explained that between the extended north and south lot lines of Lot 1, Block 31, a small area of commons shoreline is contained. That area has four characteristics which seem to be present in all first priority locations. He reviewed these with the Council via a transparency: 2. 3. 4. The property abuts the commons The extended property lines contain a shoreline At least part of the contained shoreline is not in private ownership No private property is located between the abutting commons and the First Priority Shoreline Therefore, Mr. Dean is of the opinion that the Council could use the extended Lot 1 line to set the north boundary, and the dock location becomes abutting. The City Council briefly discussed it and directed the city attorney to prepare a resolution approving the abutting status to be brought back at the next regular meeting. 1.4 SET PUBLI~ I~EARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAl, USE PER~T TO ALLQW A DRIVE-IN BUSINESS SERVING FOOD AND BEVERAQE$ AT 2242 COMMERCE BLVD. PARTS OF LOTS 40-46, PID 13-117- MOTION byXAffrens, seconded by Jensen and carried unanimously to set the public hearing for April 9, 1996, at 7:30 PM. 2 Minutes - Mound City Council 1.5 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT, Mayor Polston asked if there were any comments and suggestions from citizens present. There being no citizens present, they moved onto the next item on the agenda. 1.6 PAYMENT OF BILLS, MOTION by Polston, seconded by Jensen to authorize the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of $249,537.08, when funds become available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.7 LICENSE RENEWALS The following licenses are up for renewal. The license period is April 1, 1996 through March 31, 1997. Approval is contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being submitted. Hawker Blue Bell Ice Cream Set-Up License Al & Alma's Supper Club Tree Removal License Aaspen Tree Service Emery's Tree Service Four Season's Tree Service Randy's Tress Service Shorewood Tree Service The Tree-Stump Co. Woodsmen Tree Service Precision Landscape MOTION by Polston, seconded by Ahrens and carried unanimously to approve the licenses as submitted. Motion carried. 1.8 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS: A. DEPARTMENT HEAD MONTHLY REPORTS FOR FEBRUARY, 1996. B. LMCD REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT FOR FEBRUARY, 1996. C. LMCD MAILINGS. Minutes - Mound City Council March 12, 1996 De REMINDER: PUBLIC HEARINGS RE: MCTO BUS SERVICE TO MOUND. NEAREST LOCATION IS WAYZATA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 1996, 7 PM. DUE TO LACK OF A QUORUM, THE MARCH 19, 1996 COMMTFFEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING IS CANCELLED. 1.9 MCTO SERVICE CHANGE Mayor Polston asked a question regarding the MCTO bus service to Mound. He indicated that the Senior Citizens and others were going to be attending the public hearing in Wayzata on March 14th. He suggested that a resolution be prepared and faxed to the MCTO officials prior to the public hearing. The resolution should incorporate the need for service for persons on part time jobs who need to get to Ridgedale and other places during off peak hours. In addition, students, who don't have driver's licenses, but must get to different places at different time of the day need to have bus service. Also, the elderly are affected by the proposed reduction in service. Other alternatives for bus service ought to be researched in lieu of service reduction. The City Manager will prepare a resolution and have it sent to the MCTO prior to the public hearing. Mayor Polston moved and Councilmember Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION g96-29 RESOLUTION OPPOSING REDUCTIONS IN MCTO TRANSIT SERVICE TO THE CITY OF MOUND. The vote was unanimously in favor. Resolution passed. The City Manager also noted that the sales data books, as prepared by the Hennepin County Assessor's Office were now ready for distribution to the Council. This information will be of some assistance for the Council as they prepare for the April 23, 1996 Board of Review meeting. MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Ahrens and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 7:57 PM. Minutes submitted by City Manager Ed Shukle. Ed Shukle, City Manager 4 PROPOSED RESOLUTION //96- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE RECOGNIZING EXISTING NONCONFORMING SETBACKS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING ADDITION AT 1969 LAKESIDE LANE LOT 3, BLOCK 11, SHADYWOOD POINT PID 18-117-23230049, P&Z CASE//96-06 WHEREAS, the owners, Anthony and Jennifer Palesotti, have applied for variance to recognize the existing nonconforming dwelling and boat house in order to construct a conforming addition on the// lake side of the dwelling and a conforming entry deck on the street side of the dwelling, and; WHEREAS, the subject property is a lot-of-record located within the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires a lot area of 10, 00-~square feet, a 30 foot front yard setback, side yard setbacks of 6 feet and 10 feet, and a 50 foot setback to the ordinary high water (OHW), and; WHEREAS, the existing dwelling is in good condition; it has a nonconforming side yard setback of 4.5 feet to the west, resulting in a 1.5 foot setback variance, and due to practical difficulty it is unlikely, due to the proposed addition, that this nonconforming setback can be eliminated at this time, and; ~ ~ c.~ WHEREAS, the existing boat house is setback 20 feet +/- from the OHW, a 50 foot setback r~qmred. 2'h~aoat~ ......... oc,,,~,, in ..... ~ ..... -C4L~ ,..,,,~ Section 300:15, Sub~ r ud: , ut ,u,.aL~ so the, ,,,~uL ia at-er4bo~.~___ ~}~ ' "ati~P for Lake M!_~meto,4', is 931 fl& flnnr -~ i: k,~,,,, t~,~ ,~,~,,o,~,,,, ~ q~., ~d; The boat house is in good condition, it is anchored with wood post footings (similar to typical deck construction), and it could reasonably be relocated or removed, and; WHEREAS, the long-term purpose of the nonconforming use section of the ordinance is to promote the removal of nonconforming structures. This coupled with the goals and policies as stated within the ordinances and comprehensive plan leads to the conclusion that the nonconforming boat house should be brought into conformance at the earliest possibility, and; WHEREAS, no fill is allowed below the elevation of 931.5 without approval from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and; WHEREAS, the lowest floor of the existing house and proposed addition will be at 933.6 WHEREAS, all other setbacks, lot area, and impervious lot coverage are conforming, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended approval, as recommended by staff, with 5 in favor and 1 opposed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby grant a variance recognizing the existing nonconforming 4.5 foot side yard setback to the dwelling to allow construction of a conforming addition, subject to the following conditions: Proposed Resolution Palesotti, 96-06 P. 2 o The boat house must be relocated to a conforming location or be removed from the site prior to building permit issuance. bo The applicants shall submit a drainage plan that shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to building permit issuance. The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420, Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and restrictions of Section 350:420. 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 12.8' x 28.8' two story addition, 12' x 12' three season porch, and a 16.8' x 12' deck on the lake side of the dwelling, and a conforming entry deck on the street side of the dwelling. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: Lot 3, Block 11, Shadywood Point. 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. LakeSide ~o. K w.) I~innetonka MINUTES OF A MF~ETING OF ~ MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 11, 1996 CASE 96-06: ANTHONY & JENNIFER PALESOTTI, 1969 LAKE~qlDE LANE, LOT 3. BLOCK 11, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID 18-117-23 23 0049. VARIANCE FOR .ADDITION Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the staff report. The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming dwelling and boat house in order to allow construction of an addition on the lake side, as shown on the survey. The proposal also includes a small conforming entry deck. The existing dwelling has a setback of 4.5 feet to the closest point on the west side, the required side yard setbacks are 6 and 10 feet resulting in the recognition of a 1.5 foot side yard variance. The proposed addition has conforming setbacks. Impervious surface coverage is conforming at less than 30 %, including the boat house. The applicant presented new survey information relating to the floodplain concerns. Sutherland related that the lowest floor of the existing house and proposed addition will be at 933.6, however, the boat house is in the floodplain. Sutherland commented that things stored in boat houses are usually not subject to flood damage, but this would be one more building that would need to be reported to FEMA as being located within the floodplain, if it is not relocated or removed. Suthefland emphasized that no fill is allowed below the elevation of 931.5 without approval from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The applicant confirmed that they do not foresee this happening. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 The nonconforming boat house is setback 20 feet +/- from the OHW, a 50 foot setback is required, resulting in recognition of a 30 foot variance. Since the floor of the boat house is located within the floodplain, this must be addressed by variance approval or relocation. The structure is in good condition, it is anchored with wood post footings (similar to typical deck construction), and could easily be relocated. The Planning Commission may consider a condition that the boat house be moved to a conforming location or removed. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance recognizing the existing nonconforming side yard setback to the dwelling to allow construction of a conforming addition, subject to the condition that the boat house be relocated to a conforming location or be removed from the site. The applicant, Anthony Palesotti, noted that the floor of the boat house is about eighteen inches above ground, and questioned if this this takes the building out of the flood plain. Sutherland clarified that the code requires the floor to be at or above the elevation of 933, and the floor of the boat house is below this elevation. Weiland confirmed that the structure should be setback 50 feet from the ordinary high water. The Building Official confirmed that the entire structure is within the 50 foot setback. Sutherland noted that relocation on the lot will be difficult due to the location of three large existing trees and the flood plain elevation. The applicant expressed a concern that to move the boat house anywhere else on the lot would require excavating and leveling. Weiland commented that it is not their responsibility to find where to put the boat house. Glister agreed that now is the time for them to address this nonconforming situation. Mr. Palesotti stated that the neighbors have no objections to the existing location of the boat house, it does not obstruct their views. He noted that down the street there is a boat house that is in the flood plain and a shed that is closer to the lake than 50 feet, and they have done improvements to their properties. Michael commented that they are not concerned about the neighbors opinions regarding views. Sutherland confirmed that a neighbor to the north, was doing construction on his house, a stop work order was issued, he went through the variance process, and he does have a nonconforming shed. Mueller noted that their neighbors property has a unique situation due to the contour of the shoreline on the adjacent City property. Palesotti stated that their realtor told them that the boat house can remain until it burns down. Mueller commented that this is another reason to have a Truth in Housing Ordinance, which he has supported for many years. Mueller commented that the boat house is in good shape, and questioned if it was recently repaired. He finds the appearance ugly from the lake and thinks it should be removed, however does not want to see trees ruined just to relocate it, and if it is moved to the east it would inhibit the neighbors view of the lake. Mueller noted that the Shoreland Management Ordinances requires that the visibility of structures from public waters be reduced, such as by vegetation, Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 and if the boat house is to remain, he would support a recommendation to require landscaping to reduce the visibility of the boat house from the water. Glister would like to see the boat house brought into conformity as much as possible, and emphasized that now is the time. Voss liked Mueller's comments, however, does not believe it is a good long term solution. Voss would like to see a positive recommendation but require the boat house be moved. MOTION by Voss, seconded by Weiland, to recommend approval of the variance, as recommended by staff. Mueller expressed a concern with drainage and how the roof lines create water to drain directly onto the neighbors property. He noted that the garage has no gutters or downspouts. Mueller would like the motion to include a statement that ail water from the current and future improvements must be contained on the lot for the improvements aspect of it. Sutherland commented that staff would welcome an amendment to the motion such as, "the applicants shail submit a drainage plan that shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Voss and Weiland accepted an amendment to the motion that the applicants shall submit a drainage plan that shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Mueller questioned if the boat house could remain if the floor was raised. Creating a precedence was discussed. Weiland suggested that the boat house could be dismantled, and reconstructed to be smaller and in a conforming location. Mueller clarified that the basement of the house is at 933.6, and suggested that a storage area could be constructed under the screen porch. The applicants commented that the view out of their sliding door would then be eliminated. The applicant questioned when the boat house would have to be removed. It was clarified that the way the motion stands, the boat house would be required to be removed before a building permit could be issued for the addition. The applicant stated that they would like to use the boat house for storage during construction. Sutherland noted that it may be possible to ailow the boat house to remain until after construction, but it would require a bond or escrow deposit and an agreement with the City to guarantee removai. Mueller asked for a friendly amendment to the motion to allow the boat house to remain until one year after building permit issuance, subject to the required bond/escrow and a suitable agreement as approved by the City Attorney. The maker of the motion, Voss, did not accept the amendment, and suggested it could be made as a separate motion. