Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1998-11-10
AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUFgDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1998, 7:30 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. OPEN MEETING- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PAGE 2. APPROVE AGENDA. *3. CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 27, 1998, REGULAR MEETING ................................... 4207-4210 *B. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 4, 1998, CANVASSING MEETING. (TO BE HANDED OUT TUESDAY EVENING.) *C. CASE 98-56: MINOR SUBDIVISION, TO CREATE 3 LOTS FROM 2 EXISTING LOTS, MARY ANN SELLS AND AL SAGE, 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD. AND 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE, PID 14-117-24 33 0016 AND 14-117-24 33 0007. (REFER TO ITEM//5, CASE//98-61 FOR BACKGROUND INFORMATION.} ............................ 4211-4213 *D. APPROVAL OF LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUND AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS) FOR 1998-99 .... 4214-4215 *E. BID AWARD: CBD(CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) SNOW PLOWING. 4216-4217 *F. PAYMENT OF BILLS .................................... 4218-4239 PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-55: STREET VACATION, LONGFORD ROAD, KILDARE ROAD AND KINGS LANE, FINE LINE DESIGN, P.O. BOX 1611, BURNSVILLE, MN .......................................... 4240-4278 4204 Ce o Se 10. 11. 13. PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-61: UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION, 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD. AND 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD., ALFRED SAGE AND MARY ANN SELLS, PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE AND LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, HD 14-117-24 33 0007 AND 14-117-24 33 0016 ........... 4279-4302 PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-62; ONE YEAR REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, 5201 P1PER ROAD, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156. . . 4303-4377 LEGAL REVIEW OF TITLE ON CHESTER PARK PROPERTY AS IT PERTAINS TO USAGE BY AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB ........................ 4378-4379 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT. EXECUTIVE SESSION: THREATENED LITIGATION - NETKA PROPERTY, 2313 COMMERCE BLVD. RESOLUTION 98- RESOLUTION APPOINTING A HEARING OFFICER TO HEAR AN APPEAL OF A WETLANDS CONSERVATION (WCA) EXEMPTION REQUEST FOR TIMOTHY BECKER AND DALE AND LORELL BECKER AT 5331/5341/5351/5361 THREE POINTS BLVD ...................... 4380-4390 REQUEST' FOR STREET LIGHT ON BEACHWOOD ROAD ................ 4391-4397 (NOTE: CITY COUNCIL HAD PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THIS REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTING THE INSTALLATION OF THE LIGHT. SEE ENCLOSED MEMORANDUM FROM POLICE CHIEF AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION). RECOMMENDATIONS FROM DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION RE: DOCK ADDITIONS, SUBTRACTIONS AND CHANGES TO DOCK LOCATION MAP .................................... 4398-4406 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS: A. Department Head Monthly Reports for October 1998 ................. 4407-4430 B. Minutes and financial information from the Suburban Rate Authority (SRA). . . 4431-4446 Thank you letter from the St. Peter Police Department to the Mound Police Department for the assistance we provided to the City of St. Peter during the March 29~' tornado ............................... 4447-4448 Do List of At-Large appointments from various Hennepin County commissions and boards that are due to expire soon. Vacancies will be formally announced later. Please note that the MCWD appointments are expiring in March 1999. We want to pay particular attention to those appointments as they draw near .................... 4449-4451 Ee Applications for the DCAC are enclosed. They are from non-abutters and will be interviewed by the DCAC at their next meeting scheduled for Thursday, November 19, 1998. The City Council is invited to attend the interviews. Recommendations will be heard at the November 24, 1998 regular City Council meeting ................................ 4452-4459 4205 Fo Jo Ko Lo Mo Ne Oe REMINDER: LOST LAKE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT GROUNDBREAKING IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1998, 8:30 A.M., AT THE LOST LAKE SITE. I WOULD LIKE EACH OF YOU TO BE PREPARED TO SPEAK AT THE GROUNDBREAKING. WE WILL HAVE A TENT AT THE SITE, WITH A SOUND SYSTEM, CHAIRS, COFFEE AND DONUTS, ETC. A BANNER WILL BE PLACED AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE LOST LAKE SITE ALONG WITH BALLOONS TO CELEBRATE THIS HISTORIC OCCASION. WE HAVE INVITED OVER 250 PEOPLE AND WE HOPE TO HAVE 50-100 PEOPLE ATI'END. WE HOPE THE WEATHER WILL COOPERATE! REMINDER; VETERAN'S DAY HOLIDAY IS WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 11. CITY OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED IN OBSERVANCE OF VETERAN'S DAY. REMINDER; SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED 1999 BUDGET IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1998, 7:30 P.M. REMINDER: COMMITFEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1998, 7:30 P.M. REMINDER: ANNUAL TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1998, 6:30 P.M. REMINDER: HRA MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1998, 7 P.M. REMINDER: WCCB MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1998, 5:30 P.M., MOUND CITY HALL. REMINDER: CITY OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 26 AND FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27 IN OBSERVANCE OF THE THANKSGIVING DAY HOLIDAYS. REMINDER: ANNUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY IS SCHEDULED FOR SUNDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1998, BEGINNING AT 6:30 P.M., AL & ALMA'S. INVITATIONS WILL BE SENT WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. REMINDER: WCCB REPRESEENTATIVES ARE INVITED TO ATTEND THE NOVEMBER 9TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO HEAR THE PRESENTATION ON THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATION PROJECT. 4206 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 27, 1998 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, October 27, 1998, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz Jensen and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were: Acting City Manager Gino Businaro, City Attorney John Dean, City Clerk Fran Clark, Building Official John Sutherland, and the following interested citizens: Pat Meisel, and John Eccles. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that are not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon after the Consent Agenda has been approved. Councilmember Ahrens asked that item//6 be moved from the Regular Agenda to the Consent Agenda, Item *I.: APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT: MAR1LYN BYRNF_3, 2851 CAMBRIDGE LANE. The Council agreed. 1.0 *CONSENT AGENDA MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Weycker, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended above. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. *1.1 APPROVE THE MINUTF3 OF THE OCTOBER 13, 1998, REGULAR MEETING. MOTION Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. *1.2 *1.3 APPROVE THE MINUTFS OF THE OCTOBER 20, 1998, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING. MOTION Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. CASE 98-60: VARIANCE, FRONT & SIDE YARDS, LAKESIDE, STREI*.T ..FRONTAGE AND LOT SIZE SETBACKS TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION ON THE FRONT, OF THE EXISTING HOUSE CHRIS BAUM, 5138 TUXEDO BLVD., LOT 3, SWLY, 1 &'2 BLOCK 2, WHIPPLE~ PID 24-117-24 43 0037. MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- OCTOBER 27, 1998 RESOLUTION g98-117 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD AND LAKESIDE SETBACK, STREET FRONTAGE, AND LOT SIZE VARIANCES IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT OF THE DWELLING, AT 5138 TUXEDO BLVD, LOT 3 & SWLY 1 & 2, BLOCK 2 , WHIPPLE, PID# 24-117-24 43 0037, P & Z CASE//98-60 Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. *1.4 SET CANVASSING BOARD MEETING FOR WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1998. 7:30 P.M.. MOUND CITY HALL, MOTION Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. '1.5 RESOLUTION APPOINTING ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 3, 1998, RESOLUTION g98-118 RlzSOLUTION APPOINTING ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 3, 1998 Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. '1.6 SET SPECIAL MEETING FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1998, 7:30 P.M. FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSING 1999 PROPOSED BUDGET. (IF NECESSARY, BUDGET DISCUSSION WH~L CONTINUE UNTIL THE NOVEMBER 17, 1998, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING), MOTION Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. *1.7 SET THE FOI.LOWING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR NOVEMBER 10, 1998. A. P & Z CASE #98-55 - STREET VACATION, LONGFORD ROAD, KH.DAIRE ROAD AND KINGS LANE, FINE LINE DESIGN. B. P & Z CASE//98-61 - VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT, 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD. C. REVIEW OF CONDmONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB. 2 MOTION MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- OCTOBER 27, 1998 *1.8 Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. PAYMENT OF BILLS, MOTION Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. '1.9 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT: MARILYN BYRNES, 2851 CAMBRIDGE LANE. RESOLUTION 98-119 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS MAINTENANCE PERMIT FOR MARILYN BRYNES AT 2851 CAMBRIDGE LANE, LOT 10, BLOCK 38, WYCHWOOD, DOCK SITE # 51735 Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously. C 1.10 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRF~qENT. There were none. 1.11 PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION REGARDING FILLING VACANCY. (PLEASE NOTE THAT RITA PEDERSON HAS INDICATED THAT SHE IS INTENDING TO RESIGN FROM POSC WHICH RFSULTS IN TWO VACANCIES. POSC HAS RECOMMENDED THAT IF POSSIBLE, THEY WOUIJ~ LIKE THE TWO APPLICANTS APPOINTED THAT INTERVIEWEI~. WITH TWO VACANCIES, THE NUMBER OF POSITIONS ON THE POSC WOULD NOT HAVE TO CHANGE AND YOU COULD APPOINT BOTH APPLICANTS TO THE POSC). Weycker moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION g98-120 RESOLUTION APPOINTING NORMAN DOMHOLT AND CHRISTINA COOPER TO THE PARK & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.12 A. C. D. E. F. MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- OCTOBER 27, 1998 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS: Financial Report for September 1998 as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director. Park and Open Space Commission Minutes of October 8, 1998. Dock and Commons Advisory Commission Minutes of October 15, 1998. Draft 1999 AMM Policies and Policy Priorities List from AMM. Economic Development Commission Minutes of September 17, 1998. REMINDER: HRA MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR TUE_SDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1998, 7:00 P.M., MOUND CITY HALL. LMCD Mailing. Metropolitan Governance Report as prepared by AMM. MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to adjourn at ~:40 P.M. The vote was unaoimously in favor. Motion carried. Gino Businaro, Acting City Manager Attest: City Clerk 4 a, Ii November 4, 1998 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - SPECIAL MEETING Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City on November 4, 1998, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Acting Mayor Andrea Ahrens, Councilmenbers Mark Hanu~ and ~ Weycker. Mayor Bob Polston and Councilmember Liz Jensen were absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shulde, Jr., and City Clerk Fran Clark. The Acting Mayor opened the meeting. 1.0 ELECTION CANVASSING BOARD The City Election results were presented to the Canvassing Board for their approval. The results were as follows: MAYOR Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. 1 2 3 4 5 6 TOTAL Pat Meisel 313 218 752 525 559 393 2,760 Bob Polston 183 181 537 245 293 190 1,629 COUNCILMEMBER Robert Brown 215 158 509 358 347 244 1,831 John Eccles 196 127 486 355 329 292 1,785 Mark Hanus 252 211 665 368 456 249 2,201 Scot Mc Kenzie 137 134 391 206 265 144 1,277 The following were declared the winners: Pat Meisel, Mayor Elect (two year term) Bob Brown, Councilmember Elect (four year term) mark Hanus, Councilmember Elect (four year term) Hanus moved and Weycker seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION AS PRESENTED AT THE CANVASS OF VOTES OF THE NOVEMBER 3, 1998, GENERAL ELECTION The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Weycker to adjourn at 7:35 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager Attest: City Clerk November 10, 1998 PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION AT 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD AND 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD, TO CREATE THREE (3) BUILDABLE LOTS, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON AND PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE PID # 14-117-24 33 0016 AND 14-117-24 33 0007 P & Z CASE #98-56 WHEREAS, the applicants, Mary Ann Sells and Al Sage, have submitted a Minor Subdivision request to create three (3) buildable parcels identified as Parcels 1, 2, and 3 from the existing two parcel by relocating boundary lines that is in full compliance with the City Zoning Code, Section 330:20, Subd. 1.B; and, WHEREAS, the property located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Lynwood Blvd and Westedge Road; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties is located within R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District; and, WHEREAS, current improvements on parcel 2 is a house and detached garage and on parcel 3 there is a house and shed; and, WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is considered minor as defined by the Subdivision Code due to the fact that not more than three (3) lots are being created from an existing parcel with existing utilities and infrastructure in place; and, WHEREAS, the Parcels 1, 2, and 3 meet zoning and subdivision standards and new home construction will be subject to setback, hardcover, and grading requirements; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval of the minor subdivision as recommended by staff; and, November 10, 1996 2232 Westedge & 6351 Lynwood- Sells & Sage Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant a minor subdivision of the property pursuant to Section 330:20, Subd. 1 .B. with the following conditions: Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans for Parcel 1 be approved by the City Engineer at the time of building permit application. All existing platted easements on the easement survey be vacated as shown on the described in the easement survey. Dedicate new utility easements as proposed in the easement survey. Sanitary sewer service for Parcel 1 and water service for Parcel 2 be installed or a financial guarantee be provided such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. Park dedication fees be paid as stated in Section 330:120 of the City Code. 2. This Minor Subdivision is granted for the following new legally described property: PARCEL 1: THAT PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE, LYING WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE ON AN ASSUMED BEARING OF SOUTH 73 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE BEING DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF 160.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6 WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 410.00 FEET OF SAID LOT 6. PARCEL 2: THAT PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE, LYING EASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE ON AN ASSUMED BEARING OF SOUTH 73 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF 160.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6 WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 410.00 FEET OF SAID LOT 6, AND SAID LINE THERE ENDING. ALSO, THAT PART OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, LYING NORTHERLY AND WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE; COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE ON AN ASSUMED BEARING OF NORTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 63.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE BEING DESCRIBED; THENCE NORTH 81 DEGREES EAST A DISTANCE 156.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 9 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST TO THE MOST NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, AND SAID LINE THERE ENDING. November 10, 1998 2232 Westedge & 6351 Lynwood- Sells & Sage Page 2 PARCEL 3: THAT PART OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, LYING SOUTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE ON AN ASSUMED BEARING OF NORTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 63.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE BEING DESCRIBED; THENCE NORTH 81 DEGREES EAST A DISTANCE 156.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST TO THE MOST NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, AND SAID LINE THERE ENDING. 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. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 MEMORANDUM November 6, 1998 TO: FROM: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: POLICE SERGEANTS CONTRACT - 1998-1999 Attached is a resolution recommending approval of a labor agreement between the City of Mound and Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS), Police Sergeants. As you may recall, this matter was scheduled for arbitration. However, prior to the arbitration date, an agreement was reached between the parties. The following items are changes to the present contract which expired 12/31/97: Wages - 3% Increase for 1998 and 3% increase for 1999. Health Insurance Contribution, family coverage - $400 per month in 1998 and $420 per month in 1999. Voluntary mediation step for grievance issues. Language changes regarding "Choice of Remedy," a provision that will not conflict with rules and regulations of the United States Equal Employment Oppommity Commission. Voluntary Fitness program to remain in effect. I recommend approval of the proposed contract with the above changes. If you have any questions, please contact me. printed on recycled paper RESOLUTION NO. 98 - RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUND AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, POLICE SERGEANTS, FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1999 WHEREAS, the City of Mound and Law Enforcement Labor Services, Police Sergeants, have gone through the collective bargaining process and negotiated a Labor Contract for January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1999 period; and WHEREAS, both sides have worked a final agreement which is acceptable to both the City's negotiators and the Bargaining Unit's negotiators. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mound and Law Enforcement Labor Services, Police Sergeants, have reached a settlement on the January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1999 contract attached hereto and made a part hereof. The foregoing resolution was moved by , seconded by The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 November 5, 1'998 'FO: Edward Shukle City Manager FROM: PubZic i~jorks Supt. SUBJECT: CBD Snow Plowing Cont'ract Bids for the 1998-99 CBD snow plowing were opened on October 22, 1998. There was only one bid submitted, Widmer Bros. in St. Bonifacius. After reviewing the bid prices, which are comparable to last year prices, I recommend that Widmer Bros. be awarded the contract. printed on recycled paper 40% Pre-Consumer Content · 10% Post-Consumer Content Page No. of WlDM£R INC. P.O. Box 219 ST. BONIFACIUS, MINNESOTA 55375 PHONE 446-3.495 FAX 446-1836 Pages PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO City of Mound STREET 5341 Maywood CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE ~ound, ~ 55364 ARCHITECT DATE OF PLANS PHONE DATE 472-1251 JOB NAME 98-99 Snowplowing JOB LOCATION JJOB PHONE We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: PER HOUR 980 Cat 966E Cat (5 Yd.) -$100.00 4x4 Pickups -$ 55.00 We reserve the right to file a Mechanics Lien If bill Is not paid within the length of time prescribed by law. You agree to pay all cost Incurred pertaining to lien. We will not be responsible for any underground utilities that cannot be located by the utility companies ........................ O r"! h'e'"ho m e'own e r:'-N ormat'"clea mu p"~"t ncluded--'t n--t hi s'--prop osa h-'The re"is---n {r' sod--figure d-' tn" this--pro p e~ ~:----We--~tll"'notlsS Mine--tile ............................ responsibility for water pipes, trees, tree roots, sprinkler systems, etc. unless notified to exact location prior to excavating. Frost rlpj~lng extra charge. It is ex.p. ressl~ stipulated and agreed that the unders gned shall not be' held liable for damages to grass, trees, ........................ ~'~;~'~'S'"~'~'~'"~'~'"'~'~J'~7~[;'~'~'l~'~J" ~{f~..j~B~.~E~j.j~.~j~.`~j~:~;~.~B~j~[~j~6~j~6~.~-.~.~"~6~j~~~j~;~:~- .............................. there will be extra charges based on time and material. ~e ~ropose Payment to be made as follows: hereby to furnish material and labor --complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum Of: dollars ($ ). Within 30 days upon billing A finance charge of 1H% per month (18% annual rate) will be charged on past due accounts. All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifica- tions involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents ~,,-e~delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. Authorized Signature Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within days. Arrep mre of roposal --The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do ~he work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Date of Acceptance: Signature Signature Bills November 10, 1998 Batch 8097 852,558.45 Batch 8098 TOTAL BILLS 117,800.60 97O,359.O5 o 0'.O o Z L,U _,~ I; I g g oo oo oo oo o ~ o~ ~o o ~ ~J I ,-I -.1' L:J U~ '::3 ,0 ~.1 ~,- 0.. 0~. I C; ,. Il o o~ . ~0 or} ? r~- oo. ~W O~- Z C C' 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 4) 0 ,'..') ') 3 2 *-4 ~ '1 I I I ' . I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ I ~ I ~ I o~ ~ ~. 0 I ~ . , ~ . . ............ . ..~. . · ' I , -I o~ Z 0 Z I J i, ,J ,I- I, ~, II, C " (2 C m 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 '3' ; ..'3. z o .) I ~zzz ~ ~~z o ooroor~ o oo&oo~ooo~ W Z UJ o~ § :o o:. o.oo I o 0 uJ~ ~ I z '~(Q. UJ o z o~ '. I Z November 10, 1998 PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A STREET VACATION OF AN UNIMPROVED PLATTED CITY RIGHT OF WAY KNOWN AS KILDARE ROAD ADJACENT TO LOTS 24 & 25, BLOCK 11, SETON, P & Z CASE #98-55 WHEREAS, the applicant, Fine Line Design Group Inc, has requested the vacation of that portion of Kildare Road, Kings Lane, and Longford Rd as described in the application; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota Statues, Section 412.851 provides that the City Council may, by resolution, vacate any street, alley, public grounds, or public way, or any pal~thereof, when it appears in the interest of the public to do so; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 10, 1998, as required by law; and, WHEREAS, the vacation request was reviewed by the City staff, Park Commission, Docks & Commons Commission, and the applicable utility companies, m.~ .there ............... ,,...,-,- ....... o.a ,,o= id=_nt!fi~d c-. ,.v-- objection to-the :,=~..aficm~ In addition, it appears to be in the public's interest to vacate this right-of-way as it does not have a public use; and, WHEREAS, approval of this request will add vacated property to the neighboring parcels; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has unanimously recommended approval of the vacation of that portion of unimproved Kildare Road adjacent to Lots 24 and 25, Block 11, SETON; and, November 10, 1998 Fine £ine Design Group - K;~dare Vacation Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota to hereby approve the request to vacate the 30 foot wide unimproved platted right-of-way known as Kildare Road located adjacent to Lots 24 and 25, Block 11, Seton. A certified copy of this resolution shall be prepared by the City Clerk and shall be a notice of completion of the proceedings. It is the responsibility of the owner to record this Certified Resolution in the office of the County Recorder and/or the Registrar of Titles, as set forth in M.S.A. 412.851. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1998 Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Michael Mueller, Cklair Hasse, Becky Glister, Frank Weiland, Orv Burma, Bill Voss, and Jerry Clapsaddle. Staff present: Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Council Liason Mark Hanus and Building Official Jon Sutherland. Public Present: Mary DeVinney, Mary McCurdy, Edythe Koenig, Vanny Palm, Alma Quist, Judy Bryce, Ron Roelofs, Tom Duissen, Richard McCurdy, Teresa Lyons, Gary Lyons, David Lehtola, Merritt Geyen, Daryl Geyen, Bob Abdo, Darlene Kotila, Michelle Alexander, Joel Johnson, Bill Winter, Brian Skalbeck, Dee Skalbeck, Roger Allen, Melanie Allen, Thomas Stokes, Steve Behnke, Ebbe Christensen, Pat Christensen, Bob Zabel, Al Sage, Lois Sage, MaryAnn Sells, Ron DeVinney, Dennis Hildebrandt, Russ Fischer, Mary Cody, Keith Harrell, Holly Schluter, Joan Catain, John Cody, Jean Smith, Bud Smith, Doug Easthouse, Donna Easthouse, Al Anderson, Jan & Keith Clark, Brian Clark, Dave Hartman, Bob & Sheila Smith, Jim Smith, Janet Smith, Bonnie Aarsvold, Vicki Aune, Thomas Lind, Joanne Ashenfelter, John Rasmussen, Liz Nead, Marvin Geyen, Tim Achenfelter, Gordy McVey, Marty Woods, Roger Anderson. Meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael. MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Weiland pointed out that Jerry Clapsaddle was on both the present and the absent list. Correction noted and corrected. MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Hasse to approve the corrected Minutes of the October 12, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 8-0. Chair Michael recited the procedure for Public Hearings. BOARD OF APPEALS: CASE # 98-55: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING, STREET VACATION, LONGFORD ROAD, KILDARE, AND KINGS LANE, FINE LINE DESIGN, P O BOX 1611, BURNSVILLE, SETON Loren Gordon presented the case. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October '12, `1gg8 At the September 14, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, this item was tabled until the Park Commission and Docks and Commons Commission could provide further review and input. Staff presented the case to both Commission and each has made recommendation. The meeting minutes are provided for your review of the discussion. The Parks and Open Space Commission unanimously recommended the vacation be denied finding access issues to the lake and benefit to public interest as concerns. The recommendation can be found on page 7 of the Park and Open Space Commission meeting minutes. The Docks and Commons Commission had a split vote 2-1-1 to approve the vacation request finding many dock program related issues reason for approval. In making a recommendation to Council, the Planning Commission may want to consider some of the findings from the Parks and Docks Commissions. The final report staff will present to Council will discuss the findings and recommendation of each Commission and weigh the benefits and downfalls of each. DISCUSSION Steve Behnke, Fine Design Group, there are two subjects 1) the Longford Road vacation - they commented that it really didn't matter which way the decision went. 2) Kildare Road vacation - pertaining to the ponding issue for the development. Mueller asked Behnke to demonstrate where the ponding is proposed to go. Behnke showed where the pond was completely on their property. He also demonstrated where it would go if Kildare Road would be vacated. Behnke stated that currently the boulder wall is 12 feet high and with the vacation the wall could be reduced to approximately 5-6 feet in height. Mueller questioned if the intersection would be needed. Behnke stated that they would like to utilize half of the intersection. Mueller asked Gordon if the Parks and Open Space Commission and the Docks and Commons Commission heard what Behnke just presented. Gordon stated that they did not get into the detail that the Planning Commission has but was discussed. Both commissions were concerned with park and water issues. Gordon demonstrated the map to show what would exactly be vacated. Mueller questioned what would staff's recommendation be now after hearing the comments from the other two commissions and the applicant. Gordon stated that after hearing input from the other commissions, the applicant, Planning Commission, and City Engineer, Staff would recommend vacating Kildare Rd only. 2 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 Burma asked Behnke if he would like to have half of the intersection. Behnke stated that in the past he has. He stated that he couldn't see where a trail would need to be larger than 15 feet in width. He stated that the ponding could remain on their property. It would be easier for grading around the pond. Weiland questioned the height of the berm. Behnke stated that on the original berm is at 936 and the revised is at 934, they are grading at a 3 to 1 ratio. Voss questioned if the variance is not granted what would happen to the ponding. Behnke stated that it would stay pretty much the same with a 15 foot high retaining wall. Weiland asked why there is not a updated plan of what the Developer wants to do. Behnke stated that there is a drawing showing the pond in the vacated road. Voss commented that he was still unclear on how the city would maintain access to the city owned property. Gordon explained the vacation on an overhead map. Gordon explained a possible route for a trail system. Gordon stated that a trail system would probably require 20 feet of width for a trail and green space edging to be properly constructed. Mueller asked if staff would have a problem with the developer grading on the city right of way. Gordon stated that what the developer is proposing, grading would probably would not be a problem. Weiland asked if stipulation on the request to have the city maintain rights to the property. Gordon stated that if a trail gets put in the future, there may be situation with the retaining wall and the retaining wall may be taken over by the city. Mueller clarified the status of the property that it would require a public lands permit to do the grading and the ownership would remain the city's. Gordy McVey, 4807 Longford Rd, asked about how it will effect dock rights. Gordon stated that the development would get 7 slips under the multiple dock concept regulated by the Commons system. Chair Michael closed the Public Hearing. Burma clarified that with the vacation that half would go to Seton Bluff Development and half would go to the Trevis's. Behnke stated that he would confer with the Trevis's and work something out. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Weiland to recommend to Council to approve the vacation of Kildare Road from the east line of Kings Lane to the Cul-de-sac. Motion Carried 8-0. 3 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12. 1998 Mueller commented on some finding of facts: 1) Park Commission preferring not to give up any access to the lake and in their vote, the planning commission is not doing that, there will still be 100% access. 2) Dock Commission with a 1-1-1 vote, with one of the votes being a council member, Mueller considers that the commission made no decision. This case will go to City Council on Tuesday, November 10, 1998. 4 PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: October 26, 1998 SUBJECT: Case 98-55 Longford Road vacation - additional information APPLICANT: Fine Line Design Group, Inc. CASE NUMBER: 98-55 HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5ww LOCATION: Seton Bluff area COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential At the September 14, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, this item was tabled until the Park Commission and Docks and Commons Commission could provide further review and input. Staff presented the case to both Commission and each has made recommendation. The meeting minutes are provided for your review of the discussion. The Parks and Open Space Commission unanimously recommended the vacation be denied finding access issues to the lake and benefit to public interest as concerns. The recommendation can be found on page 7 of the Park and Open Space Commission meeting minutes. The Docks and Commons Commission had a split vote 2-1-1 to approve the vacation request finding many dock program related issues reason for approval. In making a recommendation to Council, the Planning Commission may want to consider some of the findings from the Parks and Docks Commissions. The final report staff will present to Council will discuss the findings and recommendation of each Commission and weigh the benefits and downfalls of each. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612)472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE #98-55 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A STREET VACATION OF UNIMPROVED CITY RIGHT OF WAYS LOCATED WITHIN THE R-lA ZONING DISTRICT, LONGFORD ROAD, KINGS LANE, AND KILDARE ROAD ACCORDING TO PLAT MAP, SETON P & Z 98-55 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 10, 1998 to consider the approval of a street vacation of unimproved citY right of way on Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road located within the R-lA zoning district. All persons appearing at said hearing wit r. efer-e~ce to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meet~ j _ . '---r~aS-L-~q u mt, t~a n~ Secretary Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on October 27, 1998 Published in the Laker, October 31, 1998 printed on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE #98-55 NOTICE OF A CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A STREET VACATION OF UNIMPROVED CITY RIGHT OF WAYS LOCATED WITHIN THE R-lA ZONING DISTRICT, LONGFORD ROAD, KINGS LANE, AND KILDARE ROAD ACCORDING TO PLAT MAP, SETON P & Z 98-55 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, October 26, 1998 to consider the approval of a street vacation of unimproved city right of way on Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road located within the R-lA zoning district. ~~~7 6 5 4 3 Z t~ - , ' ,,' .~ ~/ KILDARE ; RD ~ R '~.. "t'~"~"~['~ I I,o'h_ I.~ ~ I~~ ~ ,' CARLOW [RD ~ =/ All persons appearing at said hearing with given the opportunity to be heard at this me.e,_~ ~inquis.t/, P~n~'ng Secretary Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on October 20, 1998 Published in the Laker, October 24, 1998 printed on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 1998 Present were: Chair Mark Goldberg, Commissioners Jim Funk and Dennis Hopkins, and Council Representative Mark Hanus. Also present were Park Director Jim Fackler, Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey, City Planner Loren Gordon, and Secretary Carla Wirth. Those excused: Commissioner Frank Ahrens. Also in attendance were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmember Leah Weycker, John Kraayenbrink, and Tom Eikenberry. Goldberg called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. MINUTES Motion made by Funk, seconded by Hopkins, to approve the minutes of the September 17, 1998 DCAC meeting as presented. Motion carried unanimously. VACATION OF CITY PROPERTY Loren Gordon, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., explained the DCAC is asked to review and make recommendation on the Longford Road, Kildare Road, and Kings Lane street vacation request because of implications the proposed street vacations could have on public use, dock issues, and lake access. He presented a map of the area and pointed out the location of the street easements under consideration. Gordon noted the location of the bluff line and areas which are currently under water which includes the road easement for Longford Road. The City Engineer and Streets Superintendent do not feel Longford Road, Kings Lane, or this portion of Kildare Road would ever be constructed as roadway so they recommend vacation except for the intersection of Kings Lake and Kildare Road to assure access. They also recommend vacating the stub easements of Kings Lane and Kerry Lane. Gordon noted the storm water retention ponding area which is needed for the development. He explained the topography did not match the developer's site plan so they needed to re-engineer their storm pond and found it would be better for them if they could push the pond area out onto the road right-of-way. Gordon explained that if the vacation is approved, the properties abutting the easements would receive that property. This would create riparian lots so each could get a dock. Gordon noted the location of the stairway and configuration of the common dock, if that alternate is used. The applicant has indicated it does not matter to him which scenario happens. Gordon stated the question to answer is whether the public's best interests would be served by the proposed vacation. Hanus explained he raised this issue at the Council level, that there may be an interest in vacating. He advised that a multiple dock was already approved for this area. It was noted that there would be either individual docks or a common dock, one or the other. Hanus Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 stated the initial question was if it would do the program any good if more slips would be allowed than allowed by the program or if more BSUs would be available for use elsewhere. He stated if this is reduced, there is less burden on the program for BSUs. Goldberg stated if the road easement is vacated, the BSUs would have to live within the LMCD guidelines for private property. Fackler stated this is correct and the docks would be one per fifty feet. Goldberg asked if this shoreline (440 feet) would stay within the program if it is vacated. Fackler stated it would not since it would be private property. He explained that if vacated the property owners would have to provide a survey to the LMCD and request a variance. Fackler stated the LMCD may provide a hardship for the length of the dock but probably not for the number of BSUs. He stated it may be to the property owner's benefit to form an association and go with a common dock. Hanus noted the need for a lot of record to have a riparian lot so the LMCD might insist on a multiple dock which the property owners may want anyway due to the lower cost. Hopkins stated it would be a positive if seven more people are paying into the Dock Program. He commented on the cost to the City for multiple docks and stated it would be positive for them to remain in the commons. He noted that this common dock would not be the City's responsibility since it would be owned by their homeowners association. Goldberg inquired regarding the impact on the City's ability to install their own multiple dock and provide access for nonabutting boaters. Fackler stated it could still be done. Goldberg commented this area is a nice location since it does not involve abutters. Fackler stated this vacation action may set a precedent for other locations. Goldberg stated he thinks the precedent will not be an issue since the City wants to assure there is full access for the nonabutters and this does not impact that issue. Fackler noted it could be an impact since it will take some from the 590. Also, the City needs to show a hardship. Hanus stated these seven slips would use 350 feet and would contribute 244 feet of lakeshore so it is a benefit to the program. He noted this is a brand new consideration so the issues of benefit/negative can be fully addressed as well as the impact to the program. Hopkins suggested the City look for properties to use this program and increase contributors. Fackler stated an option is to vacate Kings Lane and Kildare Road but not Longford Road. Hanus asked if the developer wants to use part of the intersection. Gordon advised that they need some of that intersection area for their storage pond. Hanus noted that if the intersection is vacated, it would be divided into quadrants and be owned by the abutting Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 property. Gordon stated this is correct but he understands that one of the property owners does not want the easement. Hanus stated staff is recommending that if it is vacated certain easements be retained. He asked if an easement would help the City relative to the DCAC if for walkways and pathways. Hopkins restated his support to allow the dock as part of the Dock Program. He stated he does not think these property owners would ever come to the City to request maintenance. Hopkins stated this would be beneficial by making money for the program. Hanus stated the seven docks will go in one way or the other, either through the City bank of BSUs or a private bank of BSUs. If from the City bank, there will be fewer BSUs to use elsewhere. He explained that as access to the lake becomes more valuable there will be more call in the future for the same type of arrangement. Funk agreed that if this property is vacated it would allow the property owner to deal with a multiple dock, water depth, and dock length. Fackler explained the property owner would be required to apply for all permits and variances. If they can show reasonable hardship relative to water depth and reeds, they may be able to get a variance based on hardship. Goldberg stated he is less concerned about giving up the vacation as long as it is not giving up the opportunity to put in a common dock. Fackler stated this is an area that could, have a common dock but would probably not be at the top of the list. Hanus noted there is no access for anyone to go down there. Funk asked if the City would ever realistically look at this area for expansion. Hopkins stated he does not think so. Goldberg stated the benefit would be the funds received. Hopkins stated another benefit is that the City is not responsible for putting the dock in or out or for the maintenance. Goldberg stated there are two main issues: 1 ) the opportunity to collect $150 per year for each of the seven docks, and 2) a possible precedent setting. Hanus stated another impact is what it may do in the future if the property owners ask the City to handle maintenance of this dock. Hopkins suggested a restriction be added to their covenants to prevent that from occurring. Hopkins asked if there has been any other similar area that has come to the City expecting maintenance of their dock. Hanus stated they only have to ask to be treated the same as other multiples. He suggested that a legal opinion be obtained regarding this potential and asked how this dock would be categorized. Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 Fackler stated a similar situation would be a dredge where the City has done a dredge in some areas with docks but has not done so where there are limited docks since it would not have been as great a benefit. He noted this is a precedent set as well as riprap activity which has been done in some areas but not others. Goldberg noted in this situation they are abutting property owners which is different than with other multiple docks. Funk suggested the decision be based on how it impacts the program today, if at all. He stated he would prefer to minimize City involvement. Hanus stated a way to resolve that would be to change the covenants and insist that they be responsible for the cost of the dock, the dock installation, dock removal, and all maintenance which needs to be to City standards plus they need to pay the fee to the program. Hanus stated the only purpose for the public property would be to receive the annual fee. He stated this is a "draw" on BSUs of the program but a negative in respect to future growth of the program. Fackler reviewed a section of the City Code regarding removal of docks as contained in Section 437:00, Subd. 5. and stated the City has the ability to remove the license and assess the cost if the dock is not maintained to City standards. Hopkins stated it would not serve the public good to give away this land. Funk stated he leans toward supporting the vacation. Goldberg stated he can see both sides of the issue. Gordon explained the recommendations of staff, the Planning Commission, POSC, and DCAC will be presented to the Council. Motion made by Funk, seconded by Hanus, to recommend approval of the street vacation of Longford Road, Kildare Road, and Kings Lane. 2 ayes (Funk and Hanus), 1 nay (Hopkins), 1 abstain (Goldberg). Motion carried. Hopkins indicated he voted against because of the loss of income to the Dock Program and he does not believe the City would ever be asked for maintenance. ADJOURN Motion was made by Goldberg, seconded by Hopkins, to adjourn the meeting at 9:23 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION OCTOBER 8, 1998 Present were: Commissioners Peter Meyer, Bev Botko, Tom Casey, and City Council Representative Leah Weycker. Also present were Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon and Secretary Cada Wirth. The following interested citizens were also present: Norman Domholt and Christina Cooper. Absent was Commissioner Rita Pederson. Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. MINUTES Casey requested the following correction: Page 1, delete second paragraph under Review: Request to Purchase Tax Forfeit Property. Meyer requested the following corrections: Page 1, last sentence of third paragraph under Review: Request to Purchase Tax Forfeit Property, delete the words "Teal Point Development and." Page16, first paragraph, reword to indicate "Meyer stated his appreciation to fellow Commissioners and others for their help to repaint the deck at the Depot Mound Bay Park. Motion made by Botko, seconded by Casey, to approve the minutes of the September 10, 1998 Park and Open Space Commission (POSC) meeting, as amended above. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA CHANGES Meyer requested the addition of 3A, DISCUSS: STREET VACATIONS. Casey requested the addition of 7k), Minnesota Land Trust Meeting in Mound. DISCUSS: REQUEST FOR STREET VACATION Mr. Gordon explained that essentially he will take input on this issue from staff, the City Planner, Building Official, City Engineer, and Street Superintendent, as well as the Planning Commission, POSC, and the Docks and Commons Commission. This input will be summarized into an updated report which will be forwarded to the Council and present recommendations on what should be done with these streets. Mr. Gordon stated that based on all of the information submitted and provided they will make the best recommendation possible as to what to do with the street vacation. Mr. Gordon presented a site plan of the Seton Bluff development and explained that as part of the approval process and permitting of a multiple dock site, a question was raised Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission October 8, 1998 if Longford Road should be part of the City's street inventory or if it is a candidate for vacation. The Council directed staff to look at Longford Road from the Black Lake Commons area to Kings Lane and potion of Kildare Road where the cul-de-sac exists to determine the issues and if it should be vacated. Mr. Gordon stated the Planning Commission raised several issues they wanted more input on. He advised that the issue boils down to the reason these streets should be vacated (no need for a street) or if the City should consider giving up some type of public access along the streets and lake access. Mr. Gordon presented a map showing an aerial view which was overlaid by the plat/road map. He pointed out the site for the Seton Bluff development, wetland areas which are owned by the City of Mound, and roadway alignments. Casey noted an additional area of property along Kildare Road (north one-half of lots) which is owned by the City of Mound. Mr. Gordon reviewed several points of access to the City-owned wetland property. If Kings Lane is vacated, the only access would be from the west. He noted the lots owned by the Seton Bluff Homeowners Association and the two lots under different private ownership. He explained that if Longford Road is vacated, those two privately-owned lots would not have public access. To resolve this issue, the lots could be sold to the Seton Bluff developer. If that were not possible, public access through easements would have to be provided to afford access. Otherwise there may be grounds for a taking. Mr. Gordon noted the property owned by Mr. Lager(sp?) which extends from Carlow Road to the channel. If the roadways were vacated, he would be provided with a contiguous parcel. Mr. Gordon requested input from the POSC. Meyer asked what the Fine Line Design Group would gain by a street vacation. Mr. Gordon explained that currently they are requesting a multiple dock site for the development with access from two sets of stairways. If Longford Road is vacated, they would consider six riparian lots which could each have its own dock site. Casey asked if this would mean dredging through the cattails for each of those docks. Mr. Gordon explained they can have up to 100 feet of dock length but that still does not provide enough water depth (only two feet when four feet is needed). He explained that the LMCD has indicated that a dredging permit may not be an option. Meyer noted that a multiple dock permit is being requested. However if the road is vacated, six riparian lots can be created each with their own docks. Casey stated the impact will be greater from six riparian lots, each dredging through the wetland. Mr. Gordon noted the location of the top of the bluff and ordinary high water line (OHWL). He explained that due to the existing conditions, the Longford Road alignment is under water and would probably never be constructed to City standards. He advised of their research on natural preservation, no mow zones, etc. The question was raised about Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission October 8, 1998 how to address stairways. Due to the fifty foot lot width and need for a fifty foot separation between docks, the structures would be limited to stairways only. Mr. Gordon advised that the City Engineer has recommended there is no need for Longford Road or Kings Lane or this section of Kildare Road as a City street with utilities. The City Engineer recommends if the vacation is approved, to also vacate the easement stubs north of Longford Road on Kings Lane and Cary Lane. Also, it is recommended that the corner intersection of Kings Lane and Kildare Road not be vacated to assure access is provided through that intersection. Casey asked about land locking the property in the northeast corner. Mr. Gordon advised the lots in question are held in common ownership and extend from Kildare Road to the channel. Casey asked if this would create a "flag" lot. Mr. Gordon agreed it would be of an unusual configuration. Weycker noted the intent from Steven Behnke of Fine Line Design Group. Mr. Gordon stated the information received from Council's directive was to look at the vacation for the length from Black Lake Commons to Kings Lane. Weycker explained that the Council's reason to consider this is the City will be installing a multiple City dock and if there is no access, why regulate it. She asked if there is any pubic access to this area. Mr. Gordon explained that the Kings Lane right-of-way could be used to create a trail to the public property, which may be a good reason to keep it. Weycker asked if the lake level in this area is constant. Mr. Gordon stated he does not know. Meyer stated he understands the lake level is currently lower than normal. Weycker inquired regarding the footage, Mr. Gordon stated it is 440 feet for the development which incudes the full development frontage, if it were to be vacated, which would accommodate six docks. Weycker stated she believes it is an advantage to add that footage and if the boat storage units (BSU) could be added to the dock program she would not want to approve vacation. Meyer read Section 255:20 of the City Code which details what the City is to strive for in providing an unpolluted environment, access to lakes and streams, and parks which afford natural beauty as well as recreational enjoyment. Casey asked if the street area is considered in the shoreline calculations for BSUs. Weycker guessed that the OHWL is used. Casey noted that to consider a vacation, a public interest must be served. He stated that he has not seen this criteria met unless the consideration is to raise the value of the property for the developer. He noted that to not vacate allows the City more control to assure the bluff is preserved, the number of docks best fits the best design, and to maintain access points that may be valuable in the future. Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission October 8, 1998 Weycker stated that when this was originally considered, it was clear there was no public access but now it is learned that Kings Lane does provide that access. Meyer inquired regarding the ponding facility for Seton Bluff. Mr. Gordon noted the alignment of Kildare Road, driveways, and the drainage pond. He advised of the issues involving retaining walls and providing access to the public right-of-way. The City Engineer suggests pushing the ponding onto the roadways and to reduce the impacts from taller retaining walls or closeness to the house. Casey asked if the POSC is to maximize the developer's profit by allowing the ability to construct a larger house on a small lot. Mr. Gordon noted the setback issues with Lot 7 to place the house and garage on the bluff area. Casey noted that this development area has been scraped off and trees removed. He asked if there would be remediation considering what has taken place regarding removal of trees. Mr. Gordon agreed this has been a complicated process in working with the developer. Casey asked if replacement of trees will be required as part of the approvals given. Mr Gordon stated that he does not think that option has been addressed. ~'~otion by Weycker, seconded Casey, to recommend denial of the vacation request of Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road based on the finding that public access is still possible and it may be necessary; the storm water pond should be remedied on the developer's property; Kings Lane is a continued access to that area; there has been no finding or evidence to show the vacation is in the public's interest as required by the State Statutes; and the vacation would not comply with City Code Section 255:20 indicating the public policy of the City of Mound which is to strive to: a) present and future residents of the City an unpolluted environment; b) provide access to lakes and streams in the community; and c) provide parks which afford natural b_.eauty as well as recreational enjoyment. __~ Meyer stated he believes this will provide a better situation than seven docks and uncertainty about what will happen with the bluff area. Motion carried unanimously. Casey requested an opportunity to discuss the Comprehensive Plan process. The POSC agreed to comply with this request. ADJOURN Motion was made by Casey, seconded by Weycker, to adjourn the meeting at 10:07 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. gin TO: Mound Park and Rec. Director, Park Commission, and Dock and Commons Commission FROM: Loren Gordon, Assistant City Planner DATE: October 1, 1998 SUBJECT: Longford Road, Kildare Road, and Kings Lane street vacation request DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission has referred this item on for your review and recommendation because of implications the proposed street vacations could have on public use, dock issues, and lake access. Included in the packet information is the application material, a staff report and minutes from the September 14, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission would like the Commissions to provide any input on the proposal relevant to public use and accessibility. I would expect that either Jon Sutherland or myself would be present to assist with the discussion. Mound Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1998 MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Cklair Hasse, Becky Glister, Michael Mueller, Orv Burma, and Council Liaison Mark Hanus. Staff present: Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Jerry Clapsaddle, Bill Voss, and Frank Weiland. Public Present: Pat & Irene Harrington, Paul & Kim Stannard, Scot McKenzie, Doug & Ann Jepson, Bud Stannard, Brian & Teri Meagher, Andrea Ahrens, Steve Behnke - Fine Line Design, Thomas Stokes - Brenshell Homes. Meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael. MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 24, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. No Corrections were made. MOTION by Hasse, seconded by Burma to approve the Minutes of the August 24, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 6-0. Chair Michael explained how a Public Hearing is heard. BOARD OF APPEALS: CASE # 98-55: PUBLIC HEARING, STREET VACATION, LONGFORD ROAD, KILDARE ROAD, AND KINGS LANE, FINE LINE DESIGN, P O BOX 1611, BURNSVlLLE, SETON The applicant, Fine Line Design, has submitted a request to vacate portions or Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road. As you will remember, the discussions about the vacation of Longford Road were initiated at an August Council meeting and at that meeting staff was directed to investigate scenarios of vacating Longford Road from Black Lake Commons to Kings Lane. Since this meeting, the developer of the Seton Bluff project, has also made application to consider vacation of that portion of Longford Road as well as portions of Kings Lane and Kildare Road. For purposes of discussion, this report will address both the Council directive and applicants request. Longford Road is a platted unimproved street for its entire length along the channel connecting Seton and Black Lake. It is platted at a 30 feet width. As the northern most east-west street on Mound Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1998 the island, it somewhat acts as the delineation of developable land. The 929.4 feet ordinary high water line (OHWL) is within the Longford Road right-of-way from Black Lake Commons to a point about halfway between Kings Place and Emmett Place where it meanders south. Land south of it is generally above the 929.4 feet and has developed or is currently developing. The platted lots north of Longford Road are generally below the 929.4 feet water level and are for all practical purposes, will never develop as home sites. There are no known utilities in the street. Those portions of Kings Lane and Kildare Road are also platted unimproved streets with a 30 feet width. Almost all of the land area of both streets is above the 929.4 except for a northern portion of Kings Lane at the intersection of Longford Road. The Seton Bluff development is east of Kings Lane and west of Kings Lane is a swampy bay area at or below the OHWL. Kildare Road is improved east of Kerry Lane to provide access to the Seton Bluff development. It cul- se-sacs 80 feet east of Kings Lane where it remains unimproved. There are no known utilities within Kings Land or the unimproved portion of Kildare Road. Property Ownership Access to properties lying north of Longford Road is a large issue in considering a vacation due to the potential of land locking some properties. At the present time there are at least 2 and potentially 3 properties that could be cut off from public access if a vacation occurred. These include Lots 1 and 2 in Block 2 and Lot 8 in Block 2. The developers of Seton Bluff contend that they have recently purchased lot 8 which will become part of the Seton Bluff homeowners association. Lots 1 and 2 are separately owned and have no ownership south of Longford Road. There are a couple of options to address access to lots 1 and 2. One option would be to create some type of access easement gain access to an improved public street. A likely route would be to connect the properties to Black Lake Lane via Longford Road. This would require easements through a number of properties. All effected property owners would need to agree for this to work. A second scenario assumes the 2 property owners are willing to sell the properties to an adjacent private owner. The logical buyer would be the Seton Bluff developers who would then own lots 1 - 9. The City of Mound owns lots 2 - 11 on Block 3 and lots 2 - 5 and 37 -39 on Block 10. These lots include an overgrown bay of cattails adjacent to the channel. It is separated from Kings Lane by land currently owned by the Jerome and Kathleen Trevis. Seton Bluff development One of the reasons for the developers have petitioned for the vacation is due to engineering complications associated with the storm water ponding facilities. The pond and outlet were originally designed to be located within the development. During construction however, it was found that the grading was not accurate and modifications would be needed to get the facility to work correctly. The developer is suggesting that the best way to accomplish this is to grade onto Kildare Road. They would like to own that portion of the street to accomplish this rather than petition the City for necessary permits. Mound Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1998 The developers also intend to construct docks along the channel to serve the development. A street vacation would allow the developers to consider individual riparian lot docks in addition to a multiple dock site originally proposed. Either scenario is acceptable to the developer, it just becomes a matter of who makes the application, the lot owners or the City. In either case there are some lingering issues regarding dock length and the water depth that would need to be resolved. In considering the vacation request, the ultimate question that should be answered is "Is a vacation of benefit to the public?" If the proposed street vacations would not have an adverse impact to private property access, lake access, or public utility provision, then vacations should be considered. If the proposed street vacations would adversely impact private property access, access to the lake, and public utilities, then it would appear that vacations should not be considered because it would not benefit the public. In terms of looking at the potential for future streets, the City Engineer's report states that there is no need for these platted right-of-ways for street purposes. It is suggested that drainage and utility easements be retained on those portions adjacent to Seton Bluff. (Refer to the letter from Jon Cameron dated September 10, 1998). If the preservation of public access to the lake is desired, then it would appear that at least Longford Road and Kings Place serve this purpose. The opportunity currently exists for anyone to access the channel. With the large number of lots in the small bay owned by the City, King's Lane would provide the only logical access. Vacation of the Longford Road segment could be problematic due to the lots 1 and 2 being landlocked. If the lots are not purchased by an adjacent property owner an easement would need to be secured to guarantee access. Due to the elevation of Longford Road construction of an improved street is unlikely. Improvements for access would be at most a foot path or trail. Kings Place provides an opportunity for public access to the channel. Although a street would probably not be built, there may be opportunities for trail access to the channel. Kildare Road appears to serve the least public purpose of the three streets as it does not directly connect to the channel. The Planning Commission should consider the public benefit of each of these streets based on the above material and the City Engineer's report and make an appropriate recommendation. DISCUSSION: Hanus asked if there was a need for the City to provide access to the properties below the 929.4 elevation. Gordon stated that it was discussed with City Staff and they feel if some event happens and the water level decreases there may be a possibility that the property may be developable. They feel that there should be an easement. Mound Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1998 Mueller asked why the Council requested that Staff look into a vacation of Longford Road. Hanus explained that the applicants came before the City Council to apply for a Multiple Dock application. They felt that a Multiple Dock would be a negative to the Dock program. They feel that the public would not benefit from the usage of this property adjacent to Longford Road. Hanus explained what a BSU (Boat Storage Unit) is. He explained that the city operates under a commercial license under the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Mueller brought up some other similar properties on Three Points on Heron Lane that if we pass this, we could be setting a precedence for the vacation of these other properties. Mueller commented that the DNR has the power to lower the level of water and if they did so, the properties under the water could possibly be built upon and they should have access to their properties. He feels that those lots should have easements to them. Gordon stated that Jim Fackler, the Parks Director, and the LMCD felt that there would not be a problem with either the vacation or having the Multiple Dock. Fackler felt that there should not be a problem with BSU's. Hanus commented that he felt that the lake level would not be lowered because the public would not allow it. Gordon pointed out that most of Longford Road would probably not be improved since most of it is under water. Gordon pointed out that most of Longford Road would probably not be improved since most of it is under water. Chair Michael opened the Public Hearing: Steve Behnke, Fine Line Design Group, Applicant: He displayed his grading plan for the Seton Bluff development. He explained why they chose to go with the vacation option. He explained that the owner of Lots 1 & 2 will not respond to their calls. The other lots in question are under a purchase agreement. He showed how the ponding would be for Seton Bluff. Hanus questioned where he came up with 400 feet of shoreline. Behnke explained how he calculated. Tom Stokes, Owner of Seton Bluff Development, discussed the issue of the ponding. He was concerned about the safety issue for the home that will be closely located by the pond. By vacating the street, it will enable to move the pond over. Mueller questioned that it would increase the property and decrease the liability for lot 7. Stokes responded that the building pad would stay the same. Mueller asked if the Association would be preparing adequate paperwork. Stokes said they would. Mound Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1998 Hanus questioned if the city could vacate half a street without vacating the other half. Gordon explained how a intersection could have been divided but with the Public Works Superintendent felt they needed more than just the corner quadrant. Behnke stated that he had a discussion with John Cameron regarding the vacation of the intersection. Brian Meagher, 4644 Carlow, the new owner of the Trevis property. He explained about a culvert system by his home. He is in favor of the vacation of that intersection. Sutherland asked Brian if he has private lakeshore. Brian stated yes. Chair Michael closed the public hearing. Mueller felt there are many issues that have not been addressed yet. He stated that isthis a issue that could come up in other areas of the city. He commented that it should be looked into before making a decision. He asked for staff comment. Gordon stated that they were aware and they would like to have the comments from the Docks and Commons Commission. Mueller recommended that Staff delineate shoreline that is adjacent to private land and that have city platted streets and public land that are in the wetlands. To show the planning commission were they are located within the city. Hanus suggested that the other commissions look at this at the same time in order not to hold up the process of the application. Stokes and Behnke requested having the vacation looked at in 2 separate ways. They requested that the Kings Lane and Kildare Road portion be looked so that the ponding issues may be addressed. Mueller made the suggestion to table this application. Gordon stated that we need some other perspectives from the commissions before a recommendation be made. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Glister to table this case until there has been input from the Park and Open Space Commission and the Commons and Docks Commission. Motion carried 4-2. Opposed: Michael and Hasse. This case was tabled until further notice. PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. lt-4H TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: September 14, 1998 SUBJECT: Street Vacation request -Portions of Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road APPLICANT: Fine Line Design Group, Inc. CASE NUMBER: 98-55 HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5ww LOCATION: Seton Bluff area COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted a request to vacate portions or Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road. As you will remember, the discussions about the vacation of Longford Road were initiated at an August Council meeting and at that meeting staff was directed to investigate scenarios of vacating Longford Road from Black Lake Commons to Kings Lane. Since this meeting, the developer of the Seton Bluff project, has also made application to consider vacation of that portion of Longford Road as well as portions of Kings Lane and Kildare Road. For purposes of discussion, this report will address both the Council directive and applicants request. Longford Road is a platted unimproved street for its entire length along the channel connecting Seton and Black Lake. It is platted at a 30 feet width. As the northern most east-west street on the island, it somewhat acts as the delineation of developable land. The 929.4 feet ordinary high water line (OHWL) is within the Longford Road right-of-way from Black Lake Commons to a point about halfway between Kings Place and Emmett Place where it meanders south. Land south of it is generally above the 929.4 feet and has developed or is currently developing. The platted lots north of Longford Road are generally below the 929.4 feet water level and are for all practical purposes, will never develop as home sites. There are no known utilities in the street. Those portions of Kings Lane and Kildare Road are also platted unimproved streets with a 30 feet width. Almost all of the land area of both streets is above the 929.4 except for a northern portion of Kings Lane at the intersection of Longford Road. The Seton Bluff development is east of Kings Lane and west of Kings Lane is a swampy bay area at or below the OHWL. Kildare Road is improved east of Kerry Lane to provide access to the Seton Bluff development. It cul-se- sacs 80 feet east of Kings Lane where it remains unimproved. There are no known utilities within 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 2 Longford Road, Kings Lane, Kildare Road Street vacation request September 14, 1998 Kings Land or the unimproved portion of Kildare Road. Property Ownership Access to properties lying north of Longford Road is a large issue in considering a vacation due to the potential of land locking some properties. At the present time there are at least 2 and potentially 3 properties that could be cut off from public access if a vacation occurred. These include Lots 1 and 2 in Block 2 and Lot 8 in Block 2. The developers of Seton Bluff contend that they have recently purchased lot 8 which will become part of the Seton Bluff homeowners association. Lots 1 and 2 are separately owned and have no ownership south of Longford Road. There are a couple of options to address access to lots 1 and 2. One option would be to create some type of access easement gain access to an improved public street. A likely route would be to connect the properties to Black Lake Lane via Longford Road. This would require easements through a number of properties. All effected property owners would need to agree for this to work. A second scenario assumes the 2 property owners are willing to sell the properties to an adjacent private owner. The logical buyer would be the Seton Bluff developers who would then own lots 1 - 9. The City of Mound owns lots 2 - 11 on Block 3 and lots 2 - 5 and 37 -39 on Block 10. These lots include an overgrown bay of cattails adjacent to the channel. It is separated fi'om Kings Lane by land currently owned by the Jerome and Kathleen Trevis. Seton Bluff developmerlt One of the reasons for the developers have petitioned for the vacation is due to engineering complications associated with the storm water ponding facilities. The pond and outlet were originally designed to be located within the development. During construction however, it was found that the grading was not accurate and modifications would be needed to get the facility to work correctly. The developer is suggesting that the best way to accomplish this is to grade onto Kildare Road. They would like to own that portion of the street to accomplish this rather than petition the City for necessary permits. The developers also intend to construct docks along the channel to serve the development. A street vacation would allow the developers to consider individual riparian lot docks in addition to a multiple dock site originally proposed. Either scenario is acceptable to the developer, it just becomes a matter of who makes the application, the lot owners or the City. In either case there are some lingering issues regarding dock length and the water depth that would need to be resolved. COMMENTS: In considering the vacation request, the ultimate question that should be answered is "Is a vacation of benefit to the public?" If the proposed street vacations would not have an adverse impact to private property access, lake access, or public utility provision, then vacations should be considered. If the proposed street vacations would adversely impact private 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 3 Longford Road, Kings Lane, Kildare Road Street vacation request September 14, 1998 property access, access to the lake, and public utilities, then it would appear that vacations should not be considered because it would not benefit the public. In terms of looking at the potential for future streets, the City Engineer's report states that there is no need for these platted right-of-ways for street purposes. It is suggested that drainage and utility easements be retained on those portions adjacent to Seton Bluff. (Refer to the letter from Jon Cameron dated September 10, 1998). If the preservation of public access to the lake is desired, then it would appear that at least Longford Road and Kings Place serve this purpose. The opportunity currently exists for anyone to access the channel. With the large number of lots in the small bay owned by the City, King's Lane would provide the only logical access. Vacation of the Longford Road segment could be problematic due to the lots 1 and 2 being landlocked. If the lots are not purchased by an adjacent property owner an easement would need to be secured to guarantee access. Due to the elevation of Longford Road construction of an improved street is unlikely. Improvements for access would be at most a foot path or trail. Kings Place provides an opportunity for public access to the channel. Although a street would probably. not be built, there may be oppommities for trail access to the channel. Kildare Road appears to serve the least public purpose of the three streets as it does not directly connect to the channel. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should consider the public benefit of each of these streets based on the above material and the City Engineer's report and make an appropriate recommendation. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 Engineering · Planning * Surveying RECEIVED SEP 10 1998 September 10, 1998 Mr. Jon Suthefland, Planning and Zoning City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Proposed Street Vacation Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road Case #98-55 MFRA #12148 Dear Jon: We have reviewed the information provided with the request for vacation of subject streets and have the following comments and recommendations. The street right-of-way included in the request is unimproved and does not contain any City utilities. There are concerns about access to some lots, which will be addressed by the City Planner and City Attorney. Public Works has requested that the actual intersection of Kildare Road and Kings Lane not be vacated; thus the vacation of Kildare Road would be limited to the area between the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 26, Block 11, Seton and the southerly extension of the west line of Block 11, Seton. The vacation of Kings Lane would start at the westerly extension of the south line of Blocks 11, Seton and extend north to the north boundary of the plat. This includes the short section of Kings Lane lying north of Longford Road not included in the request, which is entirely below the OHW and is of no practical use to the City. We are also recommending that Kerry Lane north of Longford Road be vacated for the same reason. In analyzing the future need of these platted right-of-ways for street purposes, it is our opinion that the streets proposed for vacation do not serve any public purpose. We would suggest however, that those portions of the streets proposed for vacation that are adjacent to the drainage and utility easements contained in the plat of Seton Bluff should have drainage and utility easements retained. 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 612/476-6010 · fax 612/476-8532 e-mai/: mfra@mfra.com Mr. Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning September 1 O, 1998 Page 2 RECEIVED SEP ! 0 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSP. Enclosed are copies of the Hennepin County half section overlaid on their aerial photo. The street right-of-way recommended for vacation is colored in red and City owned property is shown in yellow. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Very truly yours, McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry e:h'nain:\l 2148\sutherland9-9 'Rev. 1/30/97 Application for STREET / EASEMENT VACATION City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 RECEIVED AL/6 2 7 19,98 MOUND PLANNING & /NSP. Case No. ~ Application Fee: $250.00 Distribution: ~-~-~_~_~---City Enginee~ .~.&~-a%~ .Public Work~ /-~~-Minne~asco Police Dept. Fire Dept. Please type or print the following information: APPLICANT Name ~ ,.o e ,., , (M) Adjacent Address ADdACENT P~OPERIY Name of Buzinezs (APPLICANT'S PROPERTY) Lot Block Plat Subdivision PID~ ZONING Cimle: ~-1 ~-2 ~-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 REQUEST IS THERE A PUBLICFoR THIsNEED'~~ LAND? Print Applicant's Name Print Applicant's Name Applicant's Signature Date John Sutherland Building Inspection-City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear John, Enclosed please find the submittal for the Street Vacation Submission. A) The Neighbors List from Hennepin County for an area 350' from the extents of the proposed Street Vacation B) Map of Obsolete Streets to be Vacated- shown on plat, to scale C)__) ~A Petition from abutting Prope.__fl~ ~em..~4'~ D) Proposed Design for Seton Bluff Retention Pond. E) Statement of project follows STATEMENT OF PROJECT This plan shows the extems of obsolete street right-of-way in the Seton plat. It is my understanding that at the August 11, 1998, the City Council directed staff to investigate the vacating of obsolete right-of-way along the north side of Seton Bluff (Longford Road) for the purpose of expediting the process in approving the multiple dock permit for Seton Bluff. We agree with the vacation of this property as the bulk of the subject land is below the 929.4' elevation and is 'in Lake Minnetonka' and virtually all of the property is below the 931.5' flood elevation. In addition there are severe access problems and grade issues that would need to be dealt with before these right-of-ways could ever be made available for public travel. In discussions with the neighbors of Seton Bluff, we have encountered a consensus from the majority of neighbors supporting the vacation of the subject fight-of-ways. We encourage the Mound City Council to consider vacating all of the obsolete right-of-ways delineated in the attached drawing. The Longford Road right-of-way has already been suggested as being better suited to being privatly held, the Kings Road and Kildare Road fight-of-ways we believe to be better suited to providing retention ponding for the neighborhood. It would be our intention to revise the approved pond at the southwest comer of Seton Bluff to the design attached as exhibit D. We look forward to having this item placed on the City Council agenda for the earliest consideration. Steven K. Behnke · I* I I I I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I i ~ I N 0 .L 3 S ~ ! II ! 7 1998 & 40 5O RD ' KILDARE ~ RD LONGF~)RD C,~RLOW RD ."a'~" CARLOW ~RD RECEIVED AIJ$ 2 ? 1998 MOlJN~ PLANNING & INSP. / / / / / / 19-117-23 22 0048 Lots 2-11, Block :3, Seton City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0050 Lots 1 & 40 BIk 10 Seton Jerome & Kathleen Trevis 4644 Carlow Road Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0009 Lot 7, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0006 Lot 4, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0037 Lot 22, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0039 Lot 24, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 23 0004 Lots 5-12 & W ~ of 13, BIk 13 Jerome & Kathleen Trevis 4644 Carlow Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0020 Lots 6-8, BIk 1 Seton Black Lk Hmowners Assn Norman Berglund 1905 Concordia St Wayzata MN 55391 8-31-g8 LONGFORD ROAD VACATION STUDY 19-117-23 22 0053 Lots 2-5, 37, 38 BIk 10 N1/2 of Lots 1-4 BIk 14 Seton City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0012 Lot 1 BIk 3 Seton Jerome & Kathleen Trevis 4644 Carlow Road Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0011 Lot 9, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0008 Lot 6, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0010 Lot 8, BIk 2 Seton Norman T Berglund 1905 Concordia St Wayzata MN 55391 19-117-23 22 0007 Lot 5, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0005 Lot 3, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0038 Lot 23, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0036 Lot 21, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0054 Lots 15-20 & 27-32, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0040 Lot 25, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 22 0041 Lot 26, BIk 11 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0022 Lot 2, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0021 Lot 1, BIk 2 Seton Seton Bluffs Devel 4804 Carrick Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0044 Lots 14 & 33, BIk 11 Seton Jack Schuster 4634 Kildare Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0043 Lots 13 & 34, BIk 11 Seton Patrick Pelstring 4630 Kildare Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0042 Lots 12 & 35, BIk 11 Seton Peter Buchner 4626 Kildare Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0019 Lot 5, BIk 1 Seton Jepson & Schouweiler 2545 Black Lake Lane Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0023 Lot 1, BIk 11 Seton City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0041 Lots 11 & 36, BIk 11 Seton Douglas Rippie 4622 Kildare Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0018 Lots 1-4, BIk 1 Seton Myrna Coddon P O Box 175 Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0029 PILots 7 & 8, BIk 11 Seton City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0031 Lots 10 & 37, BIk 11 Seton DW Jepson & AD Schouweiler 2545 Black Lake Lane Mound MN 55364 19-117-23 21 0030 PILots 7&8, BIk 11 Seton City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound MN 55364 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE //98-55 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A STREET VACATION OF UNIMPROVED CITY RIGHT OF WAYS LOCATED WITHIN THE R-lA ZONING DISTRICT, LONGFORD ROAD, KINGS LANE, AND KILDARE ROAD ACCORDING TO PLAT MAP, SETON P & Z 98-55 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, September 14, 1998 to consider the approval of a street vacation of unimproved city right of way on Longford Road, Kings Lane, and Kildare Road located within the R-lA zoning district. LONG~OR~) RO . .'I'"~ .I , '1 / '¶l~~~~'' _ _.',~"~l'L-d~sl -'1 '~~' ' " ~// -- ~ (~) ~L~ k~ t~. h~~ ~ ~/ ' '~i~Z ' ~ ~ : __ -- ~ ~/ : ~_. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting, Kn~mqu~st, ~nin~ SecretaW Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on September 4, 1998 Published in the Laker, September 5, 1998 " ' RECEIVED '- SE? - 1 1998 .......... 1, / \ \¥ f I V9 BOIgq33X3 · [~ITY OF MOUND - ZONING SURVEY ON FILl;.? YES / NO LOT OF RECORD? YES / NO INFORMATION SttEET ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH: R1 10,000/60 B1 7,500/0 · '-~' ~,ooo/~,~ ~2 2o,ooo/~o l~ 6,000/40 B3 10,000/60 R2 14,000/80 R3 SEE ORD. I1 30,000/100 YA RD I DIRECTION [ REQUIRED EXISTING/PROPOSED EXISTING LOT SIZE: · LOT WIDTH: LOT DEPTH: VARIANCE liOUSE ......... FRONT FRONT SIDE SIDE REAR LAKE TOP OF BLUFF GARAGE, SilED ..... FRONT FRONT SIDE SIDE REAR LAKE TOP OF BLUFF IIARDCOVER CONFORMING? YES I NO N S E W N S E W N S E W N S E W N S E W 15' N S E W 50' 10' OR 30' DETACI lED BUILDINGS N S E W N S E W N S E W 4'OR6' N S E W 4'OR6' N S E W N S E W 30% OR 40'7,, 50' 10' OR 30' ? [BY: IDATED: I Thin Zoning hfformation Sheet only summarizes a portion of dte ~equil'emcnts outlined in the City of Monud Zoning Ordinance. For fur~er information, contact the City of Mound I'lanning Department at 472-06~. - / ' ~" ~ ,, ~ ~ '~ ~ ~,,~ - ~ ~. ~ ,: .~~, L~ , ~' ,~. '~ ' ~~~ei- ~'~ I ' ' .......................... ............................................. MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to approve a Land Alteration Permit under Section 320 of the City Code, subject to consideration and consent by the Park & Open Space Commi~ion at its next meeting and approval of the ponding design by the City Engineer. The vote was 4 in favor with Polston voting nay. Motion carried. 1.8 PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-61; UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION, 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD. AND 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD., ALFRED SAGE AND MARY ANN SELLS, PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE AND LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, PID 14-117-24 33 0007 AND 14-11%24 33 0016. The City Planner explained the request that this is the second stage to what was done on the Consent Agenda, Case//98-56. The Staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval. The Mayor opened the public hearing. There were no comments. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Hanus moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #98-126 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VACATION OF A UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, PID # 14-11%24 33 0016, P & Z CASE//98-61 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.9 PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-62: ONE YEAR REVIEW OF CONDITIONAl, USE PERMIT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, 5201 PIPER ROAD, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-11%24 21 0156. The City Planner explained that this item was before the Planning Commission on October 26, 1998. It is a one year review for a Conditional Use Permit that was issued for building improvements to A1 & Alma's Supper Club. The Planner reported that the improvements have been completed over the last year and the project is complete. Staff did a review on it a couple of weeks ago and found that the conditions that were attached to that approval in Resolution//97- 104, are in compliance. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. Councilmember Hanus stated that he thought there was some confusion about the parking on the southerly lot. He stated that one of the conditions that the Planning Commission recommended adding was that non-commercial or non-business related parking would be allowed there. He stated he did not see this reflected in the proposed resolution. He a'sked if this was really the lot that was being referred to. The Planner stated the original resolution (//97-104) did not state what the vacant lot was. It should have referred to Lot 1, Block 12. He stated that was 7 MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- NOVEMBER 10, 1998 BOB BROWN, 5450 3 Points Blvd. DONNA SMITH, 2531 Avon Drive The Mayor closed the public hearing. Councilmember Hanus asked that the following amendments be made to the proposed resolution: PROPOSED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 PZ CASE # 98-62 WHEREAS, Resolution/D7-104 required a one year review to verify compliance; and WHEREAS. the request was to permit an expansion of their restaurant~ and, WHEREAS, it has been determined that substantial compliance has been achieved; and WHEREAS, the restaurant is defined as a Class 1 (Traditional Restaurant) which is allowed in the B-3 district as a conditional use; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has recommended approval of the conditional use permit with conditions; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota hereby approves the existing conditional use permit as stated in Resolution # 97-104 for Al and Alma's Supper Club with the following revision: The vacant lot south of the building, Lot 1, Block 12, Whipple remain as undeveloped and that business related parking not be allowed. 2. The river rock be allowed to substitute for the landscaping. 3-- No further scheduled reviews are required. The Council agreed. Hanus moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution as amended above: 9 November 10, 1998 PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VACATION OF A~I UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE PID # 14-117-24 33 0016 P & Z CASE #98-61 WHEREAS, the applicant, Mary Ann Sells, has requested the vacation of the vacant utility easement on her property at 2232 Westedge Bird; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota Statues, Section 412.851 provides that the City Council may, by resolution, vacate any street, alley, public grounds, or public way, or any park thereof, when it appears in the interest of the public to do so; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 10, 1998, as required by law; and, WHEREAS, the vacation request was circulated through the City staff and the applicable utility companies and there was no proposed use identified or no objection to the vacation. In addition, it appears to be in the public's interest to vacate this utility easement as it does not have a public use; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has unanimously recommended approval of the vacation of the utility easement; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota to hereby approve the request to vacate the 6 foot wide utility easement as shown and described on the easement drawing dated 10-1 9-98. A certified copy of this resolution shall be prepared by the City Clerk and shall be a notice of completion of the proceedings. It is the responsibility of the owner to record this Certified Resolution in the office of the County Recorder and/or the Registrar of Titles, as set forth in M.S.A. 412.851. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1998 Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Michael Mueller, Cklair Hasse, Becky Glister, Frank Weiland, Orv Burma, Bill Voss, and Jerry Clapsaddle. Staff present: Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Council Liason Mark Hanus and Building Official Jon Sutherland. Public Present: Mary DeVinney, Mary McCurdy, Edythe Koenig, Vanny Palm, Alma Quist, Judy Bryce, Ron Roelofs, Tom Duissen, Richard McCurdy, Teresa Lyons, Gary Lyons, David Lehtola, Merritt Geyen, Daryl Geyen, Bob Abdo, Darlene Kotila, Michelle Alexander, Joel Johnson, Bill Winter, Brian Skalbeck, Dee Skalbeck, Roger Allen, Melanie Allen, Thomas Stokes, Steve Behnke, Ebbe Christensen, Pat Christensen, Bob Zabel, Al Sage, Lois Sage, MaryAnn Sells, Ron DeVinney, Dennis Hildebrandt, Russ Fischer, Mary Cody, Keith Harrell, Holly Schluter, Joan Catain, John Cody, Jean Smith, Bud Smith, Doug Easthouse, Donna Easthouse, Al Anderson, Jan & Keith Clark, Brian Clark, Dave Hartman, Bob & Sheila Smith, Jim Smith, Janet Smith, Bonnie Aarsvold, Vicki Aune, Thomas Lind, Joanne Ashenfelter, John Rasmussen, Liz Nead, Marvin Geyen, Tim Achenfelter, Gordy McVey, Marty Woods, Roger Anderson. Meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael. MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Weiland pointed out that Jerry Clapsaddle was on both the present and the absent list. Correction noted and corrected. MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Hasse to approve the corrected Minutes of the October 12, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 8-0. Chair Michael recited the procedure for Public Hearings. BOARD OF APPEALS: CASE # 98-61: PUBLIC HEARING, UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION, 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD AND 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD, ALFRED SAGE AND MARYANN SELLS, PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE AND LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE, PIDS # 14-117-24 33 0007 AND 14-117-24 33 0016 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 CASE # 98-56: MINOR SUBDIVISION, TO CREATE 3 LOTS FROM 2 EXISTING LOTS, MARY ANN SELLS AND AL SAGE, 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD AND 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE AND PART OF LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE, PIDS # '14-'1'17-24 33 00'16 AND '14-t'17-24 33 0007 Loren Gordon presented these case The applicants, Mary Ann Sells and Alfred Sage, are requesting a minor subdivision to create 3 buildable lots from 2 existing parcels and vacate an existing utility and drainage easement. The lots are platted as Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One for the Sells property and Lot 6, Block 11, Mound Terrace for the Sage property. The site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Lynwood BIvd and Westedge Road. It is zoned R-1 Single Family District which requires a minimum 10,000 square feet of lot area and a minimum of 60 feet street frontage. The proposed subdivision is considered minor as defined by the Subdivision Code due to the fact that not more than 3 lots are being created from existing parcels and no streets or major public utility improvements are needed. As proposed the new lots meet area requirements and range in size as follows: Lot Area Lot Width Parcel 1 - 12,900 sf 73 feet Parcel 2 - 20,900 sf 60 feet Parcel 3 - 33,300 sf 60 feet Access to Parcel 1 is from West Edge Road which is a gravel road. The City of Mound and Minnetrista have long discussed paving the road however, the project has not materialized. The proposed driveway is 50 feet south of the Lynwood BIvd (County Road 15) which is the best location for the property. A culvert will be needed to carry water through the natural drainage course west along Lynwood and then south along Westedge. If a Westedge paving project were to occur in the future, all three lots would be subject to road assessments. There is an existing 6 feet utility and drainage easement at the common property line of the existing lots that is proposed for vacation. There are no utilities within the easement and the topography is such that drainage is not diverted within the easement area. The applicant's engineer has prepared a survey showing the easement area to be vacated. Staff is recommending it be vacated to better accommodate the replatting of the lot. The City Engineer's report will discuss the utility service to each parcel. A proposed house foundation plan shown for parcel 1 conforms to all setbacks. The lot is outside the Shoreland Management Zone and is not required to meet a hardcover percentage but is nonetheless about 27 percent hardcover. Parcels 2 and 3 would also well under shoreland hardcover standards. 2 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 There are a large number of mature trees located on the site. The house and driveway are located on the lot to reduce tree removal. Those that are located within the south half of the building pad will need to be removed to allow for construction. It would seem appropriate to retain as many healthy and viable trees along the perimeter of each new lot as possible to keep the integrity of the site. The subdivision as proposed practically precludes further lot splits with the current locations of the houses. Parcel three is has enough area for three lots but roadway frontage is not adequate hindering additional homesites. RECOMMENDATIONS: #98-56 Minor Subdivision The Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the minor subdivision as requested with the following conditions. Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans for Parcel 1 be approved by the City Engineer at the time of building permit application. All existing platted easements along Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One be vacated as shown on the described in the easement survey. Dedicate new utility easements as proposed in the easement survey Sanitary sewer service for Parcel 1 and water service for Parcel 2 be installed or a financial guarantee be provided such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. #98-61 Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation The Planning Commission recommend Council approval of drainage and utility easement as shown and described on the easement drawing dated 10-19-98. #98-61 Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation Public Hearing DISCUSSION: Mueller asked what is located in the easement now. Gordon stated that there are not any utilities currently in there. Gordon stated that on page 53 it shows the easements. Chair Michael opened the Public Hearing. Mary Ann Sells, 2232 Westedge Blvd, the current owner questioned why the vacation is needed. Gordon explained why the vacation is needed, it is clearly on paper. 3 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, lg98 Chair Michael closed the Public Hearing. MOTION by Voss, seconded by Mueller to recommend staff recommendation of the approval of drainage and utility easement as shown and described on the easement drawing dated 10-19-98 contingent on the approval of the minor subdivision approval. Motion carried 8-0. Case # 98-56:Minor Subdivision: DISCUSSION: Weiland commented about the drainage problem along Lynwood down Westedge, what are the plans for it. The City Planner and the City Engineer had a lengthly discussion on this. They felt street improvement could not be tied into the subdivision. Gordon stated that there would be a requirement for a culvert to provide proper drainage along West Edge. Mueller questioned the street frontage. He questioned if we would be creating any non conformities. Gordon stated that the proposal does not create any variances with lot sizes, area or structure setbacks. There was a question on the driveway between the two properties. Gordon stated Mr Sage uses that to plow Ms Sells driveway. Al Sage asked about the new water service that would be required for his property. Gordon explained how the rerouting would take place and the City Engineer and Street Superintendent could provide more detail and assistance when he was ready. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Burma to recommend staffs recommendation of the minor subdivision as requested with the following conditions: 1. Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans for Parcel 1 be approved by the City Engineer at the time of building permit application. 2. All existing platted easements on the easement survey be vacated as shown on the described in the easement survey. 3. Dedicate new utility easements as proposed in the easement survey. 4. Sanitary sewer service for Parcel 1 and water service for Parcel 2 be installed or a financial guarantee be provided such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. 5. Park dedication fees be paid as stated in Section 330:120 of the City Code. Motion carried 8-0. This case will go to City Council on Tuesday, November 10, 1998. 