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Motion carried 5 to 1. Those in favor were: Voss, Weiland, Michael, Glister, and Reifschneider. Mueller was opposed. Mueller commented that it sounds like the applicant would like to have a year before the boat house must be removed. This case will be heard by the City Council on March 26, 1996. Certificate of Survey for Anthony & Jennifer Paiesotti of Lot 3, Block 11, Shadywood Point HennepJn County, Minnesota LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED; Lot 3, Block 11, Shadywood Point. TillS survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house, garage, and boathouse thereon, and the location of all existing visible "hard- cover"~thereon. It does not pur¢brt to show any other improvements or encroachmedts. · : Iron marker '~ound o : Iron marker set Bearings shown are based upo~ an assumed datum. RECEIVED L~O Certificate of Survey for Anthony & Jennifer Palesotti of Lot 3, Block $1, Shadywood Point Hennepin County, Minnesota F/. ~r.. Et6d. q~ .(~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PR'EMISES SURVEYED: Lot 3 Block 11. Shadywood Point. This survey ntends to show the boundaries of the above des£ribed properly, and'the location of an existing house, gar,age, and boathouse thereon, and the location of all existing visible "hard- cover"'thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. · : Iron marker found o : Iron marker set Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. CITY OF MOUND STAFF REPORT 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: CASE NO. LOCATION: ZONING: Planning Commission Agenda of March 11, 1996 Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff Jon Sutherland, Building Official Variance Request Anthony and Jennifer Palesotti 96-06 1969 Lakeside Lane, Lot 3, Block 11, Shadywood Point, PID #18-117-23 23 0049. R-1 Single Family Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming dwelling and boat house in order to allow construction of an addition on the lake side, as shown on the attached survey. The proposal also includes a small conforming entry deck. The existing dwelling has a setback of 4.5 feet to the closest point on the west side, the required side yard setbacks are 6 and 10 feet resulting in the recognition of a 1.5 foot side yard variance. The proposed addition has conforming setbacks, however, it needs to be determined if there are any encroachments into the floodplain by filling orby the lowest floor of the addition. Any fill or modification within the flood plain requires specific approvals by the City and other agencies, such as the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). At the time this report was developed, the floodplain elevation and any impacts had not been confirmed. The nonconforming boathouse is setback 20 feet +/- from the OHW, a 50 foot setback is required, resulting in recognition of a 30 foot variance. The floor of the boat house is located within the floodplain, and this condition must be addressed by variance approval or relocation. The structure is in good condition, it is anchored with wood post footings (similar to typical deck construction), and could easily be relocated. The Planning Commission may consider a condition that the boat house be moved to a conforming location or removed. Impervious surface coverage is conforming at less than 30%, including the boathouse. pr~nted on recycled paper Staff Report Palesotti p. 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance recognizing the existing nonconforming side yard setback to the dwellino to nllow con~tructlon of n conformlno nddltlon, ~ubj~ct to th~ condition thnt th~ boat house be relocated to a conforming location or be removed from the site. JS:pj The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on March 26, 1996. VARIANCE APPLICATION 341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 (FOR'-OF'IqCE 'USE ONLY) .... Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: Distribution; ~:~'~'~ City Planner ~ DNR ~ City Engineer Oiher ~ ~ Public Works PROPERTY Lot - LEGAL Sub~ D~C. Pm, /~ //~?- 2 3 23 ~C>~0 Plat # PROPERTY Name dA~~ / Phone (H) APPLICANT Name (n: OTHER Address Phone (H) (W). (M) OWNER) 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. 2. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or altera~on (size, number of stories, type of use, etc )' ,._ z~ _ rn~z,'Fl'F-,7' I.u,~,x ~ / __ ,, " " ' /-/ ',-..' ', . ,/_./ ,- .I O~.~ L · (. ':.. I Z.~ a ZS':-e~ ". '- a--~ ~:..T..:: - Var':ance Application, P. 2 Case No. 3. 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 (or existing) VARIANCE Front Yard: Side Yard: Side Yard: Rear Yard: Lakeside: (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. ( w ) 5D ft. D ft. ft. · (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. Street Frontage: ft. ft. ft. Lot Size: _~ ft sq ft sq ft Hardcover: sq ft sq ft sq 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 situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify Please describe: Va6.ance Application, P. 3 Cage No. 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: e Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No (). If yes, explain: o 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. Applicant's Signatu~ ~~~ ~~~/~~Date /~~>~ (Rev. 12/8/95) Certificate of Survey for Anthony & Jennifer Pa]esotti of Lot 3, Block 11, Shadywood Point Hennepin County, Minnesota / / / / LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED: Lot 3, Block 11, Shadywood Poin[. lhls survey intends to show tile boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house, garage, and boathouse thereon, and the location of ail existing visible "hard- cover"ethereon. It does not pur~6rt to show any other improvements or encroachments. · : Iron marker ~'ound o : Iron marker set Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. RE .P, EIVED .~D PLANNING & INSP. ' 4Fo \\O (THE NEXT PAGE IS 971) Cr'FY OF MC)UND HAROCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPERTY ADDRESS: IG[~d~ L~I~,E~'j~' /.,,4~. /4f/~J/ j[f/,~ OWNER'S NAME: A~O-~¥ ~ "~'~iFE'~ ~[~-_~>"~/' ~OIIND P~,,INI)2G & INSP. LOT AREA SO. FT. X 30% = (for all lots) .............. I I LOT AREA /~ ;~"'~) SQ. FT. X _40% -- (for Lots of Record*) ....... I__~_~z~)_l LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15% = (for detached buildings only) eExisting Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. _ ~~~,t~.. ~ ~~"'"'"'~'"'"'"'"'" '"".__ ..,___ _ ,_~-,,:;',:;;:~"~' X[~ :F_J~~,'"" "' ' '"'" · LENGTH WIDTH SQ F'r' HOUSE X = DETACHED BLDGS (GARAGE/SHED) · DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ETC. DECKS Open decks (114" min. opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover OTHER TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. X = X = X = TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC .................. X = X = X = TOTAL DECK .......................... ~ x .¢" = /,.g"d). O X = TOTALOTHER ......................... /,262. q "/5'8,9 /£O.O TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE I~1 OVER (indicate differ~ce) ............................... T AtSov~' ul T ID' RECEIVED ,~OU,ND PLN~NI~.JG & INS[ RECEIVED ~LII4D PU~NNING & tNSP. OF: Iz' DE'C ~ ADDRESS: SURVEY ON F,LE? REQUIRED STREET FRONTAGE/WIDTH: ZONE: REQ. LOT AREA: LOT OF RECORD? / ? EXIST. LOT AREA: EXISTING LOT WIDTH: ~ ! ')"/.. EXISTING LOT DEPTH: ) ~0 ' +/-- REQUIRED SETBACKS PRINCIPA,I~UILDING / HOUSE FRONT: N~tS E W '~(.,.~ / FRONT: N ¢, SIDE: N SIDE: N j (~ ' REAR: N S E ~ 15' LAKESHORE: 50' (measured from O.H.W.} TOP OF BLUFF: ~ ACCESSQBY BUILDING/GARAGE/SHED FRONT:~N~S E W '~-0 · FRONT:'"R S E W SIDE: N S E W 4' or 6' SIDE: N S E W 4' or 6' REAR: N S E W 4' LAKESHORE: TOP OF BLUFF: 50' (measured from O.H.W.) EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED SETBACKS: y summanzes a portion of the requIrements ou~ Ordinance. For further information, contact the City of Mound Planning Department at 472-0600. pRINCIPAL BUILDING/HOUSE ACCESSORY BUILDING/GARAGE/~IED ~0~T ~5~ FRONT: N S E W ~"l(:~ ' '~/'" FRONT: N S E W ~' */- FRONT: N S E W FRONT: N S E W SIDE: ~S E~ ~,~ ~ ~ SIDE: N S E W ~, ~ ~ SIDE- N S~ W / ~ · ~ t~ ~ p~O SIDE: N S E W ~ ' REAR: N S E W REAR: N S E W LAKESHORE: ~ LAKESHORE: ~ ' ~/_ ~ TOP OF BLUFF: TOP OF BLUFF: HARDCOVER CONFORMING~~O / 7 IS THIS PROPERTY CONFORMING7 YE PROPOSED RESOLUTION #96- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE RECOGNIZING AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE AT 2031 BELLAIRE LANE ALL OF LOT 64 & N. 1/2 OF LOTS 65 & 67 MOUND ADDITION, PID 14-117-24 41 0036 P&Z CASE #96-08 WHEREAS, the owner, Jesse Erickson, has applied for variance to recognize ~ existing~ onconforming front yard setback of 18.5' to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 22 detached J ag%, and; / WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-2 One and Two Faraily Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires for single family dwellings a lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 20 foot front yard setback to both Sunset Road and Bellaire Lane, and a 15 foot rear yard setback, and; WHEREAS, all other setbacks, lot area, and impervious lot coverage are conforming, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RF~OLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby grant a variance recognizing the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 18.5 feet to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 22' detached garage. The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420, Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and restrictions of Section 350:420. 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 24' x 22' detached garage. 4. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: All of Lot 64 & N. 1/2 of Lots 6 5& 67, Mound Addition 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. q-Tq MINUTES OF A MF. ETING OF TI-IF. MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 11, 1996 CASE 96-08: JESSE ERICKSON, 2031 BELLAIRE LANE, LOT 64 & N 1/2 OF 65 & 67 MOUND ADDITION, PI]) 14-117-24 41 0036. VARIANCE FOR GARAGE Building Official, Ion Sutherland, reviewed the staff report. The applicant is seeking a variance to rebuild a detached garage in a conforming location that was destroyed by fire. The existing dwelling has a nonconforming setback of 18.5' +/- to the front, the required setback is 20 feet resulting in the recognition of a 1.5' +/- variance. The property is conforming in all other Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance to recognize the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 18.5' +/- to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 22' detached garage. The request is a reasonable use of the property and is conforming to setbacks and other provisions of the ordinance. Mueller expressed a concern about drainage and noted that the roof line slopes towards the property to the west. Staff noted Mueller's concerns. Motion by Weiland to recommend approval of the variance as recommended by staff. Seconded by Mueller. Motion carried unanimously. This case will be reviewed by the City Council on March 27, 1996 6 CITY OF MOUND STAFF REPORT 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: CASE NO. LOCATION: ZONING: Planning Commission Agenda of March 11, 1996 Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~ Variance Request Jesse Erickson 96-08 2031 Bellaire Lane, All of Lot 64 and N 1/2 of Lots 65 & 67, Mound Addition, PID 14-117-2441 0036 R-2 One and Two Family Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance to rebuild a detached garage in a conforming location that was destroyed by fire. The existing dwelling has a nonconforming setback of 18.5' +/- to the front, the required setback is 20 feet resulting in the recognition of a 1.5' +/- variance. The property is conforming in all other aspects. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance to recognize the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 18.5' +/- to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 22' detached garage. The request is a reasonable use of the property and is conforming to setbacks and other provisions of the ordinance. JS:pj The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on March 26. 1996. printed on recycled paper J (FOR OtqqCE USE ONLY) VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 Application Fee: $50.O0 Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: City Planner City Engineer Public Works DNR SUBJECT PROPERTY LEGAL DESC. PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT (IF OTHER THAN OWNER) Lot ~l~oFLo+ Subdivision Block -" Plat# (M) Has an application ever been made for .,,zonMg, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? { ) yes, (~Y'no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 2. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): (Rev. 12/8/95) Variance Application, P. 2 Case No. o Do the existing structures comply with all ar/ea, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No (vJ. If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED, ,~ I- VARIANCE (or existing) 0 I~' Front Yard: ( _N S E W ) ft. ./ ft. I' ft. Side Yard: ({~)S E W ) ~;ko' ft. lq e~,~s*, ft. ft. Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft. Rear Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft- Lakeside: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft. : (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft Street Frontage: Lot Size: Hardcover: Does the present/use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (v)', 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 (~f~xisting situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify (Rev. 12/8/95) Variance Application, P. 3 Case No. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone~baving property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No (~. If yes, explain: Was thg/hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No (~. If yes, explain: o Are the conditions of har/dahip 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? 9. 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 required by law. Applicants Signature (.~. ~2/~/~$) Date Date CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPERTY ADDRESS: '~"©SI ~t//~rL ~-~,v~ OWNER'S NAME: -~"LS~ ~-r[~-V,,-~o~ LOT AREA ~,4-t ~00 SQ. FT. X 30% LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15% = (for all lots) .............. I ~-~r~0 I = (for Lots of Record*) ....... = (for detached buildings only) . . *Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. HOUSE DETACHED BLDGS (GARAGE(~ DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ETC. DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover OTHER LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT x ;k~ = 1~'~, lro' x 4-' : 64 $' x I : S TOTAL HOUSE ......................... %.~,' x ~ : 5~ x t~' : ct(= TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. 'So' x '~'- (," : X = TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC .................. X = X = X = TOTAL DECK .......................... X = X = TOTAL OTHER ......................... TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE .~ OVER (indicate difference) ............................... I CE]C'H,'ICATE OF LOCATION 0F BUII.DING [hcreby cer[ify that on ..... ~:* , made a survey of lhe localion of ~)~e buiidinK(s) on the above described properly ~u}d Chat tl~e location of aaid buihtin~(s) is corrcc[ly~howl~ on [he above pla~. .'~' ~ ) 3//~',~ ~",' '." ".'/t~ r 1// /'~/"-:~-x-',-.~ ~'-.':' ,,~ CI.;IYi'IiVlCATE OF SURVEY I hereby certify that .n ____19__ I l;urvcyeg-khc property described above nml tlmt thc aboYe plat is a correct representation of said surYey. ADDRESS: I Z~E REQ. LOT AREA: SQ FT /? IEXIST. LOT AREA: 14< O0 Z°' REQUIRED SETBACKS PRINCIPAL BUI).,DING/HO=USE/ FRONT: I~ Sf' E) W ~ FRONT: i~I2S~E' W ~:~) / .~U I~'~..'~' SIDE: '1~ ~E W LAKESHORE: ~' (measured from O.H.W.) TOP OF BLUFF: ACCESSORY BUILDING/GARAGE/SHED FRONT: N S E W ~ FRONT: N S E W SIDE: N S E W 4' or 6' SIDE: N S E W 4' or 6' REAR: N S E W 4' LAKESHORE: 50' (measured from O.H.W.) TOP OF BLUFF: EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED SETBACKS: PRINCIPAL BUdDING/HOUSE FRONT: ~ S~) FRONT:(N) S E SIDE: ~ E SIDE: N~E~ REAR: N S E~ LAKESHORE: TOP OF BLUFF: ACC ESSJ:~Y BUILDING/GARAGE/SHED FRONT~ S FRONT: N S(E)W SIDE: N S"E W SIDE: N S E W REAR: N S E W LAKESHORE: TOP OF BLUFF: HARDCOVER CONFORMING7 _YE...., NO 7 IS THIS PROPERTY CONFORMING7 YES 7 DATE' .- BY: This Gen~al Zoning Information Sheet only summanzes a port,on ot the requirements outlmeo in the City of Mound Zonin Ordinance. For further information, contact the City of Mound Planning Department at 472-0600. o RESOLUTION RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ABUTTING STATUS OF PROPERTY OF LOT 1, BLOCK 31, SETON 4700 WILSHIRE BLVD. WHEREAS, the City of Mound licenses and regulates the number and location of docks situated on public commons within the City; and WHEREAS, the ordinance code of the City allocates certain priorities to individuals requesting dock locations on public commons; and WHEREAS, the City has received a request from the owner of Lot 1, Block 31, Seton, for a determination by the City regarding to what priority, if any, the said lot would be entitled; and WHEREAS, the request was duly referred to this City Council for review and decision; and WHEREAS, this City Council has now reviewed the request of the owner, reviewed the materials and recommendations provided by the City Staff and is fully informed regarding the matters at issue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council as follows: I. Findings - 1. Richard Jacobson is the owner of several lots located within Block 31, Seton; among them is Lot 1, Block 31, Seton. 2. The Plat of Seton contains a dedication at Excelsior Road to the public. 3. The lake shore portions of Excelsior Road have been treated as public commons for the purpose of inclusion within the scope of the City's dock regulations. 4. In 1984 a portion of Excelsior Road was vacated by official action of the City Council. The vacated portion of Excelsior Road ceased to be part of the public commons upon vacation. The vacated and unvacated portions of Excelsior Road, the location of Lot 1, Block 31, Seton and the assumed location of the Shoreline are all depicted on the attached Exhibit A, 5. Section 437.05, Subd. 7 (a) provides: a. First Priority. An abutting owner has first priority for a City designated location within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline. Docks shall be located in accordance with the dock location map. Page 2 II. Conclusions - 1. Lot 1, Block 31, Seton abuts upon the Excelsior Road Commons at the northeasterly comer of said Lot 1. Under the circumstances presented here, abutment at that point is sufficient to qualifying the owner of LOt 1, Block 3 as an abutting owner as the term is used in the above cited ordinance. 2. A line of shoreline is contained between the easterly extensions of the north and south lot lines of said Lot 1. That area is depicted on the attached Exhibit A. It is along that line of shoreline that the owner of LOt 1, Block 31, Seton shall have priority for a designated dock location. factors: The foregoing conclusion is based in part on the presence of the following five a) b) c) d) Lot 1, Block 31, Seton abuts a common The extended property lines contain a shoreline At least part of the contained shoreline is not in private ownership No privately owned property lies between the abutting property and the public shoreline There are no conflicting claims for priority status to the designated location which are of equal merit. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Manager Resolution approved: JoHs B. DEAN Attorney at Law Dim~ Di~l (612) 337-9207 KENNEDY & GRAVEN March 7, 1996 Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1687 FAX AND MAIL RE: Reouest by Richard Jacobson for "abut'ting" status Dear Mr. Shulde: At its February 27 meeting, the City Council directed our office for its opinion whether the property owned by Mr. Jacobson, which has a street address of 4700 Wilshire Boulevard qualifies for the dock location priority under the provision of Mound City Code Section 437.05, Subd. 7(a) ("First Priority"). For the reasons stated below, it is our opinion that the City Council could determine, in its reasonable discretion, that the property is entitled to the First Priority. A. The Ordinance. Section 437.05, Subd. 7(a) of the Mound City Code provides: a. First Priority. An abutting owner has first priority for a City designated location within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline. Docks shall be located in accordance with the dock location map. Two Elements are Required. 1) 2) The property abut a commons; and the property lines when extended across the commons contain an area of lake shore. B. 4700 Wilshire Boulevard~ In reaching our conclusion, several assumptions have been made. This opinion is correct only to the extent that the assumptions which are reflected in the attached Exhibit ~A, are correct. The assumptions are stated as follows: are correct. The dimensions and street and lot locations.shown in the official plat of SETON Edward Shukle, March 7, 1996 Page Two Jr. is correct. Thc lake shore location depicted at page 814 of thc February 27 council agenda 3. Resolution No. 84-17 vacating a portion of Excelsior is in full force and effect. 4. Richard Sacobson is the owner of at least, Lot 1, Block 31, SETON together with thc west one-half of vacated Excelsior. 5. Excelsior is a commons which is part of the City's dock program. The vacated portion of Excelsior is no longer part of the commons. C. .Analysis Abutting. Thc ordinance contains no definition for thc term "abutting". Consequently the council is free to select from among the possible definitions, the one which most closely accomplishes its objectives. Following vacation of a portion of Excelsior, Lot 1, Block 31 SETON touches the commons at its Northeast corner (red dot on Exhibit A. Touching, meeting or joining at a comer can constitute an acceptable definition of "abutting". If the Council accepts that definition, the first element of the ordinance is satisfied. Contained Shoreline. Between the extended North and South lot lines of Lot 1, Block 31 a small area of commons shoreline is contained. The area is shown in red on the attached Exhibit A. That area has four characteristics which seem to be present in all First Priority locations. 2. 3. 4. The property abuts a commons The extend property lines contain a shoreline At least part of the contained shoreline is not in private ownership No private property is located between the abutting commons and the First Priority Shoreline The referenced ordinance refers to shoreline lying between the extended lot lines. It can be argued that the annexation of the west 1/2 of vacated Excelsior to Lot 1 causes the "lot line" to deflect down and entirely miss the possible dock area shown on the exhibit. However, because Lot 1 abutted on the Excelsior commons both before and after vacation, I believe it would be more appropriate for the Council to use the extended Lot 1 line to set the north boundary. SBD:ds nB. Dean ~ MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION FEBRUARY 8, 1996 REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF ABUTTING STATUS FOR 4700 WlLSHIRE BLVD. Parks Director, Jim Fackler, reviewed the staff report. The applicant is seeking to have the property at 4700 Wilshire Blvd. designated as an "abutting" property as referred to under Mound City Code Section 437:05, Subd. 7.a. The dock location area affected is Excelsior Lane which currently has 23 dock sites. All 23 dock sites were issued a license in 1995. The 1996 available dock sites will not be known until the first week of April when all renewals have been received. Because of the location of this property in relationship to the dock site area, which would have the extended property line running parallel to the shoreline, a dock site would not fall "within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline" as stated in Section 437.05, Subd. 7.a. If it is determined that this property is "abutting" with first priority rights, it would also have to be determined how staff would proceed in assigning a site. Possibilities include: 1) Give abutting property the closest site #32340 which has been renewed by the same party for about 10 years. 2) Assign a site upon availability when a site comes open and allow the site to change to locations closer to the abutting property as they become available. (Note - this may take more than one year due to renewals.) The Parks Director clarified that their is no definition for "abutting." Mr. Jacobson, understands about the lines projecting into the commons shoreline, however, indicated that his parcel is actually closer to the water than any other properties adjacent to the Excelsior Lane commons. He would be happy to take the next available spot and eventually move closer to his property as the dock sites become available. Jacobson stressed that this is an unusual and unique situation. Darling suggested that it should not be the Park Commissions responsibility to recommend if this property is abutting or not. MOTION by Darling, seconded by Geffre, to recommend to the City Council that this issue be reviewed by the City Attorney to get an opinion whether this property can be considered 'abutting". Motion carried unanimously. This recommendation will be reviewed by the City Council on February 2.7, 1996. Mr. Jacobson indicated that he will be out of town, howeverj would prefer the item remain on that agenda. -- CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 Staff ReD0rt DATE: January 25, 1996 TO: Park and Open Space Commission FROM: Jim Fackler, Parks Director SUBJECT: REQUEST BY RICHARD JACOBSON FOR "ABUTTING" STATUS AT 4700 WlLSHIRE BLVD. The applicant is seeking to have the property at 4700 Wilshire Blvd. designated as an "abutting" property as referred to under Mound City Code Section 437:05, Subd. 7.a. "First Priority - an abutting owner has first priority ..... " The dock location area affected is Excelsior Lane which currently has 23 dock sites. All 23 dock sites were issued a license in 1995. The 1996 available dock sites will not be known until the first week of April when all renewals have been received. Because of the location of this property in relationship to the dock site area, which would have the extended property line running parallel to the shoreline, a dock site would not fall "within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline" as stated in Section 437.05, Subd. 7.a. If it is determined that this property is "abutting" with first priority rights, it would also have to be determined how staff would proceed in assigning a site. Possibilities include: 1) 2) Give abutting property the closest site #32340 which has been renewed by the same party for about 10 years. Assign a site upon availability when a site comes open and allow the site to change to locations closer to the abutting property as they become available. (Note - this may take more than one year due to renewals.) cc: Richard Jacobson4200 Wilshire Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 LARRY E. COULTER ATTORNEY AT LAW 9100 West Bloomington Freeway, Suile 122 Bloomington, MN 55431 (612) 888-9579 Fax (612) 888-2711 RECEIVED ' '-" , Z January 18, 1996 Richard L. Jacobson 4200 Wilshire Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Application Dear Mr. Jacobson: You have requested that I review the Mound City Code Provisions relating to issuance of dock licenses so as to be able to counsel you relating to your impending application to the City of Mound for such a license. After reviewing the Code Provisions, the plat of Seton and the survey of your property prepared by Schoborg Land Surveying, Inc., I am of the opinion that you should be eligible for a license for a dock on Seton Lagoon. Further, it would appear that your lot is so situated that you should have first priority under the ordinance for such a license. If you have any questions about the foregoing, please call me. Sincerely, RECEIVED ~UN~, "~:" INSP. January 19, 1996 To: City of Mound Please find attached a letter from Larry Coulter, my attorney, regarding the property located at 4700 Wilshire Blvd. I requesting this property be considered an abutting property torte commons area, which will give it first priority dock status. I submit this request at this time for the city's review. grateful for your consideration of this matter. I am /? ?0o V/EI/. = ~3z, 4 ._/,~7".J" /, z W'E£7- $CHOBORG SURVEYING INC. I hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was. prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minneso~-) /,~, ,,,,~ /? Date. ~,~'/,-~- ~ //~ec~ Reg~s--~tration No. 14700 JOB # Book - Page IIX) L(,~) tO ...... CAR · GAL'flAY RD ~ RD ~ ~Zl," { (? CA'/,~N s s R s~ ~D GOVT LOTS 3 & 4 18 (55) :"'- (56) ( -'FL · ~3.7 ,%. t ~8 "35 19-117-22 0 0 ~q u ......... .-.,~ ....... ~ _-.-'' ~l ) , ~! ............ ~- ..,, . :,, .,,, ~ / I I ROAD I ~ ! ~ "--~.-- -'~/ KILDARE _J ~ , --" .~ · CAR LOW ~ I I ,GALWAY] ~AD I . . C_-- P~ · .J iI I I ~UFFOLK ~L ~r It BEDFORD IL BRU. J~$WlCKO I RICHMOND DORCHESTER ROAD J j- -~r' r I I MANCHESTER CUMBERLAND ROAD ROAD ROAD ROAD City of Mound 1996 Seal Coat Program Sealed proposals will be received by the City Clerk until 11:00 A.M. Thursday April 11, 1996 at the City Offices, at which time they will be publicly opened and read aloud, for the furnishing of all labor, equipment and materials for the application of approximately 28,000 gallons of bituminous material and 1,400 tons of seal coat aggregate. The bids will be considered by the City Council at their meeting on Tuesday, April 1996. All proposals shall be addressed to: City Clerk City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 and shall be securely sealed and shall be endorsed on the outside with the statement "Proposal for 1996 Seal Coat Program" and shall be on the Bid Form included in the specifications for the project. Copies of the plans and specifications and other proposed contract documents are on f-fie with the City Clerk and at the office of McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc., 15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447. Plans and specifications for use in preparing bids may be obtained at the offices of the Engineer upon deposit of $20.00 per set. The full amount ofthe deposit will be refunded to each bidder who has made a deposit and has filed a bid with the OWNER and returns the plans and specifications within ten (10) days after the bids are opened. Each bidder shall file with his bid a cashier's check, certified check, or bid bond in an amount of not less than five (5) percent of the total amount of the bid. No bid may be withdrawn within sixty (60) days after the bids are opened. The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids and waive any informalities or irregularities therein. ATTEST: City of Mound, Minnesota Robert Polston, Mayor END OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 March 22, 1996 FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL LINDA STRONG, ACTING CITY CLERK "BY THE WAY SNACK SHOP" LICENSE RENEWALS Steve Bedell, owner of By the Way Snack Shop, is applying for the renewal of his Transient Merchant License and his Cigarette License. Attached is a resolution and a memo from Jon Sutherland, Building Inspector. Also attached is a letter from Steve Bedell. All forms have been filed, fees paid and insurance is current. He is requesting approval from the Council for the April to October 1996 season. lS printed on recycled paper RESOLUTION g96- RESOLUTION TO AMEND RESOLUTION g95-44 APPROVING A TRANSIENT MERCHANT LICENSE WITH CONDITIONS FOR A SEASONAL SNACK SHOP TRAILER AT 4801 SHORELINE DRIVE SKARP'S EAST LAWN, LOTS 1, 2, & 3, PID//13-117-24 44 0052 WHEREAS, Resolution//95-44 approved a Transient Merchant License for a seasonal snack shop trailer known as "By the Way Snack Shop," and; WHEREAS, a Transient Merchant License was obtained for the 1995 season by Steven Bedell, and; WHEREAS, no complaints have been received over the past year with regards to the operation of the snack shop, and; WHEREAS, condition #9 within Resolution 1/95-44 states, "The toilet facilities will be handicapped accessible and will be screened from the lake. These facilities shall not be within 50 feet of the lake, and will be removed from the parcel during the off-season." and; WHEREAS, Mr. Bedell has no employees other than himself, and the portable toilet on the property is provided as a convenience only, therefore, it is not required to be handicap accessible by the building code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, to approve an amendment to Resolution//95-44, condition//9, as follows: "9. The toilet facilities will be ~'~"'~: ..... -~ ...... :~.~ .,.,~ ..,m ~.~ screened from the lake. These facilities shall not be within 50 feet of the lake, and will be removed from the parcel during the off-season." CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAY1NOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 Memorandum DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: March 21, 1996 Mayor, City Council and City Manager Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~ ~ TRANSIENT MERCHANT LICENSE RENEWAL "BY THE WAY SNACK SHOP" 4801 SHORELINE DRIVE I am happy to report there have been no complaints received over the past year with regards to the operation of the snack shop. Mr. Bedell has submitted with his renewal application for a Transient Merchant License a request for an amendment to Resolution//95-44. Condition//9 requires the toilet facilities be handicap accessible, and he asked that this requirement be eliminated. It is my understanding that Mr. Bedell has no employees other than himself, and that the portable toilet is provided as a convenience only, therefore, is not required to be handicap accessible by the building code. JS:pj printed on recycled paper January 25, 1996 Mound City Council 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 To Mound City Council Members, I'd like to thank those who supported me last year in opening my business. It was a sucessfull summer and an encouraging first year. I am looking forward to spring and can't wait to open the doors to the snack shop and greet the boaters. Last summer there was nothing but positive response to the business, except for many boaters stating that ! had stole their idea. There were no incidents reported as a result of me opening the snack shop and I counted the Water Patrol as some of my most loyal customers. Last year there were many conditions I was required to follow to open the snack shop. I followed them all, even though some were questionable, I wanted to get open. I would ask that one condition of my license be removed. The condition requires that I must have a handicapped accessible portable bathroom. The bathroom was never used by a handicapped person. My customers are generally fishermen or smaller water craft and, from my experience of living on the lake all my life, handicapped boaters will usually be on a boat equipped with the necessary facilities for them. None of the Mound beaches have handicapped accessible bathrooms, nor did I see any at Winterfest or Mound City Days. Financially, this requirement was an anchor which cost nearly four times as much as a regular portable bathroom. Thank you! I look forward to seeing you and discussing this matter. Sincerely, Steve Bedell Owner- By The Way Snack Shop 472-2706 /coo RF. SOLUTION//95-4A April 25, 1995 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A TRANSrKNT MERCHANT LICENSE WITH CONDITIONS FOR A SEASONAL SNACK SHOP TRArLER AT 4801 SHORELINE DRIVE SKARP'S EAST LAWN, LOTS 1, 2 & 3, PID #13-11%24 44 0052 ~AS, Steven Matthew Bedell, d/b/a By the Way Snack Shop, has applied for a Transient Merchant License to allow a seasonal snack shop trailer at 4801 Shoreline Drive, and; WTIIEREAS, City Code Section 485, Subd. 1., defines a Transient Merchant as, "Any person selling any merchandise, either as principal or agent, from a building or lot which he or she occupies as tenant at will, or under a lease for a shorter term than six (6) months, or from a railroad car, or a vehicle (if he or she does not travel about from house to house or from purchaser to purchaser) is a transient merchant." WHEREAS, this business is proposed to be water-oriented and will cater to boaters utilizing the adjacent Seton Channel and will offer service via a tie-up arrangement parallel to the channel, the two existing docks are proposed to be removed, and; ~AS, the applicant proposes to sell: ice, cigarettes, ice cream, chewing tobacco, pre-packaged sandwiches, bottles and canned beverages (non-intoxicating), chips, and candy, sunglasses, suntan lotion, and; WHEREAS, the applicant also proposes to provide a public pay phone, portable bathrooms, and aesthetically pleasing garbage and recycling cans, and; WHEREAS, the subject property is located in the B-2 General Business Zoning District, WHEREAS, the City Council, at their meeting on April 11, 1995, directed City staff to prepare a Transient Merchant License with conditions to address issues and concerns relating to traffic problems or other types of problems that may occur. NOW, TttEflLEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve a Transient Merchant License for Steven Matthew Bedell, d/b/a By the Way Snack Shop, to operate a seasonal snack shop at 4801 Shoreline Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. The snack shop shall be setback 19 feet from the water. Customer stops in the docking area of the channel shall be limited at the dock to 15 minutes. 109 Resolution//95-44 Page 2 3. 4. April 25, 1995 The snack shop trailer to be currently licensed year-round. The snack shop shall maintain a minimum 50 foot setback from the water during the off-season (October 16 through April 14). 5. The season will be April 15 through October 15. 6. If there are congestion problems in the channel, precipitating complaints, that this would be consideration for license revocation or denial of a license for the following year. 7. No picnic tables will be allowed on the site. 8. There must be garbage and recycling receptacles in an enclosure. 9. The toilet facilities will be handicapped accessible and will be screened from the lake. These facilities shall not be within 50 feet of the lake, and will be removed from the parcel during the off- se.2son. 10. There shall be no signage for this business on the street side of the parcel and it will conform to all other applicable signage requirements in the code. 11. There will be a hold harmless provision, signed by the applicant and the applicant will provide proof of liability insurance with the City of Mound named as additional insured. 12. Hours of operation shall be restricted to, from sunrise to 1/2 hour after sunset, daily. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Hanus and seconded by Councilmember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens,. Hanus and Polston. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Jensen and Jessen. .&t~st: City Man~ager Mayor 110 k S10.00 )nc Day o~ u~ ~;., $2.5.00 3ne Week Date or Length of Time for S75.00 >ne Month ~ ~~ which Licen~ is Requested MOUND, MINNESOTA, S$364 t l ,i TRANSIENT MERCHANT LICENSE ~Fi';,.<7-x'r~ ..... PLACSBUS~SISTOBSCA~0N: ,~ ~S FOR ~ LAST (5) ~S: SAL~ P~PLE NA~ & DRUER'$ LICENSE ~ ~~C~: (G~5 NA~, ADD~S~ A~ PHO~ ~ OF ~5) DA~ SIGNA~ OF ~PLICA~ A~O~ZATION CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 March 22, 1996 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: LINDA STRONG, ACTING CITY CLERK SUBJECT: WESTONKA SENIOR CITIZENS FOUNDATION - RAFFLE - JULY 9, 1996 The Westonka Senior Citizen Foundation is applying for a "Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Authorization for an Exemption from Lawful Gambling License" for a raffle they want to hold on July 9, 1996. Is printed on recycled paper BILLS .... March 26, 1996 BATCH 6032 Total Bills $149,823.79 $149,823.79 · ,., 0 0~.) "! x ii CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT Feb. 1996 16.67% GENERAL FUND Taxes Business Licenses Non -Business Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Court Fines Other Revenue Transfers from Other Funds Charges to Other Departments Feb. 1996 YTD PERCENT BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVED 1,280,640 0 0 5,800 672 835 77,1 O0 7,351 11,358 890,740 6,250 6,250 48,250 828 1,273 60,000 4,998 4,998 35,200 796 846 43,5OO 0 0 10,000 1,018 2,037 (1,280,640) 0.00% (4,965) 14.40% (65,742) 14.73% (884,490) 0.70% (46,977) 2.64% (55,002) 8.33% (34,354) 2.40% (43,500) 0.00% (7,963) 20.37% TOTAL REVENUE 2~451 ~230 21 ~913 27~597 (2,423,633) 1.13% FIRE FUND RECYCLING FUND LIQUOR FUND WATER FUND SEWER FUND CEMETERY FUND DOCKS FUND 307,570 25,705 108,320 5,219 1,430,000 98,340 410,000 34,558 766,500 66,903 5,100 0 70,800 46,579 69,794 (237,776) 22.69% 9,994 (98,326) 9.23% 196,959 (1,233,041) 13.77% 65,795 (344,205) 16.05% 131,823 (634,677) 17.20% 1,000 (4,100) 19.61% 55,110 (15,690) 77.84% 03/18/96 rev95 G.B. CITY OF MOUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT Feb. 1996 16.67% Feb. 1996 YTD PERCENT BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED GENERAL FUND Council 68,730 5,466 14,762 53,968 21.48% Promotions 4,000 0 0 4,000 0.00% Cable TV 600 0 75 525 12.50% City Manager/Clerk 1 85,030 15,445 22,867 162,163 12.36% Elections 11,300 I 1,665 9,635 14.73% Assessing 54,450 124 141 54,309 0.26% Finance 163,600 17,828 24,329 139,271 14.87% Computer 22,000 462 6,249 1 5,751 28.40% Legal 1 06,440 5,593 11,740 94,700 