4 MInnegasco' A NORAIIVl ENERGY COMPANY October 23, 1998 Peggy James Planning & Inspections 5431 Maywood Road Mound, MN. 55364-1687 RE: Utility Easements Vacation ,c/~C~/ Case #98-61 · OCl'2? u Dear Ms. James: MO~IlYD With reference to your reoent request, Minnegasco has no objection to the Yacat'on eT · all the platted utility easomont~ over the following described property: of Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 321-5381. Respectfully, MINNEGASCO Steven Von Bargen Right-of-Way Administrator 700 West Linden Avenue P.O. Box 1165 Minneapolis, MN 55440-1165 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE #98-61 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION LOCATED WITHIN THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, AT 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE AND 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD, LOT P/6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE PIDS # 14-117-24 33 0016 & 14-117-24 33 0007 P & Z 98-61 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 10, 1998 to consider the approval of a utility easement vacation located within the R-1 Single Family Residential zoning district. ~"~ 186.49 "' ~_ ~~ PART~-3aOF ill ~ ' AIl porsons appearin~ at said hoarin~ with reforonce to the abovo will be ~ivon tho opportunitg to be hoard at this meotin~. . Mailed to propo~g owners within 3~0 feet of allotted propo~ on October 27, PuBlishod in tho kakor, October 31, 1 printed on recycled paper PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: October 26, 1998 SUBJECT: Minor Subdivision and Utility Easement Vacation APPLICANT: Mary Ann Sells CASE NUMBER: 98-56 and 98-61 HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5xx and 98-5ccc LOCATION: Comer of West Edge and Lynwood Blvd. ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The applicant is requesting a minor subdivision to create 3 buildable lots from 2 existing parcels and vacate an existing utility and drainage easement. The lots are platted as Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One for the Sage property and Lot 6, Block 11, Mound Terrace for the Sells property. The site is located at the southeast comer of the intersection of Lynwood Blvd. and West Edge Road. It is zoned R-1 Single Family District which requires a minimum 10,000 square feet of lot area and a minimum of 60 feet street frontage. The proposed subdivision is considered minor as defined by the Subdivision Code due to the fact that not more than 3 lots are being created fi.om existing parcels and no streets or major public utility improvements are needed. As proposed the new lots meet area requirements and range in size as follows: Lot Area Parcel 1 - 12,900 sf Parcel 2 - 20,900 sf Parcel 3 - 33,300 sf Lot Width 73 feet 6O feet 6O feet Access to Parcel 1 is from West Edge Road which is a gravel road. The City of Mound and Minnetrista have long discussed paving the road however, the project has not materialized. The proposed driveway is 50 feet south of the Lynwood Blvd (County road 15) which is the best location for the property. A culvert will be needed to carry water through the natural drainage course west along Lynwood and then south along West Edge. Ifa West Edge paving project were to occur in the future, all three lots would be subject to road assessments. 123 North Third Slxeet, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 2 Case #98-56 Sells Minor Subdivision and #98-61 Utility Easement Vacation October 26, 1998 There is an existing 6 feet utility and drainage easement at the common property line of the existing lots that is proposed for vacation. There are no utilities within the easement and the topography is such that drainage is not diverted within the easement area. The applicant's engineer has prepared a survey showing the easement area to be vacated. Staff is recommending it be vacated to better accommodate the replatting of the lot. The City Engineer's report will discuss the utility service to each parcel. A proposed house foundation plan shown for parcel 1 conforms to all setbacks. The lot is outside the Shoreland Management Zone and is not required to meet a hardcover percentage but is nonetheless about 27 percent hardcover. Parcels 2 and 3 would also well under shoreland hardcover standards. There are a large number of mature trees located on the site. The house and driveway are located on the lot to reduce tree removal. Those that are located within the south half of the building pad will need to be removed to allow for construction. It would seem appropriate to retain as many healthy and viable trees along the perimeter of each new lot as possible to keep the integrity of the site. The subdivision as proposed practically precludes further lot splits with the current locations of the houses. Parcel three is has enough area for three lots but roadway frontage is not adequate hindering additional homesites. RECOMMENDATIONS: #98-56 Minor Subdivision The Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the minor subdivision as requested with the following conditions. 1. Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plans for Parcel 1 be approved by the City Engineer at the time of building permit application. 2. All existing platted easements along Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One be vacated as shown on the described in the easement survey. 3. Dedicate new utility easements as proposed in the easement survey. 4. Sanitary sewer service for Parcel 1 and water service for Parcel 2 be installed or a financial guarantee be provided such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. #98-61 Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation The Planning Commission recommend Council approval of drainage and utility easement as shown and described on the easement drawing dated 10-19-98. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 Engineering · Planning · Surveying RECEIVED OCT 2 I 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSP. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning John Cameron, City Engineer October 20, 1998 City of Mound Minor Subdivision Sage/Sells Property - West Edge Boulevard Case No: 98-56 and 98-61 MFRA #12190 Background Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One (Sage property) was platted in 1986 as part of a four (4) lot subdivision. The Sells property is the remaining portion of Lot 6, Block 11, Mound Terrace. West Edge Boulevard was and still is a gravel street. It lies on the boundary line between the Cities of Mound and Minnetrista. At the time this plat was proceeding through the approval process, the two cities were considering an improvement project for West Edge Boulevard the cost of which would be assessed to the benefiting property; therefore the developer was not required to improve West Edge Boulevard as a condition of the plat approval. As is evident, nothing has happened to improve West Edge as a hard surface road. Sanitary sewer was installed in West Edge in the early 60's and watermain was installed in 1980, primarily to provide water service for the plat of Anderson One. Utilities As previously mentioned, there is existing sanitary sewer and watermain located in West Edge Boulevard. Lynwood Boulevard (County Road 15) also has city sewer and watermain located within the right-of-way. The existing utility services for Parcel No. 3 will be unaffected by this proposed subdivision; however, the existing services for the home on Parcel No. 2 presents a minor problem. 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 612/476-6010 · fax 612/476-8532 e-mail: mfra@mfra, cor" Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning October 20, 1998 Page 2 The existing sanitary sewer service for Parcel No. 2 crosses a portion of new Parcel No. 1. An easement for this encroachment is provided. The existing water service for Parcel No. 2 connects to the city main in Lynwood Boulevard and also crosses a portion of new Parcel No. 1 in an area that could interfere with the future building footprint. I have discussed this with Greg Skinner of Public Works and we are suggesting that a new water service be installed for Parcel No. 2 from the main in West Edge Boulevard adjacent to the existing sewer service. Then the new home to be constructed on Parcel No. 1 could use the existing water service and install a new sewer service from the manhole in West Edge Boulevard. We would recommend that either this utility work be done before the subdivision is recorded or some type of financial guarantee provided to insure completion in the future. Streets As previously mentioned, West Edge Boulevard is still a gravel road with no improvements planned for the immediate future. Reconstruction of this street has been proposed a number of times, but nothing has materialized for a number of reasons. The proposed driveway to West Edge Boulevard is very close to the intersection, but is still a better choice then connecting to Lynwood Boulevard (County Road No. 15). Grading and Drainage A suggested grading and drainage plan has been submitted which is sufficient for subdivision approval. A more detailed plan will be required for Parcel No. 1 when application is made for a building permit. Easements are provided to cover the present drainageway along County Road No. 15 and West Edge Boulevard. Easements Existing and proposed easements are a major concern with this subdivision. The proposed relocation of lot lines causes a problem with the platted easements on Lot 1, Block 1 of the plat of Anderson One. An application has been submitted requesting vacation of all the platted easements on Lot 1. See Case #98-61. New easements will then be provided as shown on the easement drawing provided with the application. These proposed easements provide for not only drainage along the new lot lines and the County Road, but also for the utility services for Parcel No. 2 that crosses Parcel No. 1. We have reviewed both the drawing and descriptions and they meet with our approval. Conclusions and Recommendations We are recommending that the following conditions be made part of any approval for the minor subdivision: Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning October 20, 1998 Page 3 1. Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan for Parcel No. 1 is approved by the City Engineer at the time of building permit application. Vacate all platted easements on Lot 1, Block 1, Anderson One and then dedicate drainage and utility easement as shown on the approved easement drawing and described in the approved easement description document. Sanitary sewer service for Parcel No. 1 and water service for Parcel No. 2, either be installed or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. e:~nain:\ 12190Xsutherland 10-20 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-o620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE #98-61 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION LOCATED WITHIN THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, AT 2232 WESTEDGE BLVD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE AND 6351 LYNWOOD BLVD, LOT P/6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE PIDS # 14-117-24 33 0016 & 14-117-24 33 0007 P & Z 98-61 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, October 27, 1998 to consider the approval of a utility easement vacation located within the R-1Single Family Residential zoning district. [ ' ,~;C. -~'~ -= --~'T~-~I~' J; ' [ ~'. .--~--- , c- ...... ~ ~o -' ' ~ ~'- All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meetip, o~-~. ~ ~quis~ Pial~g Secret/~ary Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on October 13, 1998 Published in the Laker, October 17, 1998 printed on recycled paper Rev. 1/30/97 Application for STREET / EASEMENT VACATION City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 Case No. Application Fee: Ipistribution: ~)°IZ~ City Planner ~_L~~City Engineer '%~~ Public Works Please type or print the following information: (APPLICANT'S 0 I I · ZONING Circle: R-1A R-2 R-3 g-1 B-2 B-3 DISTRICT TO BE VACATED REQUEST IS THERE A PUBLIC NEED FOR THIS LAND? Print A~plican{'s Name Print Applicant'~/9~ne Applicant's SignOre Date Date LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR MARY ANN SELLS AND AL SAGE October 19, 1998 1. DRAINAGE & UTILITY.EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED ............. All drainage and utility easements on Lot 1, Block 1, ANDERSON ONE, as dedicated in .... the recorde_d.plat thereof. 2. DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENTS TO BE CREATED An easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across the westedy 15 f~e't,'the northerly 40 feet; the easterly 6 feet and the sOutheasterly 6 feet of the following described property: That part of Lot 6, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, lying westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 6; thence on an assumed beadng of South 73 degrees 24 minutes 30 seconds West along the northerly line of said Lot 6 a distance of 60..00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence South 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 160.00 feet; thence southwesterly to the intersection of the west line of said Lot 6 with the north line of the South 410.00 feet of said Lot 6, and said line there ending. B. An easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across the most "' westerly 10 feet adjoining West Edge Road; the most northerly 40 feet adjoining Lynwood Boulevard; and over, under and across a 6 foot strip adjoining all the other ..... Perimeter property lines of the following described property: That part of Lot 6, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, lying easterly 'of the following' described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 6; thence on an assumed beadng of South 73 degrees 24 minutes 30 seconds West along the .... northerly'line of said Lot 6 a distance of 60.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence South 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 160.00 feet; thence southwesterly to the i,¢tersection of the west line of said Lot 6 with the north line .... of the South 4_10.00/feet of said Lot 6, and said line there ending. ~ .......... Aisc, that part of Lot 1, Block 1, ANDERSON ONE, lying northerly and westedy of the following described line: Commencing at the most southerly comer of ...... said Lot 1; thence on an assumed beadng of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West along the west line of said Lot 1 a distance of 63.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence North 81 degrees East a distance 156.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West to the most northerly line of said Lot 1, and said line there ending. C. An easement for d~:ainage and u';dli~; purposes' over, under and across the most ...... westerly. 10 feet adjoining West Edge Road, and over, under and across a 6 foot .. st..dP.adjoining .all the other perimeter property lines of the following described property: ..... RECEIVED 0 CT 2 1 1998 MOUND PLANNING-& That. part of Lot 1 ,. Block 1, ANDERSON ONE, lying south, edy.and eastedy .of the following described line: Commencing at the most southerly comer of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed beadng of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West along the west line of said Lot 1 a distance of 63.00 feet to the p.o. int of beginning of the line being described; thence North 81 degrees East a. distance 156.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West to the most northerly line of said Lot 1, and said line there ending. UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE CREATED ' An 25 foot wide easement for utility purposes over, under and across that part of the following described property: That part of Lot 6, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, lying westedy of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of said Lot 6; thence on an assumed bearing of South 73 degrees 24 minutes 30 seconds West along the northerly line of said Lot 6 a distance of 60.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence South 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 160.00 feet; thence' s6Uthwestedy th' the intersection of the west line of said Lot 6 with the north line of the South 410.00 feet of said Lot 6, and said line there ending. which lies'within 12.5 feet on each side of the following described centedine: Commencing at the most southerly corner of the above described property; thence on an assumed beadng of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West along the west line of the above described property a distance of 37.50 feet to the point of beginning of the -centerline-being described; thence South 87 degrees East tothe southeasterly line of the above described property and said centedine there ending. RECEIVED OCT 2 "i99i MOUND PLANNING & .... . LOCUST HILL PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR MARY ANN SELLS &: AL SAGE IN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANDERSON ONE &: IN LOT 6, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE HENNEPIN COUNTY, 'MINNESOTA 009 " , · '1/~ . ,;,,',.' ~ ~°~ LI t ~ I ' , ~..i z~l~~ ~, ~ I -' ,, ,',-' -. I ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~/ -- - -'1... , .......... ;~. ~.~A.~.s~,~ ................ 2. Al Sage 6351 Lynwood B~ulevard Mound, MN 55364 ' ' '': "~%~S LEGAU ~ESCR~PT~O~S ........ 1. SELLS PARCEL: Lot 1, Blo=k 1, ANDERSON ONE 2. SAGE PARCEL: That pa~ of Lot 6 lying No~ of ~e South 410 feet 'thereOf,' Block 11, MOUND TER~C~ ~: iron marker found o: iron ma~er set - -/~; - -: e~sti~g sPot elevation ' ~~~~ ~of~Stoteof~ot~ 6~1 ~~~ ' U~k S. ~o~r~ Ui~to t~ ~ 127~ 98~66 RECEIVED 0 C T 2 ! 1998 ~OUt~D P/~I~(~ & INSP. Easement Drawing ~ ~ 'for Mary Ann Sells & A1 Sage in Lot ], Block l, ANDERSON ONE & ........ inLot 6-i Block 11, MOUND TERRACE HenneDin County, Minnesota Z I-1 ! I '1 i ........ I Ii..I d ,,/ / · L. ' Rev~ ~1-14-97 Application for MINOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 Case No. Application Fee: $75.00 Distribution: City ~la~er q-lq4~ DNR Public Works Other City Engineer Escrow Deposit: Deficient Unit Charges? Delinquent Taxes? $1,000 VARIANCE REQUIRED? Please type or print the following information: PROPERTY Subject Address ~ISTING Lot Block Plat DESCRIPTION Subdivision .. ZONING DISTRICT Circle: R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 APPLICANT The applicant is: ~wner other: OWNER Name ,,,o,,,r t, n applicant) Address . . Phone (H) (W) (M) ENGINEER Address 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. )~Owner~f i a'Jr,/~~4~ /~" ,! '~ ~,---/' ~0 De/te / ' 5'''~ ~ OwnS(:/s/siena' ~re /~/ Date 09/04/i998 i0:35 473-4435 COFFIN & GRONBERG PAGE 02 PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS That part of Lot 6, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, lying westerly of the following described line: Commencing a~ the northeast comer of said Lot 6; thence on an assumed beadng of .~outH 73 degree..~ ~..'~ minutes ~30 secon~ls West along {he norf. herly line of said Lot 6 a distance of 60 0.~; feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence South 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 160.00 feet; thence southwesterly to the intersectic,,~ of the west line of said Lot 6 with the north line of the South 410.00 feet of said Lot .¢!. and said tine there ending. That part of Lo~ 5, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, lying eastedy of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of said Lot 6; thence on an assumed beanng of South 73 degree.~ 2.a minutes 30 seconds West along the northerly line of said Lot 6 a distance of 60 00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence South 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 160.00 feet; thence southwesterly to the intersectio- o~ the west line of said Lot 6 with the north line of the South 410.00 feet of said Lot (!: and said line there ending. Also, that part o' Lo.'. !. Block 1, ANDERSON ONE, lying northerly and westerly of the following descr, be~ ~,,~e: Commencing at the most southerly corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West along the west line of said Lot ' a distance of 63.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; them:e North 81 degrees East a distance 156.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 ~,~(;,o.-ds West to the most northerly line of said Lot 1, and said line there ending. That part of Lo.,, ~ Block 1, ANDERSON ONE, lying southerly and easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the most southerly comer of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed ~earing of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds West along the west tine of said I..o~ '~ a d~stance of 63,00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described: the,-~,:;e North 81 degrees East a distance 156.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 14 minutes 3(', ~,':.,?,-,ds West to the most northerly line of said Lot 1, and said line there ending. PROPERTY ADDRESS: .... cITY 0t~ I~OUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) OWNER'S NAME:. /,t~t~o.f6'/ LOT AREA /2/ ?Oo SQ. IT. X 30% LOT AREA SQ. I~'. X 40% (for all lots) .............. (for Lots of Record*) ....... LOT AREA SQ. IT. X 15% = (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 submit-ted and approved by the Building Of_fir;iai, . LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT HOUSE X = /,.,¢ ~ ~' X = TOTAL HOUSE ......................... X = X = TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. .DETACHED BLDGS GARAGE/SHED) DRIVEWAY, PARKING ~,*/u'¢t~,,~ it X = /.~ O O AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ETC. X = DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. opening between boards) with pervj.0us surface under ara not counted as hardcover 0TFLER ......... TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC .................. X = TOTALDECK 1770 TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ~/OVER (indicate difference) ..... PREPARED BY ~IYI"/~' ~r ~'~'d~¢ /,,t.c'. DATE vzo I I &, 09/24/1998 15:4B 473-4435 COFFIN & GRONBERG PAGE PROPERTY ADDRESS: CITY OF MOUND RECEIVED HARDCOVER CALCULATION_S_ SEP 2 8 1998 iIMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) "' MOUND PLANNING & INSR 02 OWNER'S NAME: LOT AREA ~-O¢ ~O0..-~_.. SC;. FT. X 30% "' (for all lots) .............. I g~.TG r LOT AREA S Q; FT:"X" 40'%'- ='" (for E6ts 0'f' Re'cord · ) ........ ] LOT AREA .............................. SQ. FT, X 15.% .=.(for detached buildings only) ... '.Ex~sti.ng Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage, provided that techniques 'are utilized, as out[b3.~d..in Zon!ng Ordinance Section 350, ~,1225,.Subd:.6. a:.l. (see back). A p!an must be submitted and approved by the Build;r,g Official. LENGTH WIDTH SO FT hOUSE Z ~'"!: DETACHED BLDGS (GARAGE/SHED) DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ETC. opaning between boards) with · .~O~F ,urface ~nder n~.counted ,as h~rdcover OTHER X X TOTAL HOUSE ......................... ~,¢x,l [. ~. 2 o; 5. x 2 o,'3' = ~, j'/,,¢~ ?. 3 x /2. ~ = //~ TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. ' "X ' ' = ~ TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETc .................. ...... x ./z. z = / ~' ~ r~,~_-~/~) x .. ~' = /2 o ,'~,~ X TOTAL DECK ........................... X = X = TOTAL OTHER ......... ' .... ; ........... $2 ¢ TOTAL HARDCOVER ! IMPERVIOUS,SURFACE Q/OVER (indicate ;~ffe~ence.).,t .... -~..-.~-; .;....;... :....,., . ,,,,,, ,. .... ,.,.-.' · · · . b~;"PARED BY ~'dF~C.z.:,:,~_,~g~ C~o~.,,8~l /~¢. DATE ~/'/72 I CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATION~ (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPERTY ADDRESS: Lc~ OWNER'S NAME: AREA~SQ. FT. X 30% LOT LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% = (for all lots) .............. = (for Lots of Record*) ....... LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15% = (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/SHED) DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ETC. DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT = X = TOTAL HOUSE ......................... 1o x = X = TOTAL DETACHED x /'2 X X ~ not counted as hardcover OTHER TOTAL DECK .......................... X = TOTAL OTHER ......................... TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE November 10, 1558 PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 PZ CASE # 98-62 ~ w~~, ~hu ~errit and Darryl Geyen, have requested the one y~r rcv~cw of th~ Ccnd~tlccU ~e Permit Resolutio~ 97r104; and, WHeReAS, the request was to permit an expanmon ot their restaurant; and, WHEREAS, the restaurant is defined as a Class 1 (Traditional Restaurant) which is allowed in the B-3 district as a conditional use; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has recommended approval of the conditional use permit with conditions; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota hereby approves the existing conditional use permit as stated in Resolution # 97-104 for Al and Alma's Supper Club with the following revision_~ 2 3. The river rock be allowed to substitute for the landscaping. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1998 Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Michael Mueller, Cklair Hasse, Becky Glister, Frank Weiland, Orv Burma, Bill Voss, and Jerry Clapsaddle. Staff present: Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Council Liason Mark Hanus and Building Official Jon Sutherland. Public Present: Mary DeVinney, Mary McCurdy, Edythe Koenig, Vanny Palm, Alma Quist, Judy Bryce, Ron Roelofs, Tom Duissen, Richard McCurdy, Teresa Lyons, Gary Lyons, David Lehtola, Merritt Geyen, Daryl Geyen, Bob Abdo, Darlene Kotila, Michelle Alexander, Joel Johnson, Bill Winter, Brian Skalbeck, Dee Skalbeck, Roger Allen, Melanie Allen, Thomas Stokes, Steve Behnke, Ebbe Christensen, Pat Christensen, Bob Zabel, Al Sage, Lois Sage, MaryAnn Sells, Ron DeVinney, Dennis Hildebrandt, Russ Fischer, Mary Cody, Keith Harrell, Holly Schluter, Joan Catain, John Cody, Jean Smith, Bud Smith, Doug Easthouse, Donna Easthouse, Al Anderson, Jan & Keith Clark, Brian Clark, Dave Hartman, Bob & Sheila Smith, Jim Smith, Janet Smith, Bonnie Aarsvold, Vicki Aune, Thomas Lind, Joanne Ashenfelter, John Rasmussen, Liz Nead, Marvin Geyen, Tim Achenfelter, Gordy McVey, Marty Woods, Roger Anderson. Meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael. MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Weiland pointed out that Jerry Clapsaddle was on both the present and the absent list. Correction noted and corrected. MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Hasse to approve the corrected Minutes of the October 12, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 8-0. Chair Michael recited the procedure for Public Hearings. BOARD OF APPEALS: CASE # 98-62: PUBLIC HEARING, ONE YEAR REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, 5201 PIPER ROAD, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 Loren Gordon presented the case. November 10, 1998 PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 PZ CASE # 98-62 WHEREAS, the owners, Merrit and Darryl Geyen, have requested the one___ year review of the Conditional Use Permit Resolution 97-10_~4; WHEREAS, the request was to permit an expansion of their restaurant; and, WHEREAS, the restaurant is defined as a Class 1 (Traditional Restaurant) which is allowed in the B-3 district as a conditional use; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and has recommended approval of the conditional use permit with conditions; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota hereby approves the existing conditional use permit as stated in Resolution # 97-104 for Al and Alma's Supper Club with the following revision: 3. The river rock be allowed to substitute for the landscaping. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1998 Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Michael Mueller, Cklair Hasse, Becky Glister, Frank Weiland, Orv Burma, Bill Voss, and Jerry Clapsaddle. Staff present: Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Council Liason Mark Hanus and Building Official Jon Sutherland. Public Present: Mary DeVinney, Mary McCurdy, Edythe Koenig, Vanny Palm, Alma Quist, Judy Bryce, Ron Roelofs, Tom Duissen, Richard McCurdy, Teresa Lyons, Gary Lyons, David Lehtola, Merritt Geyen, Daryl Geyen, Bob Abdo, Darlene Kotila, Michelle Alexander, Joel Johnson, Bill Winter, Brian Skalbeck, Dee Skalbeck, Roger Allen, Melanie Allen, Thomas Stokes, Steve Behnke, Ebbe Christensen, Pat Christensen, Bob Zabel, Al Sage, Lois Sage, MaryAnn Sells, Ron DeVinney, Dennis Hildebrandt, Russ Fischer, Mary Cody, Keith Harrell, Holly Schluter, Joan Catain, John Cody, Jean Smith, Bud Smith, Doug Easthouse, Donna Easthouse, Al Anderson, Jan & Keith Clark, Brian Clark, Dave Hartman, Bob & Sheila Smith, Jim Smith, Janet Smith, Bonnie Aarsvold, Vicki Aune, Thomas Lind, Joanne Ashenfelter, John Rasmussen, Liz Nead, Marvin Geyen, Tim Achenfelter, Gordy McVey, Marry Woods, Roger Anderson. Meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael. MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Weiland pointed out that Jerry Clapsaddle was on both the present and the absent list. Correction noted and corrected. MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Hasse to approve the corrected Minutes of the Octobe__r 12, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 8-0. Chair Michael recited the procedure for Public Hearings. BOARD OF APPEALS: CASE # 98-62: PUBLIC HEARING, ONE YEAR REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, 5201 PIPER ROAD, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 Loren Gordon presented the case. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 As a condition of approval in Resolution #97-104 and #97-105, the conditional use permit approving the building remodeling is up for the one year review. Attached in your packets are the applicant's submittal information, Planning Reports, and meeting minutes for review. The review of the CUP takes on two areas: conformance of the interior and exterior remodeling, adherence to the 5 conditions stipulated by the resolution. In terms of the building remodeling, there are no significant deviations from the approved plans. The parking spaces adjacent to the restaurant, retaining walls, egress from the basement, building setbacks conform to the approved plans. In regards to the conditions of the resolution, there appears to be at least two items that are not in compliance. CUP approval conditions not in compliance: #2. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. Staff visited the site on October 20, 1998, noting the vacant lot south of the building, which is owned by the Geyens, is being used for parking of vehicles and a boat. #3. Any landscaping removed with the improvements be replaced. Landscaping proposed in front of the building along Piper Road was never installed. The area has instead been covered with river rock. ~4. All prior conditional use permit decisions be upheld. In addition to the 1 year review, all prior CUP's are being reviewed for applicability. The resolutions are included in your packets as a part of the Al & Alma's historical CUP review discussion item. Please refer there for any questions. Conditions 2 and 3 of the resolution need to be brought in to compliance with the resolution. The parking on the vacant lot was discussed last year during the hearings. Because of encroachment related issues, it was determined that requiring the lot to remain vacant would help to buffer adjacent residences. At that time, providing of additional parking in this area was not encouraged. According to the Geyen's attorney, the Geyen's have had recent conversations with the neighbors about using this lot for additional parking to alleviate some of the parking and tour bus drop-off concerns. If parking were to be proposed, it would seem that the neighborhood should support it first. The CUP would also need updating and zoning issues reviewed as well. The area proposed for ground level landscaping in front of the building was substituted for river rock. Although the river rock compliments the stone building face, it does not meet the conditions of approval. If the Planning Commission would like to allow the rock as a replacement to the landscaping, this condition could be amended. 2 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 Staff recommends the Commission recommend Council require the conditions stated in Resolution #97-104 be upheld. If the landscaping is required to be installed, it may be good practice to allow some flexibility for when plantings need to be installed. Depending on the type of plant material, spring may be the best time to plant with uncertainty about the weather in mid November. If the Planning commission would like to entertain changes as discussed above, they should be noted. As to the use of the vacant lot for parking, the owner should make an application and the CUP would need to be updated. DISCUSSION Gordon stated that item #2 is in conformance. In talking with the Geyen's Attorney, he stated that the Geyen's will do further landscaping. Weiland questioned the boat storage. Gordon stated that the boat is being stored on the vacated Hanover Road. It seems the stipulations are being met by the Conditional Use Permit. Mueller asked about the vacated street of Hanover Road. Gordon stated that the vehicles were parked on the portion of the vacated Hanover Road on the Restaurant property. Mueller stated that we did not clarify a year ago about parking on lot 1. Mueller stated that Al & Alma's is continuing and upholding the CUP, there was a misunderstanding of item #2 and that it can be clarified. He commented on the neglect of the landscaping around the building. He is most concerned about the items that were not taken care of. Chair Michael opened up the Public Hearing. Bob Abdo, Attorney for Daryl and Merritt Geyen, addressed the issue of landscaping issues The landscaping that was done, fulfilled the requirements of the resolution with the exception of putting bushes in. Second issue is the vacant lot to the south of Al & Alma's went for back mortgage foreclosure. The Geyen's tore down the dilapidated house. It was the Geyen's understanding that they could still park on the Al & Alma's property but not on lot 1. The boat is their personal use and does not have anything to do with the business. The Geyen's want to uphold all the conditions of their Conditional Use Permit. Merritt commented on where the property line is located. Mueller asked Mrs Geyen if it was ever clarified last year about parking on lot 1. Mrs. Geyen stated again that the retaining wall is not edge of the retaining wall. She also stated they have parked their personal boat on lot 1. Mueller questioned if the Geyen's would like to use lot 1 as their personal use and not for Restaurant use. Merritt Geyen stated that they use that lot for sometimes parking their personal pickup. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 Marty Woods, 5360 Edsall Rd, Stated that he had a petition regarding the Conditional Use Permit for Al & Alma's. Chair Michael tried to summerize the petition. Joel Johnson, 5309 Piper Road, has lived at his current location for 5 years, clarified the only violation would be the landscaping. He stated that the Building is pleasant to look at, provide part time employment for area high school and college students. He spoke highly in favor of the business. He commented that the Geyen's donates a boat for the simulated boat rescue for local emergency personnel to practice their skills. Roger Anderson, 3208 Allen Lane, has lived in Mound for 14 years. He stated that the Geyen's have done nothing but improve the neighborhood every year. Terry Lyons, 3219 Gladstone Lane, has lived in Mound since 1987, cannot believe that there are 51 people that would want Al & Alma's to be gone. Spoke in favor of the great job the Geyen's have done with the business. Pat Christensen, 5308 Piper Road, expressed concern about the bus drop off and about the deliveries and feels that they are small issues that could be easily resolved. He supports Al & Alma's. Mary McCurdy, 5420 Three Points Blvd, commented on how neatly the beach is kept. Judy Bryce, 4879 Wilshire Blvd, use to live by Al & Alma's, commented that it use to be just a grocery store and then the porch was added on. There are only been improvements being made. She commends the Geyen's for upholding the Al & Alma's name. Dennis Hildebrandt, 5229 Waterbury Road, Commented that Al & Alma's is an asset to the community. He feels there are traffic issues. He commented that some issues need to be addressed. He commented that the City is not doing their job. Voss asked about the pollution being produced, if he reported it to the EPA. Hildebrandt stated that he had not. Roger Allen, 3208 Charles, Stated that the washing of the boat occurred once and the captain of the boat apologized. Dave Hartman, 5124 Windsor Road, Stated that he has pictures of Al & Alma's washing their boats in front of the Park. He felt that issue was taken care of at the Park and Open Space Commission meeting. He stated that he is not against Al & Alma's. Tim Ashenfelter, 5573 Bartlett Blvd, 22 years Commented on the Park issue, he has been there many, many times especially during the day when children would be there. He commented on how much the Geyen's do for the area sport programs. Mueller stated that the Park is a public park. 4 Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 Bonnie Aarsvold, 4945 Island View Drive, Commented on the job of the Landscaping job done at Al & Alma's. After seeing the job that was done, she chose to use a local landscaping company. Bill Winter, 3343 Warner Lane, Commented that the City should try to attract businesses to Mound. Russ Fischer, 940 Bayside Lane, Minnetrista, He supports the Geyen's. He stated that his child is a car parker for Al & Alma's and has pick up and dropped off his child and has never seen any problems. Daryl Geyen, 5200 Piper Road, If there are things that can be worked out, he would be glad to work them out. He stated that there may be a problem with parking. He would like to look at other options such as off site parking with shuttling. He realizes that they are a neighborhood business. Joanne Ashenfelter, 5573 Bartlett Blvd, stated that isn't it nice that people want to come to Mound in busloads. Michelle Alexander, 4725 Island View Drive, Police officer for the City of Mound, Commented about the deliveries and the buses. Commented on the drinking in the park, the police should be called when there is drinking in the park. Voss stated that he questioned last year, what are the police doing. Alexander stated that she had one call there in the last year that a car was blocking a driveway and the car was towed. Voss asked if the situation falls under the nuisance ordinance. Alexander stated that she doesn't feel that there is a nuisance violation. She stated that she was sure there may be calls there but not when she is on duty. Chair Michael closed the Public Hearing. Mueller commented on what issues where brought up during the public hearing. None of us what to see Al & Alma's to go away. One issue is the Landscaping, the requirement was to plant trees. Another issue was the delivery trucks, one solution would be to have smaller delivery trucks. He stated that they need to take care of the conditions they agreed to. Burma didn't recall that a stipulation was that the Geyen's could use the vacant lot for their personal use. He thought it was that customers could not park there. Item # 2) He didn't recall that a stipulation would be to replace the landscaping bush for bush. He commented that maybe put up spruce trees along the vacated Hanover Road. Vanny Palm, 4879 Wilshire Blvd, Stated that Al & Alma's are her parents. She stated that the business has been there for a very long time and the people that are complaining about it moved in after the time the business had started. Mound Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 'lgg8 Hasse asked if the lot south to Al & Alma's be used for parking, Gordon stated that they could not do it without a CUP. Weiland commented on the land~¢al3ino. MOTION by Voss, seconded by Weiland to recommend to Council require the conditions stated in Resolution #97-104 with an amendment to item # 3 to read," Allow the river rock to remain as a substitute for the landscaping." The conditions are as follows: Deliveries continue to be handled on-site and not on the street. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. Allow the river rock to remain as a substitute for the landscaping. All prior conditional use permits be upheld. Motion carried 9-0. Mueller commented that he feels that there should be more greenery in the Landscaping plan. Michael commented that the Geyen are doing a good job. He recommended to the residents to either call the city or the Geyen's with issues or concerns. 6 Dear Merdtt & Daryl, November 3, 1998 We apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused you in signing the petition. We were under the assumption it was for traffic on Edsel Road, buses etc. We have now found out that there was more to the petition then we reahzed. We should have read it before signing. In fact we should never have signed it because we have suffered no inconvenience because of your business. Please accept our sincere apology.' Bernie & Colleen Hanson · 3555 Tuxedo Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mayor Polston, Ahrens, foOt/.$. D November 3, 1998 I~OLI~IL~ PMNNING ~I~~8~ and Mound City Council Members Jensen, Hanus, Weycker, and We want you to know that we are extremely disappointed to learn that the future business of Al and Alma's Supper Club is in jeopardy. We are life-long Mound residents who enjoyed Al Quist's T-bone steaks when he changed the Chester Park Superette to Al and Alma's Supper Club. The Nolans, and now the Geyens, continued to serve fine food to many of us local folks. Our Mound High School class had a reunion at Al and Alma's in 1985 and four of our classmates drove up in a Model A Ford with "Al Quist for Mayor" painted on the side. They were Island Park kids who were delighted to come back home after 30 years to enjoy a wonderful cruise, dinner, and a comfortable place to get reacquainted with old friends. We are also deeply concerned about losing yet another business in the City of Mound; and we wonder if the same residents who are trying to close down Al and Alma's want to pay higher taxes We have already lost two fine businesses in downtown Mound who now pay taxes to Maple Plain and Chaska. Losing businesses in our community erodes our tax base; yet services will continue, and we residents will foot more of the bills. We enjoy living in this beautiful Lake Minnetonka area because of businesses like Al and Alma's. There are so few places to bring our friends by boat for a great dinner and friendly service. The Geyens have worked extremely hard to make their restaurant an excellent business. We also want you to know that we believe it is your responsibility, as Mayor and Mound Council Members, to allow Al and Alma's Supper Club to continue to serve the recreational and aconomic needs of our community. Sincerely, Donna and Gerry Smith 2531 Avon Drive Mound, MN 55364 cc:Daryl & Merritt Geyen Richard & Carol Morrison 6650 Woodedge Road Minnetrista, MN 55364 October 26, 1998 City of Mound Mound City Council 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Attn: Mayor Bob Polston Re: A1 & Alma's Restaurant Dear Mayor Polston, A1 & Alma's Restaurant has been an upstanding, family owned business in our community for many years. Being a fellow small business owner I support their efforts to continue running their business in the neighborhood they currently reside in. Looking at this from a business prospective, A1 & Alma's pay a great deal of tax which benefit our community. Al & Alma's contribute generously to local organizations. A1 & Alma's provide a quality service which Mound and its residents should take pride in, not try to destroy. Granted, there is probably increased traffic in the neighborhood during the height of the summer boating season but that happens all over our beautiful community and we all just learn to live with it and welcome the attention it brings. Sincerely, Richard & Carol Morrison Helen ~aps Alice Morfison 6499 County Road 15 Mound, Minnesota 55364 City of Mound Mound City Council 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Attn: Mayor Bob Polston Re: Al ~ Alma's Restaurant Dear Mayor Polston, We have heard that the owners of Al ~ Alma's Restaurant are receiving some criticism from their neighbors. We would just like to offer some praise at this time. As senior citizens we've experienced varying degrees of customer service during our lifetimes and find the attention we receive from Daryl and Merritt Geyen and their staff to be some of the finest. Alice and I don't like to drive very far anymore and we truly appreciate the fine food and service so close to us. We wholeheartedly hope that nothing will change for the Geyens and their fine establishment. Sincerely, Helen laps October 22, 1998 RECEIVED Mayor Bob Polston City of Mound Planning Commission Members Mound City Hall 341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Darrell and Merritt Geyen A1 and Alma's Supper Club and Charter Cruises Dear Mayor Polston and Planning Commission Members: It has.come to our attention that you will be reviewing the conditional use permits which allow Darrell and Merritt Geyen to operate their business, A1 and Alma's Supper Club and Charter Cruises, at their present location. As you are probably aware, this business has been a very positive one for the City of Mound, and the Westonka Community for over forty years. The Geyen's have been exceptional in their generosity, and civic-mindedness, donating their time and talents and financial resources unselfishly to any number of civic, school, and senior groups. They have been strong employers in the City of Mound and surrounding communities for many years. Personally, we have always found their enterprise to be first class. As a business owner and employer in the city of Mound I find the threat of revocation or modification of conditional use permits against a business to be a particularly chilling one, especially at a time when Mound is desperately trying to attract new commercial enterprise to their downtown re-development. We would strongly urge you to be very cautious in taking any action that would jeopardize valuable enterprise, and valued members of the Mound business community. Their reputation is outstanding, and we are confident that any minor differences giving rise to complaints could be handled in a non-punitive fashion. Y~ur~ very true, . William a~d Suz~m~e PeglowO WRP/pl PETITION TO MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT ocr 2 WHEREAS, AL AND 2~,.,.Y~,S RESTAURANT operates a business in the City of Mound subject to a conditional use permit and other laws and ordinances; WHEREAS, upon information and belief, AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT may have violated the conditions in Chester Park Certificate of Title No. 448395 which states that the public shall have " .... lake shore privileges .... " and that the park ,, .... shall not be used for any commercial purpose, nor for the benefit of any one individual ..... for the furtherance of their particular interest ..... and not be used for the launching or docking of boats." For example: 1. '~ AL AND 2~.,t',]~'S RESTAURANT through their activity operating a restaurant type of business with machinery, boats and large crowds have restricted the use of Chester Park swimming beach facilities. 2. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT has constructed a paved path on Chester Park. 3. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT have placed furniture and other items in the Chester Park. 4. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff have driven all terrain vehicles across Chester Park to load charter boats with food and beverage type items. 5. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff have allowed commercial carpet cleaners to use Chester Park for parking and equipment staging. 6. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff have sold tickets to patrons while standing and sitting within Chester Park. 7. Patrons of AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT frequently congregate in Chester Park, drinking alcohol purchased at AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT. 8. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff perform boat maintenance in the swimming area of Chester Park. 9. The City of Mound has illegally allowed AL AND. ALMA'S RESTAURANT to use the Chester Park in a manner which is prohibited by the covenants of the Chester Park Certificate of Title by approving conditional use permit 80-20 paragraph 3 (b), which allows the AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff to close the swimming beach to turn the cruise boats around inside a restricted area. WHEREAS, upon information and belief, AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT may have violated their conditional use permit. For example: o o o o 0 Resolution 84-26 I (k), an unmarked exhibit, and Resolution 70-189 indicate that the parking lot should have 34 - 9x20 spaces, and clearly demarcate property boundaries. This has not been done. Note: the parking lot is too small for a restaurant with a capacity of 200 diners, and 5+ charter boats, (all with a minimum capacity of 60 persons) for a total capacity 500 people. Resolution 84-26 i (f), states that "no [charter] boats shall be moored at the transient docks for more than 4 hours." In fact, charter boats are frequently moored in these slips overnight or for periods in excess of four hours. Charter boats have been beached in the Chester Park swimming area. Resolution 84-26 I (~), and paragraph 4 prohibits any "servicing of boats." At the September, 1998 City of Mound Park and Open Space Commission meeting, AL AND ALMa'S RESTAURANT staff admitted to washing a boat at the Chester Park beach with "Lime-Away." Lime-Away is a corrosive chemical. Resolution 94-69, by changing the conditional use permit to allow an additional 63 foot cruise boat, clearly contradicts the previously passed Resolution 84-26 i (a) which states that "no further expansion of these docks over the plan approved and on file with the city" will be allowed. The City of Mound lacks the ability to effectively administer the conditions of the Conditional use permit and Zoning ordinances regulating the operation of the AL AND ALMa'S RESTAURANT. Resolution 97-104 condition 1, states that "deliveries continue to be handled on site and not on the street." In fact all deliveries have been and continue to be from the street. The street area is restrictive, too narrow, and does not provide adequate space for either commercial bus or heavy freight carrier traffic. Semi-trailers block traffic while loading and unloading food and beverages from the street and delivering to the AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT and home of the Geyens. Resolution 97-104 Condition 2, states "the vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed." The vacant lot south of the restaurant and vacated portion of Hanover Road are in fact used as parking lots for AL AND ALMa'S RESTAURANT employees and patrons on a daily basis. Resolution 85-2, requires that the trash dumpster be screened with fencing. The trash dumpster as it is today can be viewed from several vantage points. Trash and food containers are left out in lot overnight; are stored at the exterior of the building without appropriate containers; and broken and unbroken boxes are frequently left out in plain view of passers by. Resolution 84-26 (h), provides for the construction of one sign not exceeding six square feet. As it is today four signs exceeding the legally prescribed standards are 2 10. 11. permanently installed along Tuxedo Boulevard and Piper Road. Mound city code section 365 provides specific guidelines for signage in the city. These are misdemeanor violations of the city code subject to fines and imprisonment. Resolution 84-26 i (i), states ~ .... Ingress and egress from and over the residential properties shall be restricted to properties owned by ..... the Geyens, and that adequate safeguards shall be provided so that persons .... will not trespass on private property...Chester Park .... or other public property." There is untrammeled use of Chester Park and public property by customers walking to the restaurant from the transient and charter boat docks. Resolution 84-26 is dated February 28, 1984. Resolution 80-20, requires a sign be placed at the end of the lot 22, and 23 docks and be seen from the lake reading "NO BOAT PARKING" indicating the swimming beach and a sign seen from shore reading "NO SWIMMING FROM DOCK." These signs are not installed. Resolution 84-26 paragraph 2 (d), requires a sign be placed on the east side docks indicating that no private watercraft be moored at these slips. At the September, 1998 POSC meeting AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff admitted that the customers bully the attendants and moor their watercraft anywhere they please. AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT staff lack the ability or knowledge of these regulations to effectively operate under the Conditional use permit they currently enjoy. WHEREAS, upon information and belief, AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT may have violated other laws. For example: o Mound City Code Section 350:760, Subd., 3 (c) requires curbing around the perimeter of the parking lot, and (d), which states that a fence of four to five feet is required on the residential property line of the parking area. Resolution 84-26, i (k), requires AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT "to bring their parking lot into conformance with all the provisions set forth in previously issued conditional use permits [70-189] (AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT does not own Lots 25 and 26 Block 9 Whipple today)." Section 350:760, Subd., 4 prohibits parking of buses in platted residential areas or public streets except when rendering a service. Buses with engines running park on Piper Road, Waterbury Road, and Tuxedo Boulevard for extended periods. At the September, 1998 City of Mound Park and Open Space Commission meeting, AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT admitted to washing their boat at the Chester Park beach with "Lime- Away," which contains a toxic and corrosive substance called either oxalic acid, sulpheric acid or sulphamic acid. This admitted conduct violates Minn. Stat. 115.061(a), which states in part," .... it is the duty of 1317 o o o every person to notify the [pollution control] agency immediately of the discharge, accidental or otherwise, of any substance or material under its control which, if not recovered, may cause pollution of waters of the state, and the responsible person shall recover as rapidly and as thorough as possible such substance or material and take immediately such other action as may be reasonably possible to minimize or abate pollution of waters of the state caused thereby." Mound city code section 350:750 Traffic Control states in part that " .... Traffic generated by any use shall be channelized and controlled in a manner that will avoid: (a) congestion on the public streets, (b) traffic hazards, (c) excessive traffic through residential areas, particularly truck traffic." That ordinance further states that "Traffic into and out of business area .... be forward moving .... with no backing into streets." Traffic as it is today (a) backs up on Tuxedo as cars wait to enter all parking lots (b) buses load and unload in front of park on Tuxedo Boulevard (c) pedestrian traffic crossing street (d) crowds gathering at the intersection of Tuxedo Boulevard and Piper Road and (d) cars back onto Tuxedo Boulevard from parking spaces in front of AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT. Ail of this contributes to unsafe conditions and congestion. Additionally, deliveries have a profound impact on road conditions. Mound city code section 350:760 subd., 2 (a) requires all parking spaces be 10 feet wide and 20 feet in length. The parking lot as it is today does not have the characteristics described in this code section. Mound city code section 350:760, Subd., 5 (m) reasonably prescribes I space for three seats based on capacity design. Our conservative estimates are based on the capacity of 5+ cruise boats carrying 60 persons each and restaurant capacity at 200. There should be enough parking for 160 automobiles or 32,000 sq. feet of parking not including traffic lanes. We calculate that there is a shortage of 10,000 to 15,000 square feet or parking space. Less than 20,000 feet of parking exists on the south side of Tuxedo Boulevard and approximately 1000 feet of legal parking space is available on the restaurant side of Tuxedo Boulevard. Automobiles parking on grass covered area is evidence that there is a dramatic shortage of off street parking. Section 350:525 Subd., I E requires "that adequate measures be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, and noise .... so that none of these will constitute a nuisance .... in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result." Neighboring residents are frequently subjected to diesel fumes, exhaust, and engine noise coming from charter buses, and commercial delivery vehicles, all servicing the AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT. 4 Mound city code section 1000:15A. Public nuisances affecting peace and safety (e} states "Any use of property abutting on a public street or sidewalk or any use of a public street or sidewalk which causes large crowds of people to gather, obstructing traffic and the free use of streets or sidewalks" are declared to be a public nuisance affecting the peace and safety of the residents of Mound. WHEREAS, residents of the Island Park neighborhood have brought concerns about parking, noise and garbage in the area to the attention of A1 AND ALMa'S RESTAURANT; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound did not publish the September 22, 1998, City Council meeting agenda in the Westonka Laker Newspaper. The citizens of Mound had little opportunity to comment on the decision to defer this matter to November 10, 1998. NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned petitioners being aware of one or more of the aforementioned complaint issues request that the Mound City Council undertake the following action: City of Mound and the Mound Police Department notify AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT of their code violations in writing. Abate all signs placed in the right of way as prescribed in section 365:05 Subd., 8 (b), and remove all other non- conforming signs immediately upon receipt of this petition as required by Mound Code of Ordinances 365:05, 365:07 Subd., 8, and 9; and City staff, including the city attorney, provide a written report regarding the facts and law pertaining to petitioners complaints. Ail reports are to be rendered at the October 13, 1998, Mound City Council meeting; and Mound City Council hold a public hearing to review the conditional use permit for the AL AND ALMa'S RESTAURANT and above stated issues on or before October 13, 1998, with at least 7 days prior notice to each of the undersigned petitioners by U.S. Mail and prior publication of the hearing in the Westonka Laker Newspaper; and Mound City Council and city staff take all steps necessary, including legal action, to bring AL AND ALMA'S RESTAURANT into conformance with the Conditional use permit and other laws currently in effect, including but not limited to reducing the number of charter boat launches from the Island Park area to conform with parking lot standards as prescribed in Mound city code section 350:760; and Mound City Council direct city staff to obtain a certified mediator at the city's expense to assist the parties to 5 resolve issues that cannot be rectified through legal proceedings. Name (sign clearly) Address, City, State, Zip Phone ' // l/ 0 (,J ' , "1310 (sign clearly) Add~ess, City, State,~ Phone - ~17/ -I Name (sign clearly) Address, City, State, Zip Phone 7 U II~ I! Il RECEIVED OCT 2 6 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSP. · RECEIVED OCT 2 6 1998 October 23, 1988, MOUND PLANNING & INSP. Dear Mayor Poistonan-a- Councilmembers, I live ri9ht back of A1 and Alma~ Supper Club and I want to tell you that I have never witnessed such kindness toward me as a person'and such good operation of a business which the entire neighborhood gave permission to remodel and operate. Every Easter and Thanksgiving and Christmas Merritt would brine my husband and me the most delicious dinners. Since my husban~ passing I have been on a lower income and they have brought me lots of delicious food and told me in effect to never go hungry - they would share their food. They paid for dinner for my granddaughter and me and they paid for dessert and cofffee for my Crafts Club. They have generously let me use their docks to bring my golden retreiver swimming and I have been to the beach every day and witnessed children playing there in safety and happiness. I have witnesssed the few trucks that come in to deliver food in promptness and safety. A1 and Almas's has tried to hire people in the neighborhood for their restaurant and cruises and thus do a service for the neighborhood. Merritt and Daryl have been so friendly and fun-loving. talk to everyone and like to bring happiness in their relationships and restaurant. They I think it 'is a sad state of affairs when a few neighbors stir up trouble against fun-loving and hard working people as the Geyers who have invested their earnings in a beautiful restaurant and cruise business. Also the Geyers told me to bring a friend and family to go on a cruise "on the house". The cruise was beautiful and relaxing and the food was very delicious. What an entertaining service they do for the community. I thank the Geyers for "being there" and I believe very strongly they should be given the kind .of community support they have given the community. BOX 335 SPRING PARK, MN 55384 PHONE 471-9515 FAX 471-0011 ~ City of Mound Mound City Council 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN. 55364 RECEIVED 0CT 2 6 1998 I 0UN[ ?LANNING & INSP. ATTENTION: Mayor Bob Polston - Mound City Council Members and Mound City Planning Commission Members RE: Hearing on A1 and Alma's conditional use permit A1 and Alma's restaurant has been a respected business member of the Mound and Lake Minnetonka area for over 41 years. They have always done their utmost to co- operate with their neighbors and resolve any problems that have come to their attention throughout the years. The operation of the restaurant has been first class and provides the community with a much needed full service dinner restaurant. Since Lake Minnetonka is a public lake and is supported with public tax dollars, during the boating season their charter boat rentals also provide a valuable service to the public. Their boat rentals provide access to people or groups who otherwise might not have an opportunity to use Lake Minnetonka. Thank you for giving your consideration to the above mentioned points. ~ckvam I SALES REPAIRS RENTALS DOCKAGE STORAGE OCT----~&--9~ ~$:15 PM ~E~TOFIKh N~DICnL CROUP Octo~ City 3~1 I Noun~ Dear ,er 22, 1998 ']~ob Polston of Hound Planning Connission Hombers l City ilall Sy~ood Road L, MN 553~4 RECEIVED OCT 2 6 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSP. Darrell and Herritt Geyen A1 and Alma's Supper Club and Charter Cruises Mayor Polston and Plennin~ Com~is;ion Hembers: It h~s como to our attcntlon that you viii be reviewin~ tho conditional use per~[ts ~hich allo~ Darrell and ~erritt Gayan ~o operate their business, Al end Alma's Supper Club and Charter Cruises, et ~heir p~esent locat£o~. As you are prob.~bly evers, this businessh~s bean a very positive one for the City O~ Hound, ·nd the ~estonka Community for over [orty years. The Geyen's hev~ been exceptional in ~heir ~enerosi~y, a~d c~v~c-m£ndedness, donetlnS their time and talents and financial resources unselfishly to any number of civic, school, and senior ~oups, T~ey have been stron~ ~loyers in the ¢~ty of Hound and surround~n~ communities for many years. Fersonally, ye have alvays found their enterprise to be first class. As · business owne~ and e~ployer in the city of ~o~d ! f~nd the th~ea~ of rev~cat£on or modification of conditional use per, its a~a~nst a buslncss to be · particularly ehilltn~ one, especially at a time vhen Hound [s desperately ~ryin~ to at~ract ney commercial enterprise to ~heir do~own re-development. Wa ould strongly ursa you to be very cautious £n kak~nS ~Y action ~hat vould 'ac ard£ze valuable enterprise, and valued membera of the Hound ~ /~ q-c) _c,e-~_~ -H,,,~rY, r-~-Io~, RECEIVED 0 C T 2 6 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSR 0~T-26-~8 P.01 Kurt & Jayne Silton 3237 Gladstone Lane Mound, MN 55364 612-472-7342 ksiiton@aol.com RECEIVED 0 C T 2 6 1~198 MOUND PLANNING & IN,fiR October 22, 1998 Mayor Bob Polston City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Al & Alma's To VVhom it May Concern, We live 2 blocks from Al & Alma's restaurant and this letter is being sent to you in support of this fine neighborhood establishment. Daryl and Men'itt have been fine neighbors that always give back to the community. Their restaurant is only even an issue because of their many years of hard work have resulted in so many of us - their neighbors - enjoying the Geyen's hospitality. I am not sure, but I believe that the park across the street was improved by the restaurant and not the city. Even if this is not true, Al and Alma's is legendary for their generosity in our community. They support so many school and community needs that I can't even begin to list them. It is true that on a few weekends during the summer they need some more parking, but for the most part they do an excellent job keeping customers cars on property that they own. Ail in all, count Jayne and I as supporters. If you have any questions, please feel free to call rna at 4727342T Sincer/~y, ~, 21 October 199g City of Mound Mound City Council Atm. Mayor Bob Polston 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, Mn. 55364 RECEIVED 0 CT 2 6 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSP. Re. Al and Alma's Dear Mayor Polstom My wife and I are long time reaiclents of the Mound community (20 years). We would like to voice our full support for the continned and successful operation of A1 and Alma's restaurant. We understand the concerns expressed by the neighboring reddems, however we also know that A1 and Alma's has been operating in this comm~lity for OVer foIty years. Those that have chosen to live in this area were certainly aware at the time of their property purchase that this bn6ness existed. Those that have lived in the area more than forty years have been exposed to the impact for a long time. The lake area is full of different combinations ofproperties both commercial and resi~al. We need this restaurant in the commlmity. Lets find a wayto make it work for Al and Alma's. Sincerely Yours,,, 6420 County Road 15 Mound, Mn. 55364 FROM : Concept Landscapin9 PHONE NO, Concept Landscaping 4'/2-4118 City of Mound attention: Meyer Bob Polston and City Counsel October 26, I998 : 472 4118 Oct. 26 1998 03:09PM P1 MN. Contractor LIC.#000-8997 Bond~l Sltor~!iac Contmcaot #0 i 9008644 RECEIVED 0 C T 2 6 1998 MOUND PLANNING & De. ar Sirs, I am sending you a letter in support of At and Alma's Resturant. I heard that there arc some local residents grouping for a complaint. 