11.03% Police 804,640 82,286 133,068 671,572 16.54% Civil Defense 3,780 81 624 3,156 16.51% Planning/Inspections 1 67,320 14,914 20,445 1 46,875 12.22% Streets 398,840 38,651 76,873 321,967 19.27% City Property 92,790 5,566 11,785 81,005 12.70% Parks 1 35,300 8,358 15,487 119,813 11.45% Summer Recreation 29,700 0 0 29,700 0.00% Contingencies 40,000 0 1 93 39,807 0.48% Transfers 1 55,310 11,782 23,565 131,745 15.17% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 2~443m830 206~557 3637868 2~079~962 14.89% Area Fire Service Fund 307,570 17,683 39,732 267,838 12.92% Recycling Fund 1 22,420 12,718 20,595 1 01,825 16.82% Liquor Fund 205,930 25,330 37,627 1 68,303 1 8.27% Water Fund 413,410 43,369 68,555 344,855 16.58% Sewer Fund 963,180 90,824 203,056 760,124 21.08% Cemetery Fund 5,570 34 34 5,536 0.61% Docks Fund 37,470 1,164 2,443 35,027 6.52% exp95 03/18/96 G.B. /VrlNUTES OF A MlZ. ETING OF THlg MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMI qSION MARCH 11, 1996 Those present were: Chair Ge. off Michael, Commissioners Michael Mueller, Frank Weiland, Bill Voss, Becky Glister, and Gerald Reifschneider, Building Official Jon Sutherland and Secretary Peggy James. Absent and excused were: Council Representative Mark Hanus, and Commissioners Jerry Clapsaddle and Orvin Burma. The following people were also in attendance: Anthony & Jennifer Palesotti, and Jack Cook. WELCOME NEW COMM[qSION MY~MBER Gerald Reifschneider was welcomed to the Commission. The Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 1996 were presented for approval. MOTION made by Weiland seconded by Voss, to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 1996 as written. Motion carried unanimously. CASE 96-06: ANTHONY & JENNIFER PAI.KSOTTI, 1969 LAKESIDE LANE, LOT 3, BLOCK 11, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID 18-117-23 23 0049. VARIANCE FOR ADDITION Building Official, Jon Suthefland, reviewed the staff report. The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming dwelling and boat house in order to allow construction of an addition on the lake side, as shown on the survey. The proposal also includes a small conforming entry deck. The existing dwelling has a setback of 4.5 feet to the closest point on the west side, the required side yard setbacks are 6 and 10 feet resulting in the recognition of a 1.5 foot side yard variance. The proposed addition has conforming setbacks. Impervious surface coverage is conforming at less than 30 %, including the boat house. The applicant presented new survey information relating to the floodplain concerns. Sutherland related that the lowest floor of the existing house and proposed addition will be at 933.6, however, the boat house is in the floodplain. Sutherland commented that things stored in boat houses are usually not subject to flood damage, but this would be one more building that would need to be reported to FEMA as being located within the floodplain, if it is not relocated or removed. Sutherland emphasized that no fill is allowed below the elevation of 931.5 without approval from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The applicant confirmed that they do not foresee this happening. Plannin# Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 The nonconforming boat house is setback 20 feet +/- from the OHW, a 50 foot setback is required, resulting in recognition of a 30 foot variance. Since the floor of the boat house is located within the floodplain, this must be addressed by variance approval or relocation. The structure is in good condition, it is anchored with wood post footings (similar to typical deck construction), and could easily be relocated. The Planning Commission may consider a condition that the boat house be moved to a conforming location or removed. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance recognizing the existing nonconforming side yard setback to the dwelling to allow construction of a conforming addition, subject to the condition that the boat house be relocated to a conforming location or be removed from the site. The applicant, Anthony Palesotti, noted that the floor of the boat house is about eighteen inches above ground, and questioned if this this takes the building out of the flood plain. Sutherland clarified that the code requires the floor to be at or above the elevation of 933, and the floor of the boat house is below this elevation. Weiland confirmed that the structure should be setback 50 feet from the ordinary high water. The Building Official confirmed that the entire structure is within the 50 foot setback. Sutherland noted that relocation on the lot will be difficult due to the location of three large existing trees and the flood plain elevation. The applicant expressed a concern that to move the boat house anywhere else on the lot would require excavating and leveling. Weiland commented that it is not their responsibility to fred where to put the boat house. Glister agreed that now is the time for them to address this nonconforming situation. Mr. Palesotti stated that the neighbors have no objections to the existing location of the boat house, it does not obstruct their views. He noted that down the street there is a boat house that is in the flood plain and a shed that is closer to the lake than 50 feet, and they have done improvements to their properties. Michael commented that they are not concerned about the neighbors opinions regarding views. Sutherland confirmed that a neighbor to the north, was doing construction on his house, a stop work order was issued, he went through the variance process, and he does have a nonconforming shed. Mueller noted that their neighbors property has a unique situation due to the contour of the shoreline on the adjacent City property. Palesotti stated that their realtor told them that the boat house can remain until it bums down. Mueller commented that this is another reason to have a Troth in Housing Ordinance, which he has supported for many years. Mueller commented that the boat house is in good shape, and questioned if it was recently repaired. He finds the appearance ugly from the lake and thinks it should be removed, however does not want to see trees mined just to relocate it, and if it is moved to the east it would inhibit the neighbors view of the lake. Mueller noted that the Shoreland Management Ordinances requires that the visibility of structures from public waters be reduced, such as by vegetation, 2 Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 and if the boat house is to remain, he would support a recommendation to require landscaping to reduce the visibility of the boat house from the water. Glister would like to see the boat house brought into conformity as much as possible, and emphasized that now is the time. Voss liked Mueller's comments, however, does not believe it is a good long term solution. Voss would like to see a positive recommendation but require the boat house be moved. MOTION by Voss, seconded by Wetland, to recommend approval of the variance, as recommended by staff. Mueller expressed a concern with drainage and how the roof lines create water to drain directly onto the neighbors property. He noted that the garage has no gutters or downspouts. Mueller would like the motion to include a statement that all water from the current and future improvements must be contained on the lot for the improvements aspect of it. Sutherland commented that staff would welcome an amendment to the motion such as, "the applicants shall submit a drainage plan that shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Voss and Wetland accepted an amendment to the motion that the applicants shall submit a drainage plan that shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Mueller questioned if the boat house could remain if the floor was raised. Creating a precedence was discussed. Weiland suggested that the boat house could be dismantled, and reconstructed to be smaller and in a conforming location. Mueller clarified that the basement of the house is at 933.6, and suggested that a storage area could be constructed under the screen porch. The applicants commented that the view out of their sliding door would then be eliminated. The applicant questioned when the boat house would have to be removed. It was clarified that the way the motion stands, the boat house would be required to be removed before a building permit could be issued for the addition. The applicant stated that they would like to use the boat house for storage during construction. Sutherland noted that it may be possible to allow the boat house to remain until after construction, but it would require a bond or escrow deposit and an agreement with the City to guarantee removal. Mueller asked for a friendly amendment to the motion to allow the boat house to remain until one year after building permit issuance, subject to the required bond/escrow and a suitable agreement as approved by the City Attorney. The maker of the motion, Voss, did not accept the amendment, and suggested it could be made as a separate motion. 3 Planning Comrn/ss/on Minutes March 11, 1996 Motion carried 5 to 1. Those in favor were: Voss, Weiland, Michael, Glister, and Reffschneider. Mueller was opposed. Mueller commented that it sounds like the applicant would like to have a year before the boat house must be removed. This case will be heard by the City Council on March 26, 1996. CASE 96-07: JACK COOK, 4452 & 4458 DENBIGH ROAD, LOTS 2 & 3, BLOCK 1, PID 19-11%23 24 0002 & 0003, AVALON. MINOR SUBDIVISION Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. The applicant is seeking approval of a minor subdivision in order to relocate a lot line. After subdivision, the Cook parcel will have a long area of approximately 6,159 square feet, and the Johnson parcel will have a lot area of approximately 9,608 square feet. Both of these lots conform to the R-iA minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet, and both lots also conform to hardcover requirements. The house on the Cook parcel encroaches on the neighboring parcel. Approval of the minor subdivision will remove the encroachment and create a conforming side yard setback. In order to approve the subdivision, recognition of the following variances is necessary: Cook Parcel: 12 foot front yard setback variance 1 foot side yard setback variance (east) Johnson Parcel: 5.5 foot side yard setback variance 35 foot +/- lakeshore setback variance The proposed minor subdivision meets the ordinance requirements pertaining to lot area and hard cover. The current proposal has no impact on the existing variances. Because it is in compliance with the Code and since both property owner have joined in this application, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the minor subdivision including recognition of the variances note herein subject to the following conditions: Prior to the time that this item goes to the City Council, the applicant shall have an updated survey prepared by a registered land surveyor and furthermore, said surveyor shall calculate and provide the sizes of Parcels A, B and C as well as impervious cover calculations for Parcel A (without Parcel B) and Parcel C including Parcel B). Additionally, the owner shall have the responsibility of having a land surveyor set the property irons in conformance with the locations shown on the survey. A private easement agreement shall be executed between the property owners over Parcel B allow utility access to the existing home on Parcel A. A copy of the agreement shall be filed with the City of Mound for information purposes only. 4 Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Sutherland related the City Planner's comments. Although approval was recommended, it was done so because the resulting lot pattern complies with the ordinance requirements. The existing home on Parcel A is nonconforming due to its proximity to the side lot line and to the ordinary high water line. At some point in the future, this home may eventually need to be replaced, and to do so, it would be required to be located in a conforming location on the lot. Narrowing the lot width through the approval of this subdivision limits the flexibility of constructing a new home in a conforming setback location. It also limits the amount of future hardcover that can be placed on the site. Although it clearly meets the lot area requirements of the ordinance, one has to question if restricting the future development potential of Parcel A as a result of this subdivision is the best way to solve a retaining wall and deck encroachment. Weiland questioned what changed from the previous subdivision request which the Council denied. Sutherland noted that the previous adjacent owner was not in favor of the subdivision, whereas the new owner is in agreement. Mr. Cook clarified that there are three people listed on the title of the Johnson property, including Bruce Johnson, his wife, and his mother-in-law, Loie King. Cook confirmed that the house is not inhabited right now, but that they use it during the summer. Mueller referred to Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225, Subd. 2, which states, "Lots created after January 1993 must meet lot width standards at both the building setback line and at the ordinary high water level." Mueller also asked for clarification from staff if this subdivision changes the lot-of-record status for this property. Sutherland confirmed that these lots would no longer be considered lots of record, and therefore, the side yard setback requirements would then be 10 feet. Cook's lot would still have nonconforming side yard setbacks, and if a new house were to be constructed on the Johnson property, only a 20 foot wide building envelope would remain. Cook stated that it was recommended by the previous Building Official and City Council that this property be divided in order to alleviate the encroachments. Mueller suggested that the proposed dividing line be adjusted to allow for a lot width of at least 45 feet for the Johnson property. Cook stated that he does not want to create problems for future development on the Johnson property, he just wants to clear-up any future hassles for both properties due to the encroachments. MOTION by Mueller to recommend that the current lot line proposal be the same from the north edge of Stratford Road to the edge of the deck as you would view it; drawing a line from north to south then the balance of the line to a point creating a 45 foot lot width at street for the Johnson property. Michael seconded the motion. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Cook expressed a concern that this would not leave enough room at the side of his house to put up a ladder to paint or maintain his house, and if the adjacent owner put up a fence, he would not have enough room to park a vehicle at the side of his house. Cook noted that one of the reasons he and Johnson agreed to this lot line proposal is that it would allow for enough room at the side of his lot to park a vehicle. Voss suggested that they table the request so the applicant can take this back to the neighbors to discuss. Cook agreed that the change in the lot-of-record status should be clarified and made aware of for the applicants. Sutherland confirmed that this subdivision does change the lot-of- record status. Mueller withdrew his motion. Motion by Voss, seconded by Mueller to table this request. Motion carried unanimously. Sutherland suggested that Mr. Cook discuss with Mr. Johnson how the change in lot-of-record status affects the side yard setbacks, and review Mueller's suggested change in the lot line configuration. Cook requested a copy of the statutes regarding the change in setbacks and lot-of- record status. CASE 96-08: JESSE ERICKSON, 2031 BlZ, T,LAIRE LANE, LOT 64 & N 1/2 OF 65 & 67, MOUND ADDITION, PID 14-117-24 41 0036. VARIANCE FOR GARAGE Building Official, Jon Suthefland, reviewed the staff report. The applicant is seeking a variance to rebuild a detached garage in a conforming location that was destroyed by fire. The existing dwelling has a nonconforming setback of 18.5' +/- to the front, the required setback is 20 feet resulting in the recognition of a 1.5' +/- variance. The property is conforming in all other aspects. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance to recognize the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 18.5'+/- to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 22' detached garage. The request is a reasonable use of the property and is conforming to setbacks and other provisions of the ordinance. Mueller expressed a concern about drainage and noted that the roof line slopes towards the property to the west. Staff noted Mueller's concerns. Motion by Weiland to recommend approval of the variance as recommended by staff. Seconded by Mueller. Motion carried unanimously. This case will be reviewed by the City Council on March 27, 1996 6 Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 CITY COUNCil, REPR~'-$ENTATIVE'S REPORT The Council Representative was not present. MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Glister, to adjourn the meeting at 9:14 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Chair, Geoff Michael Attest: PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MINUTES OF A MEETING 1VIARCH 14, 1996 Present were: Chair Tom Casey, Commissioners Peter Meyer, Janis Geffre, and Bev Botko, Council Representative Andrea Ahrens, Parks Director Jim Fackler, Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey, and Secretary Peggy James. Absent and excused were Commissioners Marilyn Byrnes, Bill Darling, Mary Goode, and Rita Pederson. The following persons were also in attendance: Tim Piepkorn and Wendy Anderson. WELCOME NEW COMMISSION MEMBER Bev Botko was welcomed to the Commission. Motion made by Meyer, seconded by Geffre, to approve the minutes of the February 8, 1996 Park and Open Space Commiqsion meeting, as written. Motion carried unanimously. Meyer referred to the Minutes of the Mound Park and Open Space Commission Budget Planning Session of February 15, 1996, and noted a correction, as follows, "I. C. "... Resurfacing daily and plowing after snow =~.v,v,,,, ~ n ann $6,000 maximum." AGENDA CHANGES Geffre requested the following be added to the agenda for discussion: - Dock Committee - Update on Abutting Status of 4700 Wilshire Blvd. Meyer requested the following be added for discussion: - Geese Control Program - Commons Stairway Standards PARKS AND BEACH/LIFEGUARD PROGRAMS Tim Piepkorn, Recreation Coordinator for Westonka Community Education and Services reviewed his memorandum of March 7, 1996. Piepkorn explained that last year they used most of the money from the parks budget, and what they did not use from the parks budget, they used for the lifeguards program because they ran over budget, plus they still had to cut the lifeguard program short. Park and Open Space Corem~ss~on March 14, 1996 Piepkorn stated that with the money budgeted for the 1996 season, they will not have enough money for the lifeguard program to operate at full capacity, and therefore, presented the following options of what they can do with the same dollar value for the upcoming 1996 season: #1 5 Parks M-Th for 5 weeks, Youth Center/Pond M & Th for 10 Wks, 4 Beach sites open everyday (close small beaches the end of July, last day for large beach sites would be · .~,,,,.~ ~'~- ,.,,j~'~"~ August .... 18th and then maybe weekends through l.ahor day).. 5 Parks M-Th for 5 weeks, Youth Center/Pond M & Th for 10 wks, 2 Beach sites open everyday (last day for large beach sites would be Labor day). #3 5 Parks M-Th for 6 weeks, Youth Center/Pond M & Th for 10 Wks, 2 Beach sites open everyday (beaches would shut down approximately August 18th). 5 Parks M-Th for 6 weeks, Youth Center/Pond M & Th for 10 Wks, 4 Beach sites open everyday (close small beaches Th end of July, last day for large beach sites would be Labor day, additional financial need will be $4,000). 5 Parks M-Th for 6 weeks, Youth Center/Pond M & Th for 10 Wks, 4 Beach sites open everyday (close small beaches the end of July, large beaches would shut down approximately August 18th, additional financial need will be $2,000). Built into every option is the need for a few weather related cancellation days, and depending on the number of bad weather days, they would stay open that many days longer. All options include weekends for lifeguards at 7 days per week. Piepkorn estimated that every additional week added to the parks program would cost about $2,000 per week. Meyer summarized that historically, the programs ran from Memorial day to Labor day, so the lifeguard program has been reduced from about 40 to 20 days. Option #1 is the program they had last year. Geffre noted that the attendance at Pembroke Beach and Wychwood Beach were low last year and that the parks program was better attended than those two beaches. She suggested that they consider reducing the lifeguard time at those two beaches. Piepkorn noted that there are a lot of kids on the island that have no safe beach to go to. Ahrens stated that she agrees with eliminating lifeguard services at those two beaches, and indicated that she suggested it last year. Casey questioned if Options #4 or #5 are conceivable. Fackler clarified that the 1996 approved budget for the parks program is $13,300, and for the lifeguard program is $16,400. Ahrens suggested that there be better advertising about under what conditions the beaches close. Piepkorn clarified that they will close the beaches when it is less than 70 degrees and/or it is raining with thunder storms. Signage was discussed. Park and O~en $l~ace Commission March Casey commented that he would be in favor of Option #3, and noted that people can still swim at the beaches without a lifeguard, at their own risk. Piepkorn confirmed that they would try to keep beaches open during the weekends until Labor Day. Meyer moved to recommend Option //3 for the 1996 Parks and Beach/Lifeguard Programs. Geffre seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Those in favor were: Ahrens, Botko, Casey, Meyer and Geffre. Piepkorn announced that included in the summer parks program is the middle school youth program that the City only partially funds. Wendy Anderson was present if the Commission had any questions. Geffre expressed a concern that a better emergency link to our police cannot be pr0vid~, and feels this should be a high priority. She also feels it is important that some kind of prot~on from thesUn be provided for the lifeguards. ./Motion by Geffre to recommend that the City Council address the issues of / emergency contact and sun protection for the Summer Beach/Lifeguard [ Program as this is essential to the safety of the program. Motion seconded/ _ko. Meyer does not think these items should be taken out of their lifeguard budget, but should be funded separately, a separate allocation. Geffre agreed that this statement is consistent with her motion. Piepkorn commented that they would like to work cooperatively with the Street Department to modify their radios to provide a direct link. Fackler expressed a concern that in the evenings there is not always staff on duty to monitor the radios. Motion carried 4 to 1. Those in favor were: Botko, Casey, Meyer and Geffre. Ahrens abstained because they are asking Coun~cil t° deal with it and she would prefer to deal with it at the Council level. ~~)(/?q//h ' 1997 PARK IMPROVEMENTS/BUDGET REQUESTS The Minutes of their Budget Planning Session of February 15, 1996 were reviewed. The Parks Director offered to return to the Commission at their next meeting with a reply on the top listed priorities. Ahrens questioned what is Shirley Park? Meyer confirmed that this refers the Shirley Hills School property and indicated that this property is included in the Comprehensive Plan as open space. Meyer commented that they are just looking for any support that the City can give. Ahrens confirmed that "support" means "financial support." Park and Open Space Commission March 14. 1996 ANNUAL PARKS TOUR Casey commented that at their workshop meeting they discussed the possibility of moving the parks tour to another date as some commissioners want to have a full business meeting in April. Geffre and Meyer agreed. Ahrens noted that Tuesdays are good days for Council members. The date of April 30th was agreed upon for the tour. It was noted that this also falls after daylight savings and hopefully it will be warmer. A 6:00 start time was suggested. Suggested topics for the tour included: Stairways on the commons: construction standards, what is aesthetically pleasing, and recently constructed City stairs. Swenson Park. NCA improvements. Meyer suggested they tour the French Creek Preserve in Orono which is a passive park which they could view as a model for Mound's NCA's. It was suggested that an Orono Park Commission member could attend their tour if they go to French Creek. It was determined that they can fine-tune the tour at their April meeting. DOCK COMMITTEE Geffre asked for an update on Meyer's motion from the February 8, 1996 meeting, "Meyer moved that Staff or Council present their concerns regarding the formation of a new committee to review dock issues and removing the Park Commission in having to deal with dock issues. Motion seconded by Pederson. Motion carried unanimously." Ahrens recalled that Schmidt advocated dealing with specifically park issues because the Commission was dealing too much with dock issues. Ahrens does not believe that Hanus' suggestion was for the Commons Task Force to take over. Ahrens confirmed that nothing further on the issue has been put on their agenda, and explained that a lot has been put on hold until the task force completes their work. Ahrens suggested that maybe dock issues and park issues are too much for a Commission that meets only once a month. Meyer feels that the Park Commission should deal with the dock and commons issues. Park and Open Space Commission March 14, 1996 Meyer expressed a concern that only about 10 percent of Mound's population has dock sites, and feels that all of Mound should have an input regarding the program and the direction of the Commons Task Force is taking. Botko noted that responses received from the citizens at large on their survey was extremely low. Casey feels it is important that the Park Commission be made aware of any recommendations from the Task Force and that they be given the opportunity to comment on any proposed policy changes since they have expertise and experience in the area too. Ahrens suggested that maybe certain meetings should be specifically set aside for dock issues. Casey suggested that they could meet more often. Ahrens stated that when, and if this issue arises, she will let the Council know about the Park Commission's concerns. ABUTTING STATUS Regarding the requested abutting status for 4700 Wilshire Blvd., Fackler explained that a resolution is coming back to council at their next meeting for approval to declare the property as abutting. Fackler confirmed that all dock sites are filled on that commons. Ahrens noted that this person is willing to take whatever site is open, or the least senior person in the program may get bumped. How the attorney determined that by extending the lot lines of this property it is considered to be abutting was discussed at length. After examination of the plat drawing and survey, it was questioned if by extending the lot line to the shore they would have to cross the adjacent private property first? It was noted that the vacated portion of Excelsior Lane is 160 feet deep, and the adjacent property is only 150 feet deep. It was suggested that the description of the vacated road be examined, and that this issue be clarified before the resolution is prepared and approved by the City Council. Fackler also expressed a concern on how this may impact other areas. GEESE CONTROL Meyer questioned what type of control measures are being proposed for the MCWD Goose Control program. Different goose control methods were discussed. Meyer questioned what they plan to do with the money they raise. Meyer is in favor of expanding the hunting season for the metro area. Ahren's confirmed that the City has not given them any money yet, but the Council has indicated that Mound has an interest in the program. It was suggested that the Park Commission be kept apprised on this issue. 5 Park and Open Space Commission March 14, 1996 COMMONS STAIRWAYS Meyer commented that he want's to keep discussion on this item open. Casey suggested they further discuss this issue at a future meeting when more people are present. Casey suggested that they may need some consultation on devising guidelines other than the building code. Fackler commented that the design standards are up to the Park Commission and suggested that they look at stairway designs on their tour. Meyer suggested that a subcommittee, including Jim and Jon could develop guidelines. Geffre stated that there should be a book of designs so that the applicant's can see what different designs are available. Ahrens stated that one of the reasons they were looking a changing thc code is because the building code requires a landing for every 12 feet of rise, and in order to avoid cattle-chute type stairs, or zig/zag stairs, this needs to be changed. If a landing is not required for every 12 feet of rise, a more aesthetically pleasing design could be applied. CITY COUNCIL REPORT Fiscal disparities were discussed. PARKS DIRECTOR REPORT Jim Fackler reported that they are now receiving items ordered out of capital outlay. They have received four water fountains that will be installed at various parks this Spring. It was noted that the City Council consensus was that the tree removal on Norwood Lane did not need their approval. Fackler confirmed that tree removals deemed to be hazardous do not require review by the Park Commission or council. DOCK INSPECTOR'S REPORT Tom McCaffrey stated that things are pretty quiet now, but next month will be very busy. OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL SKATING RINK Peter Meyer reported that they will be presenting a proposal to the Council on April 16th at their COW meeting for the Hadorf Field Ice Skating Rink. They will hand out the proposal to the Council on April 9th. Ahrens questioned who "they" are. Meyer stated that Park Commissioners Bill Darling, Rita Pederson, and himself have worked on this proposal. 6 Park and Open Space Commission March 14, 1996 APItlL PARK ~QMMI~$ION MEETING AGENDA Items to be included on the April agenda include: 1997 Budget, Parks Tour, and Commons Task Force Update. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Geffre, to adjourn the Park and Open Space Commi~ion Meeting at 9:40 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 7 March 14, 1996 To: From: Subject: National League of Cities 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 626-3000 Fax: (202) 626-3043 Officers President Gregory S. Lashutka Mayor, Columbus, Ohio First Vice Presiclent Mark S. Schwartz Council Member, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Second Wce Pres;dent Brian J. O'Neill Council Member, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Immediate Past President Carolyn Long Banks Councilwoman-at-Large, Atlanta, Georgia Executive Director Donald J. Borut Mayors of Direct Member Cities Executive Directors of State Municipal Leagues Gregory S. Lashutka~ President Amendments to the NLC Bylaws At its July 14-15, 1995, meeting in Atlanta, the NLC Board of Directors accepted the report of a special Bylaws Committee which recommended one amendment to the NLC Bylaws. The Bylaws Committee, which was initially appointed in March 1993 by then- NLC President Donald M. Fraser, was asked in January 1995 by then-NLC President Carolyn Long Banks to reconvene to review procedures for election of NLC officers and for filling leadership vacancies. The committee was chaired by Past President Bob Bolen, former mayor of Fort Worth, Texas. This package includes specific language to amend the Bylaws, a ballot which must be returned to NLC headquarters by April 26, ,1996, and a postage paid reply envelope to return your ballot by the deadline. Ballots may also be returned by fax at (202) 626-3143. However, if you return your ballot by fax, please do not mail the ballot. The proposed Bylaws Amendment is as follows: Amend Section 6 of Article III to modify and clarify the process for filling leadership vacancies. The recommended language is as follows (new language is underlined and deleted language is ~ d cut): A vacancy in the office .of second vice president or other elected member of the Board of Directors shall ~e pontinue until a new, qualified person is elected unde~ Article III, Section 5, unless it is filled for the unexpired term by a person selected by a majority vote Peet Presidents: Glencls E. Hood, Mayor, Orlando, Florida · Sharps James, Mayor, Newark, New Jersey · Cathy Reynolds, Councilwoman-at-Large, Denver, Colorado · Di~tore: Karen An'~orson, Mayor, Minnetonka, Minnesota · Clarence E. Anthony, Mayor, South Bay, Florida · Ken Bacchus, Councilman-at-Large, Kansas City, Missouri · Geoffrey Beokwith, Executive Director, Massachusetts Municipal Association · Lera Blakely, Council Member, Monrovia, California · Eddie L. Blenkenahip, City Council President, Birmingham, Alabama · Lucllle C. Brogdon, Council Vice President, Hyattsville, Maryland · John W. Butt, Councilman, Chesapeake, Virginia · Carol Y. Clark, Councilmember, East Orange, New Jersey · Larry R. Curtis, Mayor, Ames, Iowa · Alvin p. DuPont, Mayor, Tuscaloosa, Alabama · John Ferrsro, City Council President, Los Angeles, California · Patriots Figueroa, Council Member, Mountain View, California · Sten Ftnkelstein, Executive Director, Association of Washington Cities · Paul Helmke, Mayor, Fort Wayne, Indiana · James C. Hunt, Councilmember, Clarksburg, West Virginia · Linde Lawrence, Alderman, Wausau, Wisconsin · Christopher K. McKenzie, Executive Director, League of Kansas Municipalities · Beverly Melton, Board of Aldermen Presi~lent, Louisville, Kentucky · David W. Moore, Mayor, Beaumont, Texas · Kathy M. Morris, Mayor, San Marcos. Texas · Willies F. Murphy, Mayor, Woodridge, Illinois · Thomee C. Owena, Council President, Overland Park, Kansas · David L. Perry, Sr., Mayor Pro Tern, Piano, Texas · Michael J. Qulnn, Executive Director, Indiana Assoclalion of Cities and Towns · Alice Schlenker, Mayor, Lake Oswego, Oregon · Larry L. SChultz, Councilman, Rockledge, Florida · Winston Seertes, Mayor Pro Tern, Rock Hill, South Carolina · Judy Forgueon Shaw, Councilwoman, Berkeley, Missouri · Joseph F. Sinklswic, Mayor, Loves Park, Illinois · Joseph A. Sweat, Executive Director, Tennessee Municipal League · Marian B. Tosco, Councilwoman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania · Reford C. Theobold, Council Member, Grand Junction, Colorado · William E. ThorntOn, Mayor, San Antonio, Texas · John R. Thune, Executive Director, .2South Dakota Municipal League · Marcia Weaver, Council Member, Jackson, Mississippi · Thomas L. Worth, Mayor, Rochester, Michigan · George C. Wright, Jr., Executive Director, · Delaware League of Local Governments * Charles C. Yancey, Councillor, Boston, Massachusetts · Don Zlmmermen, Executive Director, Arkansas Municipal League /~I~ Recycled Paper Mayors of Direct Member Cities Executive Directors of State Municipal Leagues March 14, 1996 Page Two of the remaining members of the Board of Directors ..... ~ ~..-~ ~..~- ~.~ ...... ~.~.~ t~ ~ A vacancy which occurs for a person serving as a member of the Board of Directors as a past president because that Derson ceases to possess the essential qualifications provided in Section 4 hereof ~ v~c~ncy shall continue until a new, qualified retiring president assumes such position on the Board of Directors. The proposed changes in the first sentence are intended to give the Board of Directors more flexibility in dealing with leadership vacancies including the option of leaving a position vacant until the next regularly-scheduled election by the full membership. The changes in the second sentence relating to past president vacancies are proposed for clarification purposes. A copy of the Bylaws (amended as of June 12, 1994) is enclosed for your reference. It is extremely important that you exercise your voting right by casting your ballot. The number of votes you are entitled to cast is indicated on the enclosed ballot. Ballots received at NLC headquarters by April 26 will be tabulated and certified by two members of the Board of Directors and the results announced by mail early in May. If you have any questions about the proposed amendments, please contact Christine Becker, Deputy Executive Director, at (202) 626-3017. Enclosures OFFICIAL BALLOT FOR MEMBER CITIES On a Change to the Bylaws of the National League of Cities March 14, 1996 Do you favor amending the Bylaws of the National League of Cities as proposed below: Amend Section 6 of Article III to modify and clarify the process for filling leadership vacancies. YES NO Signature for member city: Mayor's Signature Mayor's Name City State Number of Votes Cast ~ Date ,1996 RETURN IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE TO: National League of Cities Attention: DonaldJ. Borut 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004 OR BY FAX TO (202) 626-3143 (Note: If you fax your ballot, please do not mail the ballot.) Your signed mailed or faxed ballot must be received by April 26, 1996, if it is to be counted. C BYLAWS OF THt NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES (Amended as of June 12, 1994) NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 ARTICLE I. NAME, OBJECTS, MEANS, AND DEFINITIONS Section 1. NAME, OBJECTS, AND MEANS. The National League of Cities is an instrumentality of general purpose local governments and state municipal leagues dedicated to advancing the public interest, building democracy and community, and improving the quality of life by strength- ening the capacity of local governance and advocating the interests of local communities. Local government officials, as custodians of democratic values, work together through the National League of Cities and their state municipal leagues to safeguard the authorities and improve the capabilities of general purpose local governments to respond to the needs and aspirations of the people. Local government officials act together through the National League of Cities and their state municipal leagues to express and advocate their common interests and views as responsible partners in the federal system of gover- Section 2. DEFINITIONS. As used herein, the words "city," "municipality," "local government," and "general purpose local governments" shall mean any city, town, township, village, borough or county that is a corporate entity or that functions as such. The term "capacity" refers to the means and ability to carry out the responsibilities of general purpose local governments. The words "state league city" shall mean a city which has a membership in good standing in a state league of municipalities which in turn has a membership in good standing in the National League of Cities. The words "member city" shall mean a city which has a city membership in good standing in the National League of Cities. The term "state" shall include any state, territory, or possession of the United States. ARTICLE II. MEMBERS Section 1. MEMBER LEAGUES. Any state league of municipalities or substantially similar organization, the dues of which are paid by municipalities and having not less than ten active members, is eligible for membership in the National League and may be admitted as a member league upon filing the proper application and receiving the approval of the Board of Directors. Section 2. MEMBER CITIES. Any city in the United St~es may upon payment of the prescribed annual dues be ,~ a member city and as such be entitled to all the services and privileges of the National League; provided that no city eligible to but not holding membership in a member league shall be eligible for membership in the National League. Any state league city shall be entitled to all the general services furnished municipalities by the National League through the .member leagues, and such city shall be entitled to have its city officials attend and participate in all deliberations of the meeting of the National League, sub- ject to rules and procedures set forth by the Board of Directors. Section 3. ASSOCIATE MEMBERS. Any person, firm, corporation, or organization not otherwise eligible for membership pursuant to sections ! or 2 of this Article may apply for an associate membership in the National League under such procedures, services, and dues as are pre- scribed by the Board of Directors. Such associate members will not have the voting privileges of member cities and member leagues. ARTICLE III. OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 1. LEAGUE OFFICERS. The officers of this National League shall be a president, a fLrst vice president, a second vice president, the immediate past president, all past presidents while in elective office in a city, and the Executive Director. The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Board of Directors and shall hold office at the pleasure of that Board. The Executive Director shall be secretary and t:reasurer of the National League. The presi- dent, first vice president, and the second vice president elected at the annual meeting shall hold office for one year or until their successors are qualified. The term of office of all newly elected and designated officers shall commence immediately on adjournment of the annual meeting. Section 2. BOARD OF DIRECTORS. There shall be a Board of Directors consisting of 40 members and the National League president, first vice president, and second vice president, plus all National League past presidents in elective office in a city, which shall conduct the affairs of the National League when representatives of the member- ship are not assembled, including, by a majority vote of Board of Directors members, determination or modification of national municipal policies on national leg- islation affecting cities. The Board of Directors may refer to the membership by letter ballot any matter which is not otherwise provided for in these bylaws, the voting thereon to be as provided in Section 5 of Article W. Twenty mem- bers of the Board of Directors shall be elected each year to serve for a term of two years or until their successors are elected and qualified. The term of office of all newly-elect- ed Board members shall commence immediately on adjournment of the annual business meeting. The presi- dent and first vice president shall be chairman and vice chairman respectively of the Board of Directors. Section 3. POWERS AND DUTIES OF OFFICERS. The powers and duties of the officers of this