1 believe that it is about time the residents start backing our local merchants. However, in this case Al and Alma's has been there tbr longer than 40 years (and I am sure longer than most of the complaining residents) and a better run establishmem I have not seen. I eat at Al and Alma's regularly. My Grand Daughter and I play in the park at~er we have eaten and yes I am a citizen of Mound. I am guilty of playing in the park. I sincerely desire that you allow Al and Alma's to operate as they have in a dignified marlRer. Sincerely ' James H. Smith, President FROM : Concept Landscapin9 City of Mou~d Mound CAty Coupcil Attn: Mayor ]~ob Polston 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 PHONE NO. : 472 4118 ii, I~ Oct. 26 1998 03:30PM Pi RECEIVED OCT 2 6 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSR Dear Mayor Polston: I was born and raised in Mound, and am a current resident. Far six years, previously, we own.ed a ho?e beyond A1 and Alma's apd traveled daily past thief restrauran~. Was it a problem? No, never. A1 and Alma's is one of our favorite restrauants. If we ask our five year old grand daughter which,_restrauant she wants to eat at she will always tell us A1 and Alma s. ~he knows that her grand father will take her to Cheste~ Park and push her on the swings after dinner. During the summer we come by boat too, sometimes as often as once a week. There has never been an ocassion while we were there that we felt the docks were noisy. The charter boats on the lake are never a nusience. I mu¢_~_ l~efer to be out boating next to thief charter boats, with professional captains, than some of the ya hoe boaters we have seen on the lake. A1 and Alma's ewers. Duty1 and Merret Geyen have done much to help and support this community. They h.a. ve worked lo. ag and hard to build thzer business. Thief new build~ug is beaut~t~al. They are one of the oldest successful businesses in our town. Can't we as a community, work to accommodate th~m and support them? They have my support.' CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE #98-62 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW THE USE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB LOCATED WITHIN THE B-3 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT LOTS 1, 2, 3, AND % VAC STREET, BLOCK 8, WHIPPLE, AT 5201 PIPER ROAD PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 P & Z 98-62 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 10, 1998 to review the use of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Restaurant Business, Al & Alma's Supper Club at 5201 Piper Road located within the B-3 Neighborhood Business Zoning District. 5'I.8 70.4 ~1 40 ' e-VAC CITY COb14CI /1401 -74 ~ All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this~ '~uist~P~_..n~g Secretary Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on October 27, 1998 Published in the Laker, October 31, 1998 printed on recycled paper CI PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. gill TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: October 26, 1998 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit OWNER: Daryl and Merritt Geyen - 5201 Piper Road CASE NUMBER: 98-62 HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5ddd LOCATION: 5201 Piper Road EXISTING ZONING: Neighborhood Business (B-3) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Business BACKGROUND: As a condition of approval in Resolution #97-104 and #97-105, the conditional use permit approving the building remodeling is up for the one year review. Attached in your packets are the applicant's submittal information, Planning Reports, and meeting minutes for review. The review of the CUP takes on two areas: conformance of the interior and exterior remodeling, adherence to the 5 conditions stipulated by the resolution. In terms of the building remodeling, there are no significant deviations from the approved plans. The parking spaces adjacent to the restaurant, retaining walls, egress from the basement, building setbacks conform to the approved plans. In regards to the conditions of the resolution, there appears to be at least two items that are not in compliance. CUP approval conditions not in compliance: #2. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. Staff visited the site on October 20, 1998, noting the vacant lot south of the building, which is owned by the Geyens, is being used for parking of vehicles and a boat. #3. Any landscaping removed with the improvements be replaced. · Landscaping proposed in front of the building along Piper Road was never installed. The area has instead been covered with river rock. #4. All prior conditional use permit decisions be upheld. In addition to the 1 year review, all prior CLIP's are being reviewed for applicability. The resolutions are included in your packets as a part of the A1 & Alma's historical CUP review 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 5540.1 (612) 338-0800 Fax(612)338-6838 p. 2 Case #98-62 Geyen CUP 1 year review discussion item. Please refer there for any questions. COMMENTS: Conditions 2 and 3 of the resolution need to be brought in to compliance with the resolution. The parking on the vacant lot was discussed last year during the hearings. Because of encroachment related issues, it was determined that requiring the lot to remain vacant would help to buffer adjacent residences. At that time, providing of additional parking in this area was not encouraged. According to the Geyen's attomey, the Geyen's have had recent conversations with the neighbors about using this lot for additional parking to alleviate some of the parking and tour bus drop-off concerns. If parking were to be proposed, it would seem that the neighborhood should support it first. The CLIP would also need updating and zoning issues reviewed as well. The area proposed for ground level landscaping in front of the building was substituted for river rock. Although the river rock compliments the stone building face, it does not meet the conditions of approval. If the Planning Commission would like to allow the rock as a replacement to the landscaping, this condition could be amended. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission recommend Council require the conditions stated in Resolution #97-104 be upheld. If the landscaping is required to be installed, it may be good practice to allow some flexibility for when plantings need to be installed. Depending on the type of plant material, spring may be the best time to plant with uncertainty about the weather in mid November. If the Planning commission would like to entertain changes as discussed above, they should be noted. As to the use of the vacant lot for parking, the owner should make an application and the CLIP would need to be updated. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 Lake Minnetonka Bayview Office BURNET 4165 Sho~line Drive Spring Park, MN 55384-9623 612-476-0400 Fax 612-471-7044 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: OCTOBER 28, 1998 MOUND CITY COUNCIL BILL VOSS & MARGI RAINES CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RE: AL & ALMA'S RESTAURANT We would like to offer the following comments regarding the Public Hearing for the Conditional Use Permit for A1 & Alma's restaurant. We are offering these comments not only as citizens of Mound residing on the "Island" but as REALTORS with Coldwell Banker Burnet licensed out of the Lake Minnetonka office. In our weekly sales meeting held on October 26th, 1998 we conducted a poll of 30 Realtors assembled as to their opinion on the effect A1 & Alma's restaurant has on the Real Estate market on the Island and Lake Minnetonka area. All agents unanimously agreed that the restaurant has not diminished Real Estate values and can be considered an attractive amenity, for the Lake M,.'nnetonka area. Several comments were made that Al & Alma's is a "landmark" and a prominent feature that certainly has historical significance. Many agents were shocked to think that Al & Alma"s restaurant would be threatened with the loss of their Conditional Use Permit. In summary A1 & Alma's restaurant is an asset to the City of Mound and has a positive effect on the quality of life and housing values in the neighborhood. Thank You, Bill Voss and Margi Raines Coldwell Banker Burnet Lake Minnetonka Bayview Office 4163 Shoreline Drive Spring Park, MN 55384 476-0400 Home Address: Bill Voss 4608 Kildare Road Mound, MN 55364 H # 472-6623 O# 471-2226 Margi Raines 5100 Drummond Rd. Mound, MN 55364 H# 472-8182 O# 471-2257 Independently Owned And Operated By NRT, Incorporated. RESOLUTION g97-104 October 14, 1997 RF_~OLUTION TO APPROVE AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156 PZ CASE//97-42 WHEREAS, the owners, Men-it and Darryl Geyen, have applied for a conditional use permit for an expansion of their restaurant; and, WHEREAS, the restaurant is defined as a Class 1 (Traditional Restaurant) which is allowed in the B-3 district as a conditional use; and, WHEREAS, an update of the previous conditional use permit is required because of the nature of the proposed improvements; and, WHEREAS, the seating capacity will not change; and, WHEREAS, staff recommends approval the and planning commission unanimously recommend approval with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota hereby approves an existing conditional use permit for A1 and Alma's Supper Club with the following conditions: 2. 3. 4. 5. Deliveries continue to be handled on-site and not on the street. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. Any landscaping removed with the improvements be replaced. All prior conditional use decisions be upheld. This conditional use permit shall be reviewed in one year from the approval date at no cost to the applicant. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Hanus and seconded by Councilmember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Hanus, Polston and Weycker. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Councilmember Jensen was absent and excused. Attest: City Clerk Mayor October 14, 1997 RESOLUTION//97-105 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SETBACK VARIANCE FOR REMODELING, 5201 PIPER ROAD, AL AND ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156 PZ CASE g97-43 WHEREAS, the owners, Merrit and Darryl Geyen have applied for a variance to construct an addition to the existing restaurant, and; WHEREAS, the addition would increase the yard encroachment along Tuxedo Road, decrease the front yard encroachment along Piper Road, and all other setbacks remain the same, and; WHEREAS, the applicable yard setbacks and variances include the following: Existing Proposed Required Variance Front Yard -0.35' 1.7' 30' 28.3' Side Yard 20' 16.5' 30' 13.5' (Tuxedo Blvd) Side Yard 40' '50' 10' WHEREAS, the property is located in a B-3 zone situated in a residential neighborhood, and; WHEREAS, a kitchen addition to the rear of the building in 1985 has been the only structural addition to the building in the past 25 years, and; WHEREAS, the proposed variances would increase the setback along Piper Road by 2.05 feet, and removing an encroachment into the right-of-way, and decrease the setback along Tuxedo Blvd. by 3.5 feet, and; WHEREAS, the addition will update the appearance of the building, provide a storage area in the basement, and allow better building efficiency, and; WHEREAS, improvements to the building will not decrease parking spaces or increase the number of seats in the restaurant, and; WHEREAS, these improvements will increase the aesthetics of the neighborhood and not create any negative impacts, and; WHEREAS, staff recommends approval and the Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval. October 14, 1997 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT R~. OLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota to approve a setback variance for A1 and Alma's Supper Club as follows: Front Yard Side Yard (Tuxedo Blvd) Side Yard Prop~,.sed Required. Variance 1.7' 30' 28.3' 16.5' 30' 13.5' 50' 10' The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Ahrens by Councilmember Hanus. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Hanus, Polston and Weycker. The following Councilmembers voted in the negativei none. Councilmember Jensen was absent and excused. and seconded Mayor Attest: City Clerk PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: October 26, 1998 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit OWNER: Daryl and Merritt Geyen - 5201 Piper Road CASE NUMBER: 98-62 HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5ddd LOCATION: 5201 Piper Road EXISTING ZONING: Neighborhood Business 03-3) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Business BACKGROUND: As a condition of approval in Resolution #97-104 and #97-105, the conditional use permit approving the building remodeling is up for the one year review. Attached in your packets are the applicant's submittal information, Planning Reports, and meeting minutes for review. The review of the CLIP takes on two areas: conformance of the interior and exterior remodeling, adherence to the 5 conditions stipulated by the resolution. In terms of the building remodeling, there are no significant deviations fi.om the approved plans. The parking spaces adjacent to the restaurant, retaining walls, egress fi.om the basement, building setbacks conform to the approved plans. In regards to the conditions of the resolution, there appears to be at least two items that are not in compliance. CLIP approval conditions not in compliance: #2. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. · Staff visited the site on October 20, 1998, noting the vacant lot south of the building, which is owned by the Geyens, is being used for parking of vehicles and a boat. #3. Any landscaping removed with the improvements be replaced. · Landscaping proposed in fi.om of the building along Piper Road was never installed. The area has instead been covered with river rock. g4. All prior conditional use permit decisions be upheld. · In addition to the 1 year review, all prior CLIP's are being reviewed for applicability. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 2 Case #98-62 Geyen CUP 1 year review COMMENTS: Conditions 2 and 3 of the resolution need to be brought in to compliance with the resolution. The parking on the vacant lot was discussed last year during the heatings. Because of encroachment related issues, it was determined that requiting the lot to remain vacant would help to buffer adjacent residences. At that time, providing of additional parking in this area was not encouraged. According to the Geyen's attorney, the Geyen's have had recent conversations with the neighbors about using this lot for additional parking to alleviate some of the parking and tour bus drop-off concerns. If parking were to be proposed, it would seem that the neighborhood should support it first. The CUP would also need updating and zoning issues reviewed as well. The area proposed for ground level landscaping in front of the building was substituted for river rock. Although the fiver rock compliments the stone building face, it does not meet the conditions of approval. If the Planning Commission would like to allow the rock as a replacement to the landscaping, this condition could be amended. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission recommend Council require the conditions stated in Resolution #97-104 be upheld. If the landscaping is required to be installed, it may be good practice to allow some flexibility for when plantings need to be installed. Depending on the type of plant material, spring may be the best time to plant with uncertainty about the weather in mid November. If the Planning commission would like to entertain changes as discussed above, they should be noted. As to the use of the vacant lot for parking, the owner should make an application and the CLIP would need to be updated. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 Mound City Council Minutes - October 14, 1997 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 14, 1997 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, October 14, 1997, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, and Leah Weycker. Councilmember Liz Jensen was absent and excused. Also in attendance were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Attorney John Dean, Building Official Jori Sutherland, City Clerk Fran Clark, City Planner Loren Gordon and the following interested citizens: The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of Allegiance was recked. *Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that are not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon after the Consent Agenda has been approved. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1.13 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USI*. PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR MODIFICATION OF EXISTING RESTAURANT DESCRIBED AS RENOVATION WITH ADDITIONAL 825 SQ. FT. OF BASEMENT STORAGE LOCATED WITHIN THE B-3 ZONING DISTRICT AT 5201 PIPER ROAD, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8 & LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156, P & Z 97-42, AL & ALMA'S. The Planner asked that the Council consider the variance case//97-43 at the same time they consider the CUP modification application. The Council agreed. The Planner reported that the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the CUP and the variance request. The Mayor open the Public Hearing. STEVE BEDELL, 4801 Shoreline Drive, stated that he is not for or against this project. He is for Al & Alma' s. He stated he feels he had to go through a much more lengthy process for his CUP than what A1 & Alma's has. Mound City Council Minutes - October 14, 1997 The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. Hanus moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION//97-104 RESOLUTION TO CONDITIONAL USE SUPPER CLUB, LOTS BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, CASE//97-42 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.14 CASE 97-43: SETBACK VARIANCE FOR APPROVE AN EXISTING PERMIT AL & ALMA'S 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, PID 25-117-24 21 0156, PZ REMODELING, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, 5201 PIPER ROAD, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE PID 13-117-24 41 0005 Councilmember Hanus suggested the following be changed in the proposed resolution: The 6th Whereas to read as follows: "WHEREAS, the proposed variances would rcducc increase the setback along Piper Road by ~ 2.05 feet, and removing an encroachment into the right-of-way, and :.ncrcaac decrease the setback along Tuxedo Blvd. by 3.5 feet, and;" Councilmember Hanus also suggested deleting the existing column in the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED. The City Planner stated he agreed that the suggested changes are the intern of Staff recommendations and what the Planning Commission intended. Ahrens moved and Hanus seconded the following resolution as amended above: RESOLUTION//97 - 105 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SETBACK VARIANCE FOR REMODELING, 5201 PIPER ROAD, AL AND ALMA'S SLIPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156, PZ CASE//97-43 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-o600 FAX (612) 472~o620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE #98-62 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW THE USE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB LOCATED WITHIN THE B-3 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT LOTS 1, 2, 3, AND % VAC STREET, BLOCK 8, WHIPPLE, AT 5201 PIPER ROAD PID # 25-117-24 21 0156 P & Z 98-62 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, October 26, 1998 to review the use of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Restaurant Business, Al & Alma's Supper Club at 5201 Piper Road located within the B-3 Neighborhood Business Zoning District. b- I ",~~75.-~~VAC CITY u0mC 9-21-74 ~ ~ All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this mee 'tm~r~--~ ~ , A Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on October 13, 1998 Published in the Laker, October 17, 1 998 prmted on recycled paper Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 1997 #97-42: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 5201 PIPER ROAD, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-:~3, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156 #97-43: SETBACK VARIANCE FOR REMODELLING, 5201 PIPER ROAD, AL & ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117- 24 21 01_56 The Geyen's have a applied for a conditional use permit for an expansion of their restaurant. The restaurant is defined as a Class I (Traditional Restaurant) which is allowed in the B-3 district as a conditional use. An update to the previous conditional use permit is required because of the nature of the proposed improvements. The seating area size will not change. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Commission recommend Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions: Deliveries continue to be handled on-site and not on the street. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. Any landscaping removed with the improvements be replaced. All prior conditional use review decisions be upheld. The Geyen's have also applied for a variance to construct an addition to the existing restaurant. They are requesting the following: existing proposed required variance Front Yard - 0.35' 1.7' 30' 28.3' into ROW Side Yard 20' 16.5' 30' 13.5' (Tuxedo Blvd) Side Yard 40' 50' 1 O' Staff recommendations: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance as requested. The building has existed in the neighborhood for a number of years with the current setbacks and will continue to function well into the future with the planned improvements. Requiring the building to meet the required setbacks would result in a practical difficu..Ity. Planning Commission Minutes Sel~tember 8, 1997 Commissioners Questions: Reifschneider questioned if the area above the restaurant would be adding more seating. Merritt Geyen said that there no extra seating for the proposed plan. It was just the new design. The Building Official referred the Commission to the cross section in the packet and confirmed there is no additional seating on the second floor. Hanus questioned if there were any restrictions to cover the issue of no seating going into that area. Sutherland stated that if the permit was approved, the Conditional Use Permit would be granted on the plans submitted. No changes could be made without an amended Conditional Use Permit. Mueller questioned the access doors on the lower level on Piper Road. Sid Levin, Lake Country Builders explained how the access doors would be positioned. They would not be on Piper Road, it would be between Piper Road and Tuxedo Blvd. The deliveries would remain [he same as they are currently. They are done on the premises. Chair Michael open the floor to the public. Ron DeVinney, 3214 Tuxedo Blvd, Understands that they want to improve their looks. He has a problem with parking issues. He feels the City needs to take a better look at the parking issues. On Drummond, traffic comes up and turns around in his driveway and many of the neighbors driveways too. Cars are constantly parking on the streets that are posted "No Parking" Bill Johnson, 5300 Piper Road, The restaurant is a positive in the community. He also feels that the traffic and parking is a significant load. Merritt Geyen, Owner of Al & Alma's stated that there are "no parking" signs posted on all the stre~ts around the restaurant. Mueller stated Mr DeVinney has been there longer than the boat business started. There has been more traffic created since the boats have started. Voss stated that if there is a problem with the parking, the police department needs to be notified of the problem. Mark Berglund, 5138 Hanover Road, Expressed concern with the parking issues. At one time, there were 15 cars parked on the sidewalk and the police didn't do anything. The Conditional Use Permits are not being followed by the applicant. The public beach is overrun by the charter boat people. He stated that his children cannot play at the park because there are too many drunk people. Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 1997 Chair Michael questioned how many complaints have been made. Sutherland stated that the Planning department has received very few, but the Police department may have received complaints. Weiland questioned the ownership of the property just to the south. Merritt Geyen stated they purchased the property two years ago. Weiland questioned if Al & Alma's had adequate parking for their charter boat business and their regular business. Peter Jacobs, Lake Country Builders, stated he hardly heard any public complaints regarding the remodelling of the building. It seems to be that the parking situation is a city issue not Al & Alma's issue. Al & Alma's is not changing the use of the space nor will the seating space be changed. Loren Gordon stated that previous Conditional Use Permits will need to be reviewed for the parking issues. Chair Michael stated that the city and the Geyens need to work together on the parking issues. Sutherland stated that a Conditional Use Permit can have a condition to be reviewed in one year. Chair Michael stated that they are trying to negotiate a favorable solution for the Geyen's, the City, and the area residents. Hanus explained how if a condition was put on a Conditional Use Permit how it would be reviewed. Voss suggested if the business has grown, the Conditional Use Permit could be modified so that a security person could be added to help regulate parking. Reifschneider questioned why they could not turn the property to the south into a parking lot. Gordon stated that they were try to have a balance between green space and buildings and be sensitive to the residential neighborhood. The lot south of the restaurant is vacant and acts as a buffer zone between uses. This lot will remain vacant because it does not meet the lot area requirements. It could however be combined with another property or considered for a variance if it were to be built upon. Burma stated that even if the applicant is not putting an addition on the building, there is still the issue of parking space. Possibly the Geyen's need to add security. He suggested a meeting with the neighborhood and the Geyens to discuss the parking issues. Merritt Geyen stated they purchased Al & Alma's 15 years ago and parking spaces have been taken away since that time due to concerns of the neighbors. Now parking is not allowed on the streets. They do try to get people to come out to Al & Alma's Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 1997 in buses and try to eliminate or reduce traffic. They are not asking for anything more and have given up alot. They do not want a outdoor porch. Many of the area residents use the park. They have no intention of adding seating to the restaurant. Mark Berglund, stated the reason why the neighborhoods have gone to no parking streets is because of Al & Alma's Chair Michael closed public hearing. Discussion: Hanus recommended a traffic study of the area. Voss feels that the parking situation is a policing issue. Citizens should go to the police department. Chief Harrell should be aware of the concerns of the neighbors to Al & Alma's regarding parking. MOTION by Voss, seconded by Reifschneider to recommend approval of Staff's recommendation with a one year review of the Conditional Use Permit. The motion carried 6-0. Variance: Case #97-43 MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Voss to recommend Staff recommendation. The motion carried 6-0. Staff suggested these two cases go to City Council on October 14, 1997 and the applicant agreed. NOU-10-1998 A oo oo RBDO g RBDO 710 Northstar West 625 Marquette Avenue (612) 333.1526 FAX (612) 342-2608 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET Minneapolis, MN 55402 The information contained in this facsimile message, is attorney privileged and confidential information intended for The uae of the individual or entity named below. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this fax in error, please immediately notify us hy telephone, and return the original message to us et =he above address via the U.S. Postal Service. DATE: TO: FROM: FAX NO.: November 10, 1998 Ed Shulde Robert P. Abdo, Esq. 472-0620 NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: 4 ORIGINAL WILL NOT FOLLOW BY MAIL. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OR HAVE TROUBLE WITH THIS TRANSMISSION, PLEASE CONTACT Bonnie AT ABDO AND Al]DO, P.A. RE: Parking Easments on Lots 25 and 26, Block 9, Whipple Attached please find the following: 1. Letter dated October 30, 1998 from Roger Reed. 2. Copy of a warranty deed filed April 28, 1986 reserving an easement over Lots 25 and 26 in favor of Lots 21 and 22, Block 9 WhippIe. i think this resolves this issue. Please let me know. NOU-10-1998 1_'3:36 ~BDO & ABDO REED & BOND, LTD. ROGER w. REED ,..:~'. ,~-. ~.~': , -... , .~, a:~,~S;... :..'~.z,~ .-' October ~0, 1998 ~. '~ :., ~'~';~ ,.'.'?'.:' ATTORNEYS AT LAW 5.~24 SIIOR, ELINr- DRIVI? P.O. BOX 9 .., . MOUth, MH~qES~TA ~ .' PHONE 6~72~2222: '.' il, IA Men-itt L, Geyen 5201 Piper Road Mdund, MN 553~ Dear'Merritt, ... & 26, Block 9, Whippl~:t~'g~'eith "a~dl.'f:anct Hai~li. 'This deed recites it is. SubJ¢i/t to an ca,semen~ which is ~reb~:cr~d~l for:t~' use and n~aintenanc¢ of a parking lot o~ver that portion of th~ North 1/3 of ~a~d lots which '~s presently pav~d with blacktop, said easement to be appurtenant to Lots 21 and 22, 'Block 9, WhippI¢." This easement was memorialized on Toh'ens Certificate # 827300 issued to ~e Nolan trust. The new Torrens certificate # 866151 being issued to you was not in thc file when I looked for it but no doubt this easement is carried forward as zr memorial on your certificate. This should eliminate any doubts abo~tt 'Your rights't6.'use'the porti0n'0f youi? ~ ldng lot On;LotS 'aT 25 & 26. """";"' ~'"" ' ' .:..;,~ .. -~?..'~ ":'" ~'...!?!"./.i.'i" ' '::: '.~':' Very t ly yours, ,: ...... - .... · . ' ... .,: :.'. -, . ':.....,.. ... ~-' ~' .. ~ ' REED & POND, LTD:' ":" ' "'~ Roger W. R~Ye~ ''~ RWR:s 1, J JI.. J ,i, ABDO & ABDO J, Ii, 1 612 342 2688 P.03/04 13:3B !, IL .Ill , ~, I, Ii ABDO & IqBDO i 612 342 2608 P.04/04 . ,," ,- ;, - : '.;-. O/.J~ · .;. . . . ;,.... ~,. . .... :.,,., ,..-.....; ' ' ' t.~.' .... ., :,~. · .-'.,'".'-: "-:.; -~.;'--,..i -. · /',, ." .~' ' . '"::' ..... '.t~ ...'"' , .' .... , ".:, ~... : .... ....,,--~,~ ., . , .. :. . .- . '. ' .': . ]. i ' ;. ';.... ,','.:-. ' . ' ' '. ' ,....':: '. ' · .. ~. ...... . .: . .' .. ,.. ~, - .:. --; ;'... :.,'.~',; : - ..... , .~..,..:,. .e&oeben~e o~' record l: sn~; .... ', .,, :", ,:.:.., . · ' ......, · ... ....... . :' .... .... ...... ;~.., . ..,... : :-: :, .-. · '. , ' · _ '~/'~,- L,~'~Q<~-- ..... .'.... ' , · ,. ,,, · ...:'..-.. ,/j,l~ ¥. ]1o~ ,. , .'.-' ' ..' " ~'.'..f~' . .~. ¢.:' ~' '"' '" ' ' .,.,}V : .' :'%' .. ." .......: ..~,,~.;-~,>..,~- ~,~;. ~., ~.~,,, .. ..,. · . . '. ~:~.~ee]~ I~o ]~O]:~ ...-".. :~' '"'...:~ c.; ~"~"'-o ~· -.."- " .... ' . .... '..'".":,::-'. :- ':.i::;:::i~:'.".. i-: '.', ~2v~.. ?.0. ~,= ~?, ~c~n~; ~ ~536.~'. . .. G~=.'~e~)~ ~"~/ ~'..~','.'~.Tz~"'., . , " "' *'' ~' '"' "' ' :.,.'.,',: ?:.. .,'.'.:.'.;..: : ,. PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. III1 TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission, and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP ])ATE: October 26, 1998 SUBJECT: A1 & Alma's Historical CUP review - 5201 Piper Road BACKGROUND: At the September 22, 1998 City Council meeting, Staff was directed to review the status of all CUPs approved for property associated with A1 & Alma's restaurant. The review was prompted due to concerns from neighbors about the use of park as a commercial docking area and also because the previous CUP was due for a 1 year review. This report is intended to identify those items specified in previous resolutions that are still applicable to the property today. All previously approved resolutions are included in your packets as well. History_ of Resolutions approved for A1 & Alma's: #70-189 Parking lot approval and setback variance #70-206 Approval of a swale in the parking lot for drainage purposes #72-79 Approval of a commercial dock permit #72-80 Directed the LMCD to issue a commercial dock permit #79-290 Approved the parking lot plans for lots 20-23, 25, and 26 #80-20 Dock permit #81-149 Special Use permit for commercial dock - Nolan's #81-150 Dock variance August 4, 1981 - Agreement with the Nolan's for dock and park maintenance #84-26 Dock permit - Geyen's #85-2 Kitchen improvements #97-104 Interior and exterior remodeling project #97-105 Bldg. Setback variances Staff has reviewed each of these resolutions for their conformity to the three areas of use by Al & Alma's: the restaurant site, parking lot, and park and dock site. As CLIPs were approved over the years, they are cumulative for the property unless voided by projects or change or ownership. Parking lot -- The parking lot was approved by Res. #70-180 for lots 20-23, 25, and 26 by special use p~mit. An amended parking plan was approved by Res. #79-290 but was never completed. As it exists today, the parking lot most closely represents the 1970 resolution. The 1979 resolution is no longer valid because it was never completed. Because the parking area is not stripped, it is difficult to determine how many spaces are provided. The area that is currently paved, is approximately that same area approved in the 1970 resolution. That resolution approved a 9 feet by 20 feet stall size. If 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 2 Al & Alma's historical CUP review improvements were made today, a 10 feet be 20 feet size would be required. Another issue with the parking lot is the area that is paved. The most recent survey of the property dated 8-15-98 indicates that a portion of the blacktop extends onto the northwest comer of lot 27 which is owned by an adjacent property owner. Restaurant Site There are two resolutions that apply to restaurant improvements. Res. #85-2 approved a kitchen addition with no increases in the seating capacity. As a part of the conditions of approval the new setbacks were established and dumpster screening was required. These conditions still apply and are in compliance. Res. #97-104 and 105 approved the interior and exterior remodeling work as exists today. The building meets all yard setbacks as approved. The approval came with conditions, two of which are not in compliance. The vacant lot south of the building was to be used as buffer with parking not allowed. Staff has documented instances were parking has occurred on the property. Also plantings proposed in fi'ont of the building were never installed. The area is covered in river rock instead. Additionally, a new BFI dumpster is located behind the building and is not screened. All dumpsters are required to have adequate screening. Park and dock site Most of the approved resolutions are related to the use and maintenance of the dock and park site. Resolution #80-20 approved a dock site for Mr. Nolan west of the Chester park beach. Part of the stipulations of the resolution was if a change in ownership occurred, an application would need to be resubmitted for the dock site. The site is no longer being used as the Geyens are using lots 22 and 23 on the east side of the park for boat excursions. Resolution #84-26 approves the current dock arrangement with a number of conditions. Under condition l(k), the parking lot was required to meet all previous CUPs. This reflects the approval granted by Res. #70-180 which is largely compliant. Condition 2(d) which requires a no parking of boats sign to be placed on the dock is not on display. Condition 3 requiring fencing of the docks to prevent swimmers fi.om climbing onto the docks has not been installed. The Council has directed the City Attorney to research the title of Chester Park for any restrictions on its use. At this time the report in draft form but not yet complete. Further information l~om the City Attorney will be presented to the Council. At this time however, the title search shows the following: Chester Park is located on land which is legally described as Lot 24, Whipple Shores, Mound, Minnesota (the "Property ",). The Property is owned by the City of Mound, and title is evidenced by CertifiCate of Title No. 448395. The Property was conveyed to the City by Warranty Deed dated Octoberl O, 1969. The deed of conveyance contained several restrictions: a. the Property "at all times be open to the use of the general public and particularly for the use of property owners on Island Park, so as to afford them lake shore privileges; b. the Property not be diverted from the specific purpose or purposes above 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 3 Al & Alma's historical CUP review designated without the written consent of said Tuxedo Park Company, its successors or assigns; c. the Property shall not be used for any commercial purpose, nor for the benefit of any one individual or group of individuals for the furtherance of their own particular interest; d. the Property shall not be used for the launching or docking of boats. These items were found to be out of compliance: 1. The parking lot as shown in the most recent survey appears to encroach on to lot 27, which is not under A1 & Alma's ownership. 