National League shall be such as by general usage are indicated by the title of their offices. The president shall establish and appoint such commit-tees as may be necessary provided that stand- ing policy committees shall be established by a majority vote of the Board of Directors, and their membership appointed by the president. The Executive Director shall transact the financial business of the National League and keep a complete record of all transactions and with such assistants and staff personnel as necessary shall perform such other duties as the National League or the Board of Directors shall direct and shall receive such compensation as the Board of Directors may prescribe. Section 4. QUALIFICATIONS. Each elective officer of this National League at the time of election shall be an elected official of a state league city or member city or chief execu- tive officer or equivalent of a member league. Section 5. ELECTIONS. The elective officers and Board of this National League shall be elected in the manner pro- vided for in Article IV provided that nominations for elect- ed officers and Board members shall be made by a nomi- nating committee of not less than six nor more than four- teen officers of member leagues, state league cities, and member cities and the most immediate past president, all of whom shall be appointed by the president. The most immediate past president shall serve as chair of the nomi- nating committee. The nominating committee shall make its report in writing at least four hours before the sched- uled election. Section 6. VACANCIES. A vacancy shall occur in any office of the National League in the event that the person holding the office resigns or ceases to possess the essential qualifications for election to office as provided in Section 4. A vacancy in the office of president shall be filled by the succession of the first vice president to that office. A vacan- cy in the office of the first vice president shall be filled by the succession of the second vice president to that office. A vacancy in the office of the second vice president or mem- ber of the Board of Directors shall be filled for the unex- pired term by a majority vote of the remaining members of the Board of Directors, provided that in the event that a person serving as a member of the Board of Directors as a past president ceases to possess the essential qualifications provided in Section 4 hereof, a vacancy shall continue until a new, qualified retiring president assumes such position on the Board of Directors. Section 7. ADVISORY COUNCIL The Board of Directors shall establish an Advisory Council (consisting of previous members of the Board of Directors in municipal elected office), the duties, responsibilities, and leadership of which shall be determined by the Board of Directors. ARTICLE IV. MEETINGS, VOTING, AND NATIONAL POLICIES Section 1. MEMBERSHIP MEETINGS. The time, place, and program of the annual or special meetings shall be determined by resolution of the Board of Directors. The president may also call a special meeting. Notices of meet- ings of members shall be delivered or mailed by first-class mail to the last known address of all members not less than thirty (30) nor more than sixty (60) days before such meet- ings provided that any notices required by this section may be waived before such meetings. Section 2. MEMBER VOTING. In all meetings requiring the official decision of the National League, each member league shall be entitled to twenty votes. Each member city shall be entitled to one to twenty votes based upon popula- tion as follows: ~ Printed on recycled paper. under 50,000 1 vote 50,000 - 99,999 2 votes 100,000 - 199,999 4 votes 200,000 - 299,999 6 votes 300,000 - 399,999 8 votes 400,000 - 499,999 10 votes 500,000 - 599,999 12 votes 600,000 - 699,999 14 votes 700,000 - 799,999 16 votes 800,000 - 899,999 18 votes 900,000 and above 20 votes Member cities, but not member leagues, shall be required to cast unanimous votes. It shall be the duty of the president in advance of or at the beginning of any such meeting to appoint a credentials committee of three, at least one of whom shall be a repre- sentative of a member city. As soon as practicable after the naming of the credentials committee, each member league shall designate one or more voting delegates not to exceed the number of votes to which it is entitled and may designate alternate voting del- egates not to exceed the number of its voting delegates. Each member city shall designate one voting delegate and may designate one alternate voting delegate. It shall be the duty of the credentials committee to settle any dispute con- cerning the voting rights of members and their voting dele- gates and alternate voting delegates and the number of votes each is entitled to cast and the total number of votes of all the members of the National League. All voting shall be by voice vote unless a weighted vote is demanded by ten percent or more of the certified votes present at the meeting. When the weighted vote is taken, voting shall be limited to the duly certified voting dele- gates, or their alternates, each casting the total number of votes to which the voter is entitled by the certified voting roll. A majority vote of the certified votes present at the meeting shall be required for election of any officer or member of the Board of Directors, or for passage of any matter of business brought before the business meeting. There shall be no voting by proxy. Section 3. MEMBER QUORUM. A quorum at the annual business meeting or special meeting shall consist of a majority of the votes certified to the meeting. Section 4. MEMBER RESOLUTIONS ON POLIC' Resolutions on national municipal policies, incluc,_..6 national legislation affecting cities, shall be submitted to the voting delegates in writing by the Board of Directors or by a resolution committee appointed therefor; or by special petition provided that such petition is presented to the annual convention by ten (10) voting delegates with the consent of a majority vote. A two-thirds vote shall be nec- essary to adopt all resolutions. Section 5. MAIL BALLOTS. Except as otherwise expressly provided by these bylaws, a majority of the votes cast shall be necessary for a decision in the case of mail ballots sub- mitted to the membership. The letter ballot of a member league shall bear the signature of the president and the countersignature of the chief executive officer of such member leagues, and the letter ballot of a member city shall bear the signature of the mayor. Weighted voting shall be in effect in all balloting by mail. Section 6. BOARD MEETINGS. Notices of meetings of the Board of Directors shall be delivered or mailed by first- class mail to the last known address of all members of the Board of Directors not less than five (5) nor more than ~ (40) days before such meetings, unless otherwise reqr by law, provided that any notices required by this section may be waived before such meetings. A majority of direc- tors present at a meeting shall constitute a quorum, pro- vided that a quorum consists of no less than one-third of the directors then in office. The act of the majority of the directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is pre- sent shall be the act of the Board of Directors, unless other- wise required by the articles of incorporation or these bylaws. ARTICLE V. FINANCIAL MATI'ERS Section 1. DUES. AND CHARGES. The annual member- ship dues in the National League, and the schedule of fees or systems of charges for all other services of the National League, shall be established by a resolution of the Board of Directors, within such general limits as may be set by the National League in annual meeting assembled. Annual membership dues and annual service charges shall be due the first day of the membership year for which assessed. Section 2. FISCAL YEAR. The fiscal year of the National League shall be from October 1 to September 30, inclusive. Section 3. ANNUAL BUDGET. The revenues and expen- ditures of the National League shall be planned and approved through an annual budget, and financial obliga- tions shall be incurred on the basis of the budget. The annual budget shall be prepared by the Executive Director under the direction of the Board of Directors. The budget shall be approved by the Board of Directors. Section 4. ANNUAL AUDIT. An annual audit shall be made of the financial affairs of the National League by a certified public accountant designated or approved by the Board of Directors. ARTICLE VI. AMENDMENTS These bylaws may by repealed or amended at the annual meeting of the membership or by mail ballot. In the case of an annual meeting, a two-thirds majority of the certified votes cast at the meeting shall be necessary to pass such an amendment. In the case of a mail ballot, a two-thirds majority of the votes cast shall be required. Amendments may be proposed either by initiatory petitions signed by members present at the meeting or by resolution of the Board of Directors, provided that notice of such proposed amendments to be voted on at the annual meeting shall be mailed to all members not less than fifteen days prior to that annual meeting. In the case of a mail ballot, not less than forty days shall elapse after mailing of the ballots to all members before the votes are canvassed by two members of the Board of Directors. Such amendments, when adopted by mail bal- loting, shall become effective ten days after the votes are canvassed and written notice of adoption is mailed to the membership. ARTICLE VII. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE Except as provided in these bylaws, and such official rules and procedures for the conduct of business meetings as may be adopted by the Board of Directors, Robert's Rules of Order Revised shall prevail on parliamentary procedure. GTE Telephone Operations 1000 GTE Drive P.O. Box 307 Wentzville, MO 63385~0307 March 11, 1996 Dear Community Leader: Earlier I wrote you about the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the benefits it promises to consumers. It is my pleasure to inform you that customers in Minnesota now will be able to receive the new GTE long-distance service offering. Enclosed is a copy of our news release in case you missed it in the local media. Customers have told us repeatedly that they v,,an~, a sin? scu,c,~ for their telecommunications needs. GTE's expanded offering wiii iea~ure competitive pricing and a single point-of-contact for a broad array of services. Please contact me or your local GTE representative if you have any questions. We appreciate your support of GTE. Sincerely, Barry W. Paulson Regional President-Midwest BWP:pdj Enclosure A part of GTE Corporation Public Affairs 600 Hidden Ridge Department Irving, Texas 75038 From: Nancy Bavec, GTE, 214/718-6913 (A_~er 6 p.m. CST, 214/393-0884) March 4, 1996 SUMMARY: GTE is the first of the large local-exchange carriers to offer long-distance service. GTE plans to offer long-distance service, currently available in two states, in the 28 states it serves by the end of the year. IRVING, Texas -- GTE today became the first of the large local-exchange carriers to offer long-distance (interLATA) service. The new GTE long-distance offering, marketed under the name GTE Easy Savings Plan (sm), will be available beginning today to GTE customers in Michigan and Minnesota. The company plans to offer the service by year-end in all 28 states where it currently offers local telephone service. "This groundbreaking offering is clearly one of the first tangible benefits to consumers in the emerging competitive environment, made possible by the new national telecommunications law," said GTE Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Charles R. Lee. "This is not just talk, it's action. We are proud to be the first of the large local-exchange carriers to actually offer customers long-distance service." "By choosing GTE for their long-distance calling needs, our customers will be able to receive all their local, regional and long-distance services -- both nationally and internationally -- from the same company. This is what our customers have repeatedly said they want, and we're glad to be able to respond so rapidly a~er the bill's enactment," said GTE President Kent B. Foster. GTE is Quick to Market with Long-Distance Services "This launch fulfills GTE's pledge to be quick to market with services that make our customers' lives easier. On Feb. 8 -- within an hour of the President's signing the Telecommunications Act of 1996 -- we announced an agreement with LDDS WorldCom to resell interLATA capacity to our customers. Less than a month later, we're doing it. This is an important step toward our goal of being our customers' single point-of-contact for all telecommunications services," Foster said. -more- 1 gq a Add 1-1-1 GTE Plan Features Broad Range of Services, Pricing Packages GTE's new offering, where available, will feature competitive pricing, customized service packages and a single point-of-contact for a broad array of services. Calling plan savings will be based on the total for all long-distance, operator-assisted, calling-card, and international calls, allowing customers to maximize their savings. Price discounts are available once a customer has spent as little as $10. A residential customer spending a combined total of $10 a month on all GTE long-distance services will save 10 percent. Residential customers spending a combined total of $25 a month on all GTE long-distance services will receive a 25 percent discount. Business customers will also receive special savings based on volume and usage. "We've designed our long-distance offering, the GTE Easy Savings Plan, in response to what our customers have told us they want: savings, simplicity and a single bill for ALL their local and long-distance services, including wireless," Foster said. "It's another example of GTE's pledge to be the easiest company to do business with in the industry." One of the largest publicly held telecommunications companies in the world, GTE is also the largest U.S.-based local telephone company and a leading cellular-service provider in the United States -- with wireline and wireless operations that form a market area covering more than one-third of the U.S. population. 13T(96) -more-