2. Landscaping restoration prescribed by Res. 97-104 was substituted with the area being covered in river rock. 3. The use of the lot south of the restaurant was to be used as a buffer area and no parking is allowed. Staffhas documented vehicle parking here. 4. Dock fencing has not been installed to prevent swimmers from climbing on docks. Additionally, the title search may provide other information about the use of Chester Park but is not available at this time. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 RESOLUTION//97-105 il, October 14, 1997 RESOLU~ON TO APPROVE & SETBACK VARIANCE FOR REMODELING, 5201 PIPER ROAD, AL AND ALMA'S SUPPER CLUB, LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8, LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE, PID 25-117-24 21 0156 PZ CASE g)'/-43 WltEREAS, the owners, Merrit and Darryl Geyen have applied for a variance to conslxuct an addition to the existing restaurant, and; WHEREAS, the addition would increase the yard encroachment along Tuxedo Road, decrease the front yard encroachment along Piper Road, and all other setbacks remain the same, and; WI~REAS, the applicable yard setbacks and variances include the following: Front Yard Side Yard (Tuxedo Blvd) Side Yard Existing Proposed Required Variance -0.35' 1.7' 30' 28.3' 20' 16.5' 30' 13.5' 40' '50' 10' WItEREAS, the property is located in a B-3 zone situated in a residential neighborhood, and; WHEREAS, a kitchen addition to the rear of the building in 1985 has been the only structural addition to the building in the past 25 years, and; WHEREAS, the proposed variances would increase the setback along Piper Road by 2.05 feet, and removing an encroachment into the right-of-way, and decrease the setback along Tuxedo Blvd. by 3.5 feet, and; WHEREAS, the addition will update the appemance of the building, provide a storage area in the basement, and allow better building efficiency, and; WltEREAS, improvements to the building will not decrease parking spaces or increase the number of seats in the restaurant, and; ~EAS, these improvements will increase the aesthetics of the neighborhood and not create any negative impacts, and; WHEREAS, staff recommends approval and the Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval. October 14, 1997 NOW, TI~EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota to approve a setback variance for A1 and Alma's Supper Club as follows: Front Yard Side Yard (Tuxedo Blvd) Side Yard Proposed Required Variance 1.7' 30' 28.3' 16.5' 30' 13.5' 50' 10' The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Ahrens by Councilmember Hanus. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Hanus, Polston and Weycker. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:' none. Councilmember Jensen was absent and excused. and seconded Mayor Attest: City Clerk Januar~ 8, 1985 RESOLUTION NO. 85-2 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 10.~ FOOT BY 27.8 FOOT ADDITION IN LOTS 1, 2, AND 3, BLOCK 8, WHIPPLE PIP ~25-117-2~ 21 0016 & 0017 (5201 PIPER ROAD) WHEREAS, the City Council on January 8, 1985, held a public hearing pursuant to Section 23.505 of the Mound Code of Ordinances, to consider the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit for PIP ~25-117-24 21 0015 and 0017 at 5201 Piper Road, for the construction of a 10.4 foot by 27.8 foot addition to the existing structure which would permit kitchen improvements that are necessary for improved operations and health; and WHEREAS, the expansion will not increase the seatin~ capacity of the restaurant nor the parking requirement; and WHEREAS, all persons wishing to be heard were heard; and WHEREAS, businesses within the B-3 Neighborhood zone are allowed through a conditional use permit and the existing A1 and 'Alma's Supper Club is a nonconforming, grandfathered use; and WHEREAS, the present Lots 1 and 2 are zoned B-3, and Lot ~.~s zoned R-3, and the present structure does not meet required setbacks on the north and west sides; and WHEREAS, the proposed building addition fits into the southwest corner of the building.taking wall alignments from the existing western and southern walls which results in the setbacks remaining the same as the existing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does recommend approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, that the Conditional Use Permlit is hereby..granted as aforementioned with the following conditions: 1. The plans submitted for the proposed alteration be .- made part of the requested approval as Exhibit A, dated 11-20-84. Provide that the dumpster that presently sits in the vicinity of the addition be relocated to a suitable location on the property and screened with wooden fencing. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Paulsen and seconded by Councilmember Peterson. ! RESOLUTION NO. 8~-26 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT DOCKS IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA (LOTS 22, 23 & 25, WHIPPLE SHORES, AND LOT-l, BLOCK 3, WHIPPLE) TO SERVE PROPERTY LOCATED IN A BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT WHEREAS, A1 & Alma's is a restaurant located at 5201 Piper Road, and said restaurant is now owned and operated by Daryl C. and Merritt Geyen, and WHEREAS, the Geyens also' have acquired and own Lots 22, 23 and 25 of Whipple Shores and Lot 1, Block 3, Whipple, and WHEREAS, the Geyens purchased A1 & Alma's from J. W. Nolan who previously operated the restaurant and a commercial dock which was located on Lot 25, Whipple Shores, and Lot 1, Block 3, Whipple, all of which was authorized by this Council in Resolution ~81-149,-and WHEREAS, A1 and Alma's also-owns and operate~'a parking lot on Lots 22 and 23, Block 9, Whipple and said parking lot was constructed pursuant to Conditional Use Permits issued by this Council, and WHEREAS, the Geyens have now purchased L~ts 22 and 23 of Whipple Shores and have applied to this Council for a dock to be constructed on these residential lots and to serve commercial property, all pursuant to Section 23.413 Of the City Code,' and WHEREAS, neighboring property owners have expressed concerns about not expanding the commercial establishment into the residen'tial areas through the ut.ilization of residential properties to serve A1 & Alma's Restaurant, and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on February 14, 1984, and listened to members of the public and to the applicants express their proposals, and WHEREAS, the City' Council is willing t6 renew a conditional use permit for the Oeyens along terms which are similar to those established by Resolution ~81-149 for Nolans, but has some reservations.about authorizing the expansion of the commercial-use by. the construction of a commercial dock on Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shores but is willing to authorize a permit for the storage of four excursion cruise boats owned by Daryl C. and Merritt Oeyen at---~e docks on Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shores and will also allow the loading and unloading of passengers from the area as shown on the submitted design plan (Exhibit A), but any permit on any of these lots must be subject to all of the safety conditions and to approval of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. ....F~bruary 28, 198q The owners shall be required to apply for a permit and comply with all standards and requirements of the Lake Minnetonkm Conservation District. Until said approval ~s obtained and filed with the City Of Mound, this permit shall not become effective. Daryl C. and Merritt Geyen shall be required to bring their parking lot into conformance with all the provisions set forth in the previously issued conditional use permits which are attached hereto and made a part of this permit (Exhibits B, C, D, and E). 2. The City of Mound does approve the construction of a dock in front of Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shores, which properties are owned by Daryl C. and Merritt Geyen, but said dock is subject to the following restrictions and conditions: The dock shall be an "h" shaped dock as shown on the submitted'design attached hereto and marked Exhibit A. This dock shall be contructed for the sole purpose of docking four cruise boats owned by Daryl C. and Merritt G~yen, and said c~uise boats may be store in this area only if this.permit is approved by the Lake Mlnnetonka Conservation District. The conditional use permit being granted to Lots 22 and 23, Whip. ple Shores s~all be only for the excursion boats, whereas the conditional use permit-granted in Section 1 of this Resolution shall in effect serve transient boaters ut$1izing the docks who come to A1 and Alma's for' restaurant service. The loading and unlo.ading of passengers from the docks located on Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shores shall only be from the area shown on the submitted design plan. Daryl and Merritt Geyen shall be responsible for installing and maintaining a bituminous walkway to be constructed on private property (Lot 23) to allow access to the docks located on Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shares. The location of the bituminous walkway is shown on the attached Exhibit A. Any lights constructed near the dock area on Lots 22 and. 23, Whipple Shones, shall be in such a manner that there shall be no disturbance to neighboring properties. The criteria set forth in Section 23.505 of the City.'s zoning code-shall apply to both docks. There shall b'e no transient parking on Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shores, but these four boats' may be stored for 2q hours each day. The maxmimum number of boats which may be stored in front of Lots 22 and 23, Whipple Shores ! !. 166 April 28, 1981 Coun¢ilmember Ulrick moved the foil.owing resolution, RESOLUTION NO. 81-149 RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL DOCK ON LOT 25, WHIPPLE SHORES WITH STIPULATIONS: 1) NO FURTHER CONTINUED EXPANSION OF DOCK 2) PERMIT NON-TRANSFERABLE AND 3) INCLUDE STIPULATIONS IN ORDINANCE WHEREAS, J.W. Nolan, owner of A1 & Alma's located at 5201 Piper Road, and having a legal description of Lot 25, Whipple Shores and Lot 1, Block 3 Whipple has applied for a special use permit for the purpose of a commercial dock, and WHEREAS, said permit would allow the safe mooring of watercraft for the patrons of A1 & Alma's owned by J.W. Nolan and for the dockage of J.W. Nolan's two boats, and WHEREAS, said Lot 25, Whipple Shores abuts Lot 1, Block 3, Whipple, which is ~ext co.~h~ :public-swimming beach, and WHEREAS, to avoid undue hardship on Mr. Nolan and those patrons using said dock. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That Council does hereby approve the special use permit for a Commercial Dock on Lot 25, Whipple Shores with the following stipulations: 1. There be no further continued expansion of said docks 2. Said special use permit be issued to J.W. Nolan and is not trans- ferable. 3. If said business were sold, new owner/owners would have to reapply for a new special use permit. 4. That monuments be installed so that dock will be placed in the same location annually. Be it further noted, that Section 23.Oll are also effective on this special use permit, and are as follows: a. The residential property on which dockage is to be located and the commercial property served shall be in commo~ ownership and shall be loc- ated within 300 feet of the property line of the commercial property. b. The mooring of boats at such dock shall be limited to a maximum of four hours. c. No gas, oil or other product may be sold from the dock and no ser- vicingof boats will be permitted. d. One sign for-identification will be allowed but it shall not exceed a total of six (6) square feet in size. e. Ingress and egress from the residential lot shall be restricted to the property held under common ownership and adequate safeguards shall be provided so that persons docking will not trespass on private property or any public property except for properly designated streets or side- walks f. The Council shall specify any special conditions that they may require, such as fencing, lighting'or landscaping, and shall require a site plan showing the location of any such fencing, lighting or landscap- ing. Any lighting installed along the dock or the pathway f~om the 168 April 28, 1981 Councilmember Ulrick moved the following resolution, RESOLUTION NO. 81-150 RESOLUTION ALLOWING VARIANCE AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT 5 - IN NOT MAINTAINING THE 10 FEET OUT AND PARALLEL TO THE LOT LINE WHEREAS, in Resolution 81-95 Council had approved the following: "That Council does hereby concur with the Park Commission recommendation with an additional stipulation regarding construction of a barrier four feet east of most easterly dock from ground level to four feet above water level, at time of construction. Be it further noted that there be no section of dock stored on the public property of beach but stored on owners own private property, and that dock be so constructed with a 10 ft. setback on the right side (swim beach side) with a barrier on the beach side of dock or pier, so that no boat could dock or disembar~ on the beach side. NOW,-THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That Council does hereby reconsider Res. 81-95 and does allow variance as shown in exhibit 5 ~ in not maintaini:ng the 10 feet out and parallel to the lot line Let it be further noted, that all stipulations and requirements as stated in Resolution 81-95 are to remain the same with the exception of not maintaining the 10 foot out and ~rallel to the lot line. A motion for the adoption of ~he foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Charon and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof; Charon, Lindlan, Polston, Swenson and Ulrick, the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the Acting City Clerk. Attest: Acting City Clerk AGREEMENT This agreement entered into this ~day of ~~5/'/ , 1981 between the City of Mound, hereinafter referred to as the City, and Bud Nolan, hereinafter referred to as Nolan: WHEREAS, the City licenses the issuance of commercial docks and Nolan applied for such a dock permit in 1981, and WHEREAS, the construction and installation of said dock infringed upon an area lying in front of a publicly dedicated alley and Lot 24 which is now called Chester Park, all of which are open to the public, and ~REAS, a dispute has arisen concerning the construction of that dock and/or the removal of the easterly most section of said dock to bring it into compliance with the City's requirements, and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the City Manager to meet with Nolan to discuss and settle this matter so that in the future there will be no misunderstanding, and WHEREAS, the City Manager has met and discussed the problem with Nolan and they have arrived at the following agreement, which is being recoum~ended to the City Council: 1. The City will install permanent monuments along the westerly line of the alley which abuts Chester Park. Said permanent monuments will be posts or some other marker established along the property line and will provide a site line to the lake which can be followed in any dock installation. 2. The dock as it currently exists will be allowed to remain for the balance of the 1981 season, but Nolan agrees that for the Approved by the City Council this day of 1981. MayoT~ / / - . ~.. /- -- July 17, ~979 Councilmember Ulrick moved the following resolution, RESOLUTION N0. 79 - 290 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE A:AENOED PARKING LOT PLAN FOR AL AND ALMA'S WHEREAS, Hr."Bud" Nolan, owner of business known as A1 and Alma's Restaurant, located at 5201 Piper Road, has presented Council with plans for ex- pansion of parking area, and WHEREAS, said plans had been amended and resubmitted 'to Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That Council do~s hereby authorlze and approve the amended'pa~ing lot plan as submitted for A1 and Alma's. A motion for the adoption of the'foregoing resolution.was duly seconded by Councilmember Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; Lovaasen, Swenson'and Ulrick, the following voted against the same; none, with Polston and Withhart being absent. Whereupon, said resolution was declared pa~sed and adopted,.slgned by the May6r and his signature attested by the City Clerk. s/Tim Lovaasen Mayor 72 -80 4-11-72 RESOLUTION NO. 72-80 RESOLUTION DIRECTING LAKE MINNETONEA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO ISSDE COMMERCIAL DOCK PERMIT (To A1 & Alma~ s) W~E.~FAB, the Lake ~innetonka Conservation District will not issue multiple' and commercial dock permits until they have the w~itten approval of the municipality within which the dock is located, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 72-79 A1 & Alma's was granted a dock permit to be constructed in accordance with the stipulations noted therein, ~OW, TwE.~FORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUMCIL OF ~OUND, ~0UND, . ~IN~ESOTA ~ That the Lake Hinnetonka Consex,.ation District be advised that A1 and Alma's have been granted · dock per.it in aooordAnoe with Resolution No. 72-7~. Adopted by the Council this llth day of April, 1972. 70-20~ S-Zl-7O RESOL~TION NO. 70-206 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 70-189 TO INCLUDE A SWALE ACROSS PARKING LOT TO TAKE CARE OF DRAINAGE BE IT RESOLVED BY TEE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA~ That Resolution No. 70-189 adopted 7-14-70, "Granting Special Use Permit for Parking Ia A Residential Use Area - A1 & Alma's" 'be amended to include a swale across the perking lot to take care of drainage. · Adopted By the Council this llth day of August,' 197o. HANOV~t~ BOAD .$, Ordinance No. 2&~ Page 2 allowed if said use will be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the neighbor- hood or if said use will have an adverse effect upon traffic or traffic safety. Passed by the Village Council March 10~ 1)70 Published in' the official newspaper_ March 19, 1970 NOU-10-1998 ATTORNEYS AT LAW E. JOIt'~V ASDO ROB£RT ~ ~DO DMO~ C. ~ ABDO ~. ABDO 710 Northstar West 625 Marquette Avenue (612) 333.1526 FAX (612) d PROFF_~SIONAL FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET III, , I& 1 612 342 26~8 P.01/04. Minneapolis, ~ 55402 The information contained in this facsimile message, is acgorney privileged and confidential information intended for the uae o~ the individual or en=i=y named below. If the reader of =hie message is not the intended recipient, or ehe employee or agent responsible go deliver it to =he in=ended recipient, you are hcrcby notified =hac any dissemination, dis=ribucion or copying of this communication is strictly prohibi=ed. If you have received this fax in error, 131ease ]muaedia=ely nogify us by telephone, and return ~he original message co us at =he above address via the U.S. Postal Service. DATE: TO: FROM: FAX NO.: November 10, 1998 Ed Shukle Robe~ P. Abdo, Esq. 472-0620 NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: 4 ORIGINAL WILL NOT FOLLOW BY MAIL. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OR HAVE TROUBLE WITH THIS TRANSMISSION, PLEASE CONTACT Bonnie AT ABDO AND Al]DO, P.A. RE: Parking Easments on Lots 25 and 26, Block 9, Whipple Attached please find the following: 1. Latter dated October 30, 1998 from Roger Reed. 2. Copy of a warranty deed filed April 28, 1986 reserving an easement over Lots 25 and 26 in favor of Lots 21 and 22, Block 9 Whipple. i think this resolves this issue. Please let me know. NOU-10-1998 ~BDO & ABDO REED & BOND, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW $,a2¢ SIIORF. LIN{~ DRIVE' P.O. BOX 9 .., . MOUNI~, MINNES'OT~. $$364-0009 PHONE 6121472;2222: '.' .. ,t:4~00.$?b-7080.{Mbl O~iy) · '' ' FAX 612/47~.2254 .... . .. ... ...: . .,.. , '; ., :,....... .,f:,~ :. 11, Ii i 612 342 2~08 P.02/04 Memtt L, Geyen 5201 Piper Road Mdund, MN 55364 Dear.'N-icrritt, ... ! en¢i~s¢ a cop), of th'~ '~a-"r~l~:y' de&~'.d~i:ed Janua~ ~i~,.,ig~.S bY which Sud Nol s0id Lots 2s & 26, Block 9, Ha li. '~is deed ~cit,, it is. subject to 'an c~emeni which is h&reb~':cre~ for:t~¢' use and ~a~t"enmco of a p~Mng lot o~er ~at portion of thc North 1/3 of ~d lots whch 'ls presently paved M~ blacktop, said e~ement to be appurtenant to Lots 21 ~d 22, 'Block 9, Whipple." This e~cmmt w~ m~ofialized on ToRero Certificate ~ 827300 issued to ~e Nolan trust. The new Tokens certificate ~ 866151 being issued to you was not in the file when I looked for it but no doubt ~s e~em~t is c~ed fo~ard as ~ memorial on your certificate. ". This should eliminate ~y doubts abo~t 'yOur rights't6".~e'~e poni0n'0fYouE~ hng lot On'Lots 25 & 26. *" ~'"' '' .:..~, .. -~Z"~ Very tffily yegg, ' ~'., ?.:':~'?' ' :'" . -.. . ....:., ~.. ( (. ....: . '"" .L.'..,'. · . L ' ~D & PO~, LTD:' " Roger W. Re/~ ''~ RWR:s ABDO & ABDO i,:""-- 1 612 342 2688 P.83/84 .~., '~.ta~e/~u, .~"//. I ' '" * (i;) C~Zs~ ~','.;'~ . .'. ,c- t,-' '" ~ ' ( ) not ,e~;~re~. ~$~... ~" ~: ..... ~,. ~ : . ..:~/..':' :..: :..'::.?'..~ l; Certificate o~ Re~ ' . ..... ' . : UII~L O~V~l~l~.~.~Pl ' ' .' "~. .~., .: -.' ;,: ',.. ;...:'..: .... '-.;. , :~-. ::...:. :..,..... ~¥-~=~ ~,-_, % ......... ..'-.:-".;...C :.' '. ~ ~' ~_ ~-:.'?; .: ~! . - .: :.. ' . ~.;-,.,.?- ....... . . ... . '.':1; .":.. . . - .:. ~i-~: .lot,""2~ ~i4.2S, aioc~ 9, nipple;" ~coraini' ~; . *...~ ~ ,... :..',...;.;'.;.,~*~'~"~%"'..';': . .~.' .. ', - .~ , ' ~ ...... ~. -'~.,~.-.I" · .. · . ,: ' . , - ). gn~ec~,..Vo Lin ':~e~ vh~.'la "he=o~ ~Pom~'~h. .'... .., ;~"-~ ue-~~~ or a~f lo~ ~v~z~,.~t· ~r~l.fl~ -~, -( '~' ~ '*' ~',~ 22, ~1oc~ 9, ~1~1e ......... /'*.,***- ' ~ ~ * ~ f~3 = ~ d .. * ....... NOU-10-1998 13:38 ABDO & ABDO ". .. .....:',,,., ;.,.c...,.,..~:! :i. . , .:"~:' ,' ...... ., ...,.".-~o:..:, , :.- .... ....' ~ ~' - ... -., ; .., :..:.~; . . .... ,;, ... · .~ ......~ -'. ~ ~ ~~ ,,, . · .:..... · " './. ':. ~', ~e~. ~ .... ~ .... ~'~ ~'~ ~o~..~ ~',' . ,' ' .. -... - . .... .,,, , ',?,.:... :. '~?..~ . ;,. ?~ 'no:a~la~ a~e~ o~ .esi ~ '"" :~:'~' '~'. . ~lv~., ~-0. ~= ~57, ~c~n~; ~ 5~6~'. · . " / / $; . ~ ~-~ '~ ~. .. ' ..?~... ,, · . .:~,.....,...~/,~,'.s'~'.~-~' ~':-""~.~'~ .... · , :',',~: :, ':' .. ':',.:. ???...'.'.?.~:.;:.'..:" ~..',.'. ..... .~. ~'.:-, .... . . ...' .,, .:}'? .: TOTAL P. 04 PLANNING/:::IEPO/::IT Hoisin~on Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: September 8, 1997 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit APPLICANT: Daryl and Meritt Geyen - 5201 Piper Road OWNER: Daryl and Meritt Geyen - 5201 Piper Road CASE NUMBER: 9742 HKG FILE NUMBER: 97-5y LOCATION: 5201 Piper Road EXISTING ZONING: Neighborhood Business (B-3) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Business BACKGROUND: Daryl and Merritt Geyen, owners of A1 and Alma's Supper Club, have submitted an application for a conditional use permit for an expansion of their restaurant. The property is located at 5201 Piper Road on the corner of Piper and Tuxedo Road. The restaurant is defined as a Class I (Traditional Restaurant) which is allowed in the B-3 district as a conditional use. An update to the previous conditional use permit is required because of the nature of the proposed improvements. The owners are proposing to renovate the existing building to update a number of improvements which have been made over the years to make the building function more efficiently and give it a new face lift. The plans include a new foundation under the dining area facing the lake for more storage area, interior remodeling, a new side entry, and new facade to mimic a Cape Code style appearance. A narrative detailing these improvements is included with the submittal. Modifications to the footprint of the building will occur on the north and east sides of the building in the front dining area facing the lake. A separate application addresses the setback issues with this proposed addition. The owners indicate in their letter the improvements to the building are for cosmetic and functional concerns. There are no intentions on their part to increase burden of the restaurant on the adjacent neighborhood by adding dining seats or parking spaces. An additional parcel of land south of the restaurant has been purchased by the owners to buffer the restaurant from the property. This parcel contains a portion of vacated Hanover Road and the lot directly south. The owners have indicated their intend to hold to the property for buffering purposes. COMMENTS: When considering a conditional use permit, there are a number of conditions which p. 2 Geyen Conditional Use 8. 9. 10. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that non of these will constitute a nuisance, and to control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City. The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. Existing adjacent uses will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. The property has been through a number of permit reviews over the past 25 years for various improvements. The most recent case dealing with the restaurant structure was the kitchen addition in 1985 which updated and increase its size. Other past permit reviews involved the commercial dock, its encroachment in the park lakeshore and commercial boat docking. The proposed building improvements will give the building a new look in the neighborhood. As stated by the owners, there will not be an increase in seating or parking. The existing parking around the building and parking lot across Tuxedo Road will continue to serve parking needs. No improvements are planned for these areas at this time. South of the building is a vacant lot which is owned by the Geyen's. They have indicated that this lot will remain in its current state as unimproved and that parking will not be allowed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission recommend Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions: 2. 3. 4. Deliveries continue to be handled on-site and not on the street. The vacant lot south of the building remain as undeveloped and parking not be allowed. Any landscaping removed with the improvements be replaced. All prior conditional use review decisions be upheld. BUILDERS' L A K E C O U N T R Y B U 339 SECONO STRE[T 0 IX¢[LSIOR,MN 55331 4) I L D E' R S", I N C 612. 414. 7121 612. 474. 79S7 4 September 1997 Mr. Jon Suthefland, Building Official City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 R C iv D Dear Mr. Sutherland, Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to speak with Loren Gordon, who was referred to me by Mark Koegler. I was calling, per your suggestion, to set up a meeting between you and me, Mark Koegler, and the Guyens regarding their applications for variance and conditional use permits. At this meeting, we were to all get familiar with the applications, tie up any loose ends, understand any issues that Mark may have regarding the application, and generally make sure that in obtaining your staff assistance, there was nothing else that needed to be addressed. When I spoke to Loren, he told me that he and Mark understood the application thoroughly, there was nothing missing, and that they had no issues with the application architecturally or otherwise. He stated that any issues relating to the conditional use permit we are applying for now are the same issues that they have always had to deal with A1 & Alma's. Therefore, he told me that this meeting was not necessary, and that everything could be taken care of at the scheduled meetings with the planning commission and city council. As I explained to you, and again to Loren, as the architectural designer, these ongoing issues that the city has with A1 & Alma's are not something that I can address. Daryl and Merritt can do so at the official meetings. The conditions existing now at the restaurant, in regards to noise, parking, traffic congestion, etc. are not being altered by the extent of the current remodeling plans and would remain the same after the proposed project is completed. To a different issue, thank you for your insight into the idea of a fire door and/or loading/ receiving door to the new front storage room. Daryl and Merritt do want that in the plans, so I have revised the site plan, basement plan, and an elevation to address this change. Enclosed you will find two full scale revised plans, two reduced revised plans, and 5 sets of the three pages that were changed. Please add these to the planning and council members applications if possible. If you need additional copies, please let me know. And, if you cannot do this, can you bring these revised plans to the meeting on Monday, or let me know that you did not get them added, so that I can make other arrangements? Again, thank you for all your help. I have greatly appreciated all of'you assistance and insight into this entire project. My best regards, .13ERS, INC. ~id-~e~4n,X.Design End: 2 reduced revised full blueprints 2 revised full blueprints - 5 se~s of the 3 altered pages RECEIVED SEP - 8 1997 t~ .PLANNING & INS?. SITE PLAN l ! RECEIVED [ SEP - 8 1S~7 )UND PLANNING & INSP. , / Ri :.lVEO MOUND iI INtNL & ,,,~... CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAY3NOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-060O FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE NO. 97-42 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR MODIFICATION OF EXISTING RESTAURANT DESCRIBED AS RENOVATION WITH ADDITIONAL 825 SQ FT OF BASEMENT STORAGE LOCATED WITHIN THE B-3 ZONING DISTRICT AT 5201 PIPER ROAD LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8 & LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE PID 25-117-24 21 0156, P&Z 97-42 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 14, 1997 to consider the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for modification of existing restaurant described as renovation with additional 825 square feet of basement storage located within the B-3 Business Zoning District. This business is allowable within the B-3 Business Zone through Conditional Use Permit. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property by October 3, 1997. Published in the Laker Sepetember 30, 1997. printed on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472~600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE NO. 97-42 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR MODII~ICATION OF EXISTING RESTAURANT o DESCRIBED AS RENOVATION WITH ADDITIONAL 825 SQ FT OF BASEMENT STORAGE LOCATED WITHIN THE B-3 ZONING DISTRICT AT 5201 PIPER ROAD LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 8 & LOTS 20-23, BLOCK 9, WHIPPLE PID 25-117-24 21 0156, P&Z 97-42 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, September 8, 1997 to consider the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for modification of existing restaurant described as renovation with additional 825 square feet of basement storage located within the B-3 Business Zoning District. This business is allowable within the B-3 Business Zone through Conditional Use Permit. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property by August 28, 1997. printed on recycled paper Rev. 1-29-97 Application for CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 ?J joa.to AUG 2 I 1997 Planning Commission Date: CITY OF MOUND Case No. q-~-- q~ Conditional Use Permit Fee: $250.00 Distribution: City Planner: City Engineer: Public Works: Fire Dept. Please type or print the following information: PROPERTY Subject Address INFORMATION N~e of B~s~.~ DESCRIPTION APPLICANT The applicant is: ~wner other: Name OWNER (if other than Address applicant) Phone (H) (W) (M) ARCHITECT, SURVEYOR, OR Address 3~ q ENGINEER Phone (U) (W} ZONING Circle: R-1 R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 ~-3~ DISTRICT CHANGE OF FROM: ~ ~1~ II Conditional Use Permit Application Page 2 DescriptionofProposed Use: EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts. If applicable, a _development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable guarantees for the completion of the proposed development. Estimated Development Cost of the Project: $ z. oOt t>e~O, oo Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? '1~ yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. This application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. Print Applicant's Name ! Print Owner's Name Print Owner's Name Rev. 1/29/97 Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date-~2 Date Date CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONE (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) LOT AREA .~/ ~&~ SQ. FT. X 30% LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15% = (for all lots) .............. I ~/8~.O I = (for Lots of Record*) ....... = (for detached'buildings only) . . I I *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. DETACHED BLDGS (GARAGE/SHED) 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' W/ibC LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT TOTAL HOUSE X X X TOTAL DETACHED £,~'rX ~'( S'/"X STej:,5 = ~, Z E ,S4.,c_.7-p 14. 5~ ~ ~J ~7""~ /~' '7o TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC .................. X X X TOTAL DECK X = X = ~O TOTAL OTHER 5~O TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE UNDER / OVER (indicate difference) .................... ; .......... PREPARED BY DATE '~'~"';?~' ' ~"'Q'~'~J'~'~ ~ ~""' -: .... ¢ ~'~"~'/t J' E'~ /£~',,~..~: ~.,,~,.~ 21 August 1997 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 ADDENDUM TO: Application for Conditional Use Permit for Daryl or Merritt Geyen Al & Alma's Supper Club 5201 Piper Road, Mound, MN 55364 Description of Proposed Use and Renovation Narrative The owners of Al & Alma's Supper Club, Daryl and Merritt Geyen have expressed the desire to address several concerns and issues they have with their restaurant. Most importantly, they wish to address the safety and energy loss issues within thek building's front eating area: · The small step between the front and back dining sections needs to be removed, by raising the height of the front dining area. · The foundation, or lack thereof, supporting the front exterior walls requires replacement if any new construction is to be built above it. · The windows along the lake side are leaky and in poor condition, and need to be replaced with high efficiency windows. Knowing that a new foundation is necessary, the Geyens are interested in further imporvements to the building, both cosmetically and functionally. · Due to the unique nature of the building, having been remodeled at several different times by several different owners, the building has a disjointed feel to the exterior. The Geyens would like to bring the visible exterior facades together with a Nantucket / Cape Cod architype. · Likewise, on the interior, the Geyens wish to update the interior in a similar manner. · With this interior remodeling and new front lakeside walls, we would like to build a new roof system over the front dining room that will allow for a balcony from the upper eating area to look down upon the lower level, as well as maintain its view to the lake. · Functionally, the Geyens are looking for more storage space, and would like to build a storage basement under the front dining area, as long as the foundation is being rebuilt. · Finally, the Geyens would like to add a covered entry to the side facade for architectural appeal as well as the desire to provide shelter from the elements at the main entry to the restaurant. The entry would be relocated to a point roughly 14 feet to the south. RENOVATION NARRATIVE · We would like to tear offthe front eating area of the building and build a full basement under the new area for storage along approximately the same footprint as the existing front area. · The higher (proposed 10'-4") walls will permit lots of windows facing the lake. · Directly above the curved section of the eating area will be a fiat roof with a roof deck above for aesthetic purposes only (no access or seating will be provided). · The front gable of the second floor will be extended approximately 11 feet to allow it to vault down upon the eating area from above. · A balcony will be created at the second floor to allow for a visual connection between the two floors, making the dining experience on both levels an enjoyable one. · The front entry will be relocated to the main dining area, with a double door, 6'-0" entry system and thermal break. · This will allow for an improved view to more diners while not adding any additional seating. · Finally, the curved facade of the front dining room will continue along as a covered entry "porch" added to the Tuxedo Road side, the two main facades of the building will be resided, detailed and re-roofed to bring in a unif3dng exterior feel similar to a Nantucket architype. Effects of the Proposed Use The Geyens wish to assure the City of Mound and all of their neighbors that they in no way wish to add any additional occupancy load or seating, nor any additional parking spaces as part of this remodeling project. Moreover, the intentions of this renovation project shall not create any additional traffic, noise, smoke or odors. It is a project that we feel will add to the overall beauty of the site and building, increase the functional aspects of the building, remove the safety hazards, and upgrade the energy efficiency of the windows and walls along the front facade of the restaurant. This remodeling and updating should be a terriffic improvement to their establishment as well as to the City of Mound. 21 August 1997 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 ADDENDUM TO: Application for Conditional Use Permit for Daryl or Merritt Geyen A! & Alma's Supper Club 5201 Piper Road, Mound, MN 55364 Development Schedule August 21, 1997 September 1997 October 1997 November 1, 1997 March 1, 1998 Submittal of Applications for Conditional Use Permit and Variance Further detailing of blueprints and specifications Anticipated acceptance of Variance and Grant of conditional use permit Final blueprint and specification modifications Project let-out to contractor for bid Submittal for Application for Building Permit Anticipated construction start-up Anticipated "Grand Re-Opening" Anticipated overall development cost: $200,000.00 Afl- \? ,..' 41.7] 40 { 85.85 :'4 I I c-DOC NO ~ 76. ,I I---.-4- 9-21-T4 ~ HANO' ER .RD ~.,~ ]'56.4 '~ ~5 26. g !;. ~43. ! 4 50. . ._ A :dk. lMOND ED W..ND~Or'.. ED ? 4r t(~og) ' '~ ~j~- } 4O 4o 4o J 4,,) i 4o PROJECT '~ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR AL & ALUA'S ~12-47~-4141 LLI 5201 Piper Road, Mo~ ~ 553~ © © ~..~ ~. ~ ~lt and ~tnsa" -- : · 5201'Piper Road, Mound, 1VIN 55364 rn~odeting designs for 5201 Pil~e? Road, Mound, MN 55364 remocletin8 desiSns for 5201 Piper Road, Mound, MN 55364 RI 10~ 000/$0 gl 9,500/0 · {.~tlnVl:y ~N FI! F? Y~ I N¢)x ~) Lot WIUI'iI: IIIIII~F. ......... FR()N f RII)~ RI:AR 40,% Cr~NFoRI~tlN(t? YE,~ ? BY: ' I h · 7 ,nini~ I.fi,tmnfh,n Sheet only ~mm~rizes n portion of the reciter Plnnning {~pmlment nt 472 ~ n~l c~fltd in the City of' Mound Zoning Ordinance. For fimrther InFormation, contact the Cit)' of Mound JOHN B. DEAN Attorney at Law (612) 337-9207 j dean~kennedy-graven.com TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council John Dean November 5, 1998 Use Restrictions Applicable to Chester Park At its September 22, 1998 meeting the cotmcil directed me to report back to it at its November 10 meeting concerning any use restrictions found in the real estate title records which limit the use of Chester Park. Specifically, the Council was interested in whether any restrictions exist which would impact on the operation of Al &Alma's Supper Club. The direction of the Council was limited to matters of real estate title; and my comments here do not include a discussion of any restrictions which may exist by operation of the City's land use requirements or other regulations. Chester Park is located on land which is legally described as Lot 24, Whipple Shores, Mound, Minnesota (the "Property"). The Property is owned by the City of Mound; and title is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 448395. The Property was conveyed to the City by Warranty Deed dated Octoberl0, 1969. The deed of conveyance contained several restrictions: the Property "at all times be open to the use of the general public and particularly for the use of property owners on Island Park, so as to afford them lake shore privileges; b. the Property shall not be diverted from the specific purpose or purposes above designated without the written consent of said Tuxedo Park ~ .Company, its successors or assigns; Ce the Property shall not be used for any commercial purpose, nor for the benefit of any one individual or group of individuals for the furtherance of their own particular interest; d. the Property shall not be used for the launching or docking of boats. At the September 22 Council meeting, the question was raised whether certain activities relating to the operation of Al & Alma's were in violation of any of the referenced restrictions. Based upon the material presented at that meeting I conclude that they are not. Al & Alma's principal restaurant location is south of Chester Park across Piper Road on property legally described as Lots 1 through 3, Block 8, Whipple. In addition, Al & Alma 's maintains off site parking on Lots 20 through 23, Block 9, Whipple and maintains a dock located on Lot 23, Whipple shores immediately east of Chester Park. While a number of points were raised by the public at the September 22 meeting, only one seemed to relate in any way to the title restrictions cited above. That point involved the use of Chester Park by patrons of Al & Alma's who were congregating in, or crossing through the park on the way to or from the boat dock on Lot 23. The crossing or congregating in the park does not seem to involve any potential violation of restrictions a, b, or d above. Moreover, I cannot conclude that it suggests a violation of restriction c above. The crossing of the park is at the option of the patrons to cross the park rather than to use the adjacent pathway provided by Al & Alma's on Lot 23; and congregating in the park is a public right actually granted in restriction a above. It is clear that the presence of the commercial activity has had an impact on the park and upon others who use it, but there is no suggestion that Al & Alma's has attempted to capitalize on use of the park in the promotion of its commercial activities. Consequently, I cannot find that the park is used for commercial purposes or in furtherance of the interests of Al & Alma's. JBD-151363 2 MU200-18 470 Pillsbu~ Center 200 South Sixth Street Minncapoli, MN 556,02 (612) 337-9300 tdcphone (~12) 557-~310 fas c-mail: arv/s~ken nedy-gravcn.com CH&RL£S L. L£F£vr. Rr. (6t2) 337-9215 cleFevere~kermedy-grav¢. ~.~w November 6, 1998 Mr. Ed Shukle City Manager City of Mound 53e, 1 Maywood Road Mound MN 5536~ RE: Becket Wetland Conservation Act Appeal Dear Ed: City staff, at the recommendation of the technical evaluation panel, has rejected thc ground w'aler analysis and request for exemption from wetland conservation act requirements submitted on behalf of Timothy Becket and Dale and Lorell Becket for a grading and filling permit in the City. The attorney for the Beckets. Mr. Paul Haik. attempted to appeal 'the decision of the technical evaluation panel to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR). In response. BWSR has advised that when such wetland cor~$er~'atiOn act decisions are delegated to the staff, there must be some local appeal process available to the landowner to secure a decision of the City Council prior to an appeal to BWSR. In order to satisfy the requirements of taw, the City will have to give the Beckets notice and an opportunity to be heard before making a decision whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the staff decision on the Becker application. For purposes of appeal, the hearing process should be transcribed by a court reporter and a record of the proceedings, including exhibits submitted. should be prepared. Additionally, it will be necessary for the Council to adopt findings of fac~ justifying its final decision. Because this is a contested case involving substantial propers? fights, the hearing to be conducted can be somewhat technical in nature to assure that the due process rights of the appealing party are observed. Therefore, wl~ would recommend that thc City Council consider the appointment of an independent hearing examiner to conduct the hearings and prepare a record of proceedings and recommendatiori for the Council. The record of proceedir~gs and recommendation would then be submitted to .the City Council for its rival decision. If the City Council wishes to do so, it could conduct the hearings 'itself. However. retaining an independent heating examiner has several advantages. First, of course, it reduces the burden on ~.O-d 'kO/ZO'd ~90-.I. OL£62£i~zlg+ Id:lAY~t9 t ,k(]:dldldq~4'mo'J:l meL'V:0[ [q6-go-AoN Mr. Ed Shuklc November 6, 1998 Page 2 the City Council. Second, an independent hearing examiner is more likely ,to :be regarded as an impartial tribunal. Third, a hearing examiner who is trained in the law 'will be retire 'likely to conduct a hearing which results in a coherent, understandable, and legally,appropriate recorct of proceedings which increases the likelihood that the decision of the City Council will be affirmed if that decision is again appealed to BWSR. I have contacted three attorneys who have acted as hemng examin/~rs in the past on municipal law matters. All three are currently city attorneys or have been city attorneys in the past. They are Desyl Petcrson. Minnetonka City Attorney: Dave Omstein. Bloomington City Attorney; and Karcn Many, formerly the City Attorney for the City of Shakopee. All three expressed a willingness to setw'e as hearing examiner in this matter. However, it appears that becausc of travel, vacation and trial schedules. Desyl Peterson a~d Dave Orrlstein would not be able to conduct heatings az promptly as Karen Many. Ms. Many has indicated that she would charge for her services at the rate of $60 per hour plus expenses. If the City Council agrees that this matter should be heard by an independent hearing examiner. it may appoint the hearing examiner and begin the process by adoption of the attached resolution. If you have any questions, please give me a Call. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:lh Enclosure CLL. l~282,,~ MU200-30 RESOLUTION #95- 128 RESOLUTION AP?OINT~O HEARINO EXAM~[NER IN THE CASE OI:: THE APPEAL O1~ BECKER WHEREAS. applications have been submitted by Timothy Becker and Dale and Lorell Becket for exemption from the wetland conservation act and .for approval of a wetlands boundary delineation: and WHEREAS, City staff has denied the application for exemption and disapproved the wetland delineation submitted on behalf of the applicants: and ' WHEREAS. the applicants have appealed the decision of t~e City staff to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR): and WHEREAS. BWSR has advised the City that it will be necessary for the City Council to make a final decision on the application prior to commencing an appeal to BwSR: and WHEREAS. the City Council has determined that it is most reasonable and convenient that such a hearing be conducted by an independent heanng examir~er: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, that: 1. The City Manager is authorized and directed to retain Ms. Karen Marti as hearing examiner to conduct a hearing on the appeal of the s'aff determination on the applications of Timothy Becket and Dale and Lorell Becket 2. Such hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of due process of law as expediently as is reasonably possible. 3. Upon completion of the hearing, the heating examiner shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, a transcript and record of the proceedings of the hearing and make recommendations of findings and order for review and consideration by the City Council. The foregoing resolution was moved by Mayor Polston and seconded by Councilmember Jensen. The following voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Hanus, Jensen and Polston. The following voted in the negative: none. Councilmember Weycker abstained. ATTEST: City Clerk SS/BOB POLSTON Mayor One West water St'feet Suite 200 St Paul, MN 55107 (012) Z90-3767 ~__~Fax (612) 297.5615 Jld Offlcus No~ern RegiOn; 394 S. ~ke Avenue Room 403 Duluth, MN 5~02 (~18) 72~4752 F~ (218) 723~794 3217 BemlaJl Avenue N. Bemidj{, MN 56601 (218) 755~Z35 F~ (218) 755~201 217 S, 7th Street Suite 202 Brajnerd, MN 56401-3660 (21S) 828-2383 Fax {218) Southern Region: 261 Highway 15 New UIm, MN 56073-89~5 (507) 359-6074 Fax (507) 359-6018 40--16th Street SE Suite A Roch~ter, MN 55904 (507) 2~-7458 /~- F~ (507) 28~2875 Box 267 1400 E. Lyon Marsnai[, MN 5625~ (507) 53%6060 F~x (507) 537-~368 Metro Region: One West Water Street Suite 250 St. Paul, MN 55107 (612) 282-9969 Fax (612) 297-5615 An equal opportunity employer Printed on recycled paper ~oun. tt, 1YiN 5,5364 .: Dear.irk. SutherlaM: This',)~ttcr;i.S a follow-up .to ou~i..'..mce, m telephone ~on,~tXsa;fion..l:¢§ardin 6f a :WCA.'exe~l~tion.reqUts~.".f.Or...T.~mo~y. ~ke~-. ~nd': Dart anti their .subse%~;)>t ~ppea]'. 'to. BWSR" of-'.', sa~d. di~tcrmin~tion,.: tt al>pt i' ..'. , · . ": :' : ! '- ' " -. "'- i''.. '.-" ,'" ' '~ ' : · ' achmmstrauvc..ap:peal oI0tmn l~a.s' not..b, een.: .afforded thc. B.'.cckcr a.. Sm~ under a30. day.decision: tier)od on. Whet:her to g~ant"the'iabo,~ refere~ please notify us ih..writirig immediately if and wheti such. will b6 pro .As you are aware,': Minnesota Rules Chapter: 8420.0250, Subp. 3 .. appeah:.n:g..:an exemptzon dctenmna~on and the.mqmremcnt, of. e l~cai hdminiatrative;..a..'Pi~al .op{ions' before'.an i'a,p?ml,'.e~.. bebrough Board,of:Wateri:and '!Soil. Res0m'ce$ (BWSR). ~h:e "local admin'istr; OPtiOn .'is n~t :furthei5 de'fihexli'in ~he .rote aUe..to ;th;.' differences betWe~ cities, waters}Yeti,, districts.and':the need'for flexibility: at. the. local l:ew When ..WCA' exemption d0mdningtions ~c .dciegatext .iq :s.ta. ff, th:ere .s0me;toca!.aPPeal auenue .available to..th~ iandown~.er...T..h, e wCA .ad manu~' c"ov. ers this,and it has been .~trcss.~' at i the ::'WcA ac~ministra~ sessions. 'The locat.:gnvemment 'zoning .h~ring~ ,prov!4e.' the". mi>ti, pi-oc~ings ..uniter. W.CA..iThe basic req~m,en~, are.prqPe!: ~'bticer. a. opP°rt..un~t~ 'f0.r all int~i-cstetl..persons: to .speak, ;recorilhig .of all pi-oc~ the'adoPtion of :t'ofmiit Writtei~ findings at the time of the· decision basis':, for. the' £O~S determination. Therefor:e~'..the '.City' :C0Uhcil ~dj~{istment or .some otherl.i'ocai appeal must hear ttte.matter bef0[¢ it can 1se appeale&.to-BWSR.. Seeker. and' ilsa :BWS .austing 'ali i~. bef°re.the tire appeal n elds t° be. ~iniStrati0n. .'for LOU. ' 'ut! and' ;fair. i~y Co'un~il} · Since an appeai...before :BWSR is based on .the record,: 'it' 'wou~ld:. b( p'rtident :to'.. ..' e.qtai~iish Writfe. n ~findin'"gs anll taiSe'r~rCt' 'the'heari:.ng.in Ea.se'a: v~r. ba..ti' ntr. anseriP, t. · is needed. UlXm:ap~.' Th/s p~ocgss puts thc city in a..better P0slti0n.t?:hav.~ t.h.e:.tr}. wcp~ determih~,,t~ons' afl-meg if an appea! .:is brOUght it°'BWSR. If In'¢ matter :.is: appealed to Bg~.SR and" the ~ibovc items have not'been completed.{ the .appeal. Would likely be remanded 'tO the city. .:.'.... :.! ... Mr. Yon Sutherland October 22, 1998 Page 2 It is anticipated, and ...fully. ? ~l~C.~.~.,. tha't"the..~.'t ;'Of'Mound ~4tl'act l~rOmptty..::.in grmatin.'g :ti a lo~aa, appeal prgceg..Ure,.! h. pp~'OX~mitety O. nemoh'tli.'frOm..th~ iiate-of:t.his~l¢tt.e~..should for the city to complet~ t:h.'is. 1.ocal..~p~!}.:in~.'.' ii. ii' th.e..ei.ty h=icohcems or. Problems. h with this process or time. line, p!ease.=eon.mt"me im.t.~a!, iately. Please note, and .by 'co~y 'of :this. le~er..e~,nse! .~.Or. file. B.~k~'s is".'~o ~forme. x:l, that decision by the city.in itlai.s exemp.tion. ~'t ~ns'tit~tes a ieplra.te WCA decision appealed. Please feel free to C. on. t~c.'i, me'at.:(651..) 29.7-.2'9fii5 Water Managemen~ Specialist . cc; Paul H,-tik Matt Seltzer Ron Ha.mack Doug Thomas ilolm ~laschke Barbara Oh:man. Doug Snyder .can: be'of ~urtl~r assistance:. further One West Water Street Suite 200 St. Paul, MN 55107 (612) 296-3767 Fax (612) 297-5615 Field Offices Northern Region: 394 S. Lake Avenue Room 403 Duluth, MN 55802 (218) 723-4752 Fax (218) 723-4794 3217 Bemidji Avenue N. Bemidji, MN 56601 (218) 755-4235 Fax (218) 755-4201 217 S. 7th Street Suite 202 Brainerd, MN 56401-3660 (218) 828-2383 Fax (218) 828-6036 :5outhern Region: 261 Highway 15 S. New UIm, MN 56073-8915 (507) 359-6074 Fax (507) 359-6018 40-16th Street SE Suite A Rochester, MN 55904 (507) 285-7458 Fax (507) 280-2875 Box 267 1400 E. Lyon Street Marshall, MN 56258 (507) 537-6060 Fax (507) 537-6368 Metro Region: One West Water Street Suite 250 St. Paul, MN 55107 (612) 282-9969 Fax (612) 297-5615 An equal opportunity employer Pdnted on recycled paper &, ~J, ,J,. October 22, 1998 Jon Sutherland, Building Official City of Mound 5341 Maywood Mound, MN 55364 VIA FAX AND MAIL RE: WCA Appeal, Becker v. City of Mound, File 98-8 Dear Mr. Sutherland: This letter is a follow-up to our recent telephone conversation regarding the denial of a WCA exemption request for Timothy Becker and Dale and Lorell Becker and their subsequent appeal to BWSR of said determination. It appears a local administrative appeal option has not been afforded the Becker' s. Since BWSR is under a 30 day decision period on whether to grant the above referenced appeal, please notify us in writing immediately if and when such will be provided. As you are aware, Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420.0250, Subp. 3 pertains to appealing an exemption determination and the requirement of "exhausting all local administrative appeal options" before an appeal can be brought before the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR). The "local administrative appeal option" is not further defined in the rule due to the differences between counties, cities, watershed districts and the need for flexibility at the local level. When WCA exemption determinations are delegated to staff, there needs to be some local appeal avenue available to the landowner. The WCA administration manual covers this and it has been stressed at the WCA administrative training sessions. The local government zoning hearings provide the model for LGU proceedings under WCA. The basic requirements are proper notice, a full and fair opportunity for all interested persons to speak, recording of all proceedings, and the adoption of formal written findings at the time of the decision to show the basis for the LGU determination. Therefore, the City Council, Board of Adjustment or some other local appeal process sanctioned by the City Council must hear the matter before it can be appealed to BWSR. Since an appeal betbre BWSR is based on the record, it would be prudent to establish written findings and tape record the heating in case a verbatim transcript is needed upon appeal. This process puts the city in a better position to have their WCA determinations affirmed if an appeal is brought to BWSR. If the matter is appealed to BWSR and the above items have not been completed, the appeal would likely be remanded to the city. Mr. Jon Sutherland October 22, 1998 Page 2 OCT23 D It is anticipated, and fully expected, that the City of Mound will act promptly in granting the Becker's a local appeal procedure. Approximately one month from the date of this letter should be adequate for the city to complete this local appeal process. If the city has concerns or problems in complying with this process or time line, please contact me immediately. Please note, and by copy of this letter counsel for the Becker's is so informed, that any further decision by the city in this exemption request constitutes a separate WCA decision that can be appealed. Please feel free to contact me at (65 i) 297-2906 if I can be of further assistance. .Sincerely, , /~..-----~-'------ /'Jim Haertel~~ (.//' Water Management Specialist cc: Paul Haik Matt Seltzer Ron Ha_mack Doug Thomas John Jaschke Barbara Ohman Doug Snyder -/ KREBSBACH & HAIK, LTD. ATTORNtry$ AT LAW , I ECBVB3 OCT 151 8 70 I FOURTH AVENUtr SOUTH MINN'%POLlS, MINNF.5OTA 55415-163 l ~LEPHONE (~ I ~) 333-7400 Mr. James Haertel Board of Water & Soil Resources One West Water Street Suite 250 St. Paul, MN 55107 Timothy Becket Dale and Lorell Becker Dear Mr. Haertel: October 13, 1998 I am writing' on behalf of Timothy Becker and Dale and Lorell Becker to appeal the decision of the Technical Evaluation Panel requested by the City of Mound, the local government unit. The TEP erred in rejecting the groundwater analysis and its decision is unfounded. The Wetland Conservation Act requires analysis of the hydrologic condition and does not permit the TEP panel to merely delineate based upon the hydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation. With respect to the existing exemption, sewer and water has all been installed to the site as well as roadway improvements. Based upon these improvements, the site is exempt. This appeal is quite important in that the TEP p~el p~'oposes to disregard one of the statutory requirements for determining a jurisdictional wetland. Clearly stepping outside the statute is improper. cc; Please let me know when you can schedule the prehearing conference. Sincerely, KREBSBACH & HAIK, LTD. Paul R. Haik Timothy Becker Dale and Lorell Becker John Quist City of Mound October 9, 1998 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-O600 FAX (612) 472-O620 6919 North Shore Ddve Eau Claire WI 54703 Dale and Lorell Becker 5205 Beachside Ddve Minnetonka MN 55343 SUBJECT: Results from the Technical Evaluation Panel done on September 25, 1998 at 5331/5341/5351/5361 Three Points Blvd. Dear Mr Becker, Mr & Mrs Becker: Based upon the wetlands determination, your grading and filling permit application is hereby denied. The City of Mound has accepted the Technical Evaluation Panel's ('I'EP) recommendation (attached) in regards to the Becker Sites at 5331/5341/5351/5361 Three Points Blvd. Please see the TEP recommendations for the specific conclusions. In general, the site plans need to be modified to include the area with hyddc soils, a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, and questionable wetland hydrology. The City also has denied the exemption request for the reasons specified in the TEP recommendations. In order to proceed through the Wetland Conservation Act process, a wetland replacement plan (8420.0530 through 8420.0610) including sequencing analysis (8420.0520) must be submitted for the City's review. Grading and filling work can be done above the 931.5 contour ( not including any wetland area). A revised plan and application would need to be submitted. City staff would be happy to assist you or discuss your potential development of your property and the impacts of the City's Ordinances from a comprehensive approach. You may contact our City Planner Loren Gordon at 338-0800 if you wish to do so. Re~'Decffully, and ~--~.'Building Official JS:kl Enclosure CC: John Cameron, City Engineer Ed Shukle, City Manager John Dean, City Attorney Loren Gordon, City Planner Jim Hafner, MCWD John Quist, Barr Engineering Paul Haik, Attomey printed on recygled paper City of Mound WCA Techflicn! Evaluation Panel Recommendations 5331/5341/5351/5361 Three Points Blvd. ( Becker Sites) The Technical Evaluation Panel ('rEP) met on September 25, 1998 to evaluate the adequacy of' the delineation conducted on the site by Mark Jacobson, and to make a determination of the request for an exemption based on a previous project approval. The TEP recommendations to the City of Mound are as follows. I) The observed lake level and ~oundwater level did not appear to conform with conventional hydrology theory, or the extent ofhydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation. Therefor the TEP concluded that in the absence of additional hydrology data, which either confirms or refutes the site's wetland hydrology as defined in the COE 1987 wetland delineation manual, a conservative delineation should be applied. This would place the delineated wetland boundary where hydric soils and a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation exist on the site. Additional vegetation data should be presented to document the location ofthe wetland/upland boundary in the vicinity of transect 8. In order to approve a more aggressive (and possibly more precise) delineation the TEP recommend monitoring the site groundwater through at least one growing season to document the seasonal hydrology conditions. The applicant could propose alternative modeling approaches to relate site hydrology to the requirements of wetland hydrology for TEP consideration. 2) Under Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8420.0210, the landowner applying for an exemption is responsible for submitting the proof necessary to show qualification for the particular exemption claimed. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8420.0122 subpart 8 also include language to the effect that the approvals must not have expired in order to qualify for this exemption. The request for a WCA exemption for previously approved projects (Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8420.0122, subpart 8) was based on the city of Mound's approval of resolutions 86-99 and 86-82 (attached) for the sites. Resolution 86-99 required the applicant to filed the plans with the Hermepin County within 180 days in order to be official. Since the current county plat map (attached), and the 1992 Certificate of Survey(s) provided by the applicant (attached) show lot dimensions consistent with the plat prior to the 86 replat, it was concluded that the 86 replat was never filed or becarae official. Resolution 86-82 was a variance approval which by city code expires after one year. TEP recommends that the exemption application be denied because the applicant has not shown~ Resolution 86-82 had expired. John Sutherland, City of Mound David Thill, Hermepin Conservation District ~' ~ ~.~/, pE}g RECEIVED 0 C T - 5 1998 MOUND PLANNING & INSP. Memo To'- Ed Shukle From:Len Harrell ~: Date; 10/26/98 Re-' Beachwood Road street light We have been unable to contact all the neighbors on Beachwood Road regarding the streetlight issue. Ryan ended up sending out letters (attached) to those he could not contact. There is only one negative response to the new light. A check of the area by Officer Ewald supported the addition of the light, · Page I LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Mr. & Mrs. Miller 5855 Beachwood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Miller: There has been a petition drafted by some resident's to put a Street light in at the end of your cul-de-sac on Beachwood Rd. The Mound Police Department would like to know if you are in agreement with this proposed street light in or out. [Check One] YES Nc) If you do not agree with the street light going in, please explain why. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the survey and return it as soon as possible in the enclosed self addressed envelope. Sincerely, Ryan Piper, CSO Mound P.D. LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Dan Hales 5870 Beachwood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Hales: There has been a petition drafted by some resident's to put a~street light in at the end of your cul-de-sac on Beachwood Rd,, The Mound Police Department Would like to know if you are in agreement with this proposed street light in or out. [Check One] YES ~ NC) If you do not agree with the street light going in, please explain why. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the survey and retum it as soon as possible in the enclosed self addressed envelope. Sincerely, Ryan Piper, CSO Mound P.D. LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Paul Wright 5845 Beachwood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Wright: There has been a petition drafted by some resident's to put ~Street light in at the end of your cul-de-sac on Beachwood Rd./The Mound Police Department would like to know if you are in agreement with this proposed street light in or out. [Check One] NC) ' ' If you do not agree with the street light going in, please explain why. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the survey and retum it as soon as possible in the enclosed self addressed envelope. Sincerely, Mound ~.D. LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLIC 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Mr. & Mrs. Howard 5835 Beachwood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Howard: There has been a petition drafted by some resident's to put a street light in at the end of your cul-de-sac on Beachwood Rd. The Mound Police Department would like to know if you are in agreement with this proposed street light in or out. [Check One1,,, YES/t, NO If you do not agree with the street light going in, please explain why. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the survey and return it as soon as possible in the enclosed self addressed envelope. Sincerely, Ryan Piper, CSO Mound P.D. LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLIC 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 5254210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Mr. & Mrs. Peterson 5815 Beachwood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. &Mrs. Peterson: There has been a petition drafted'by some resident's to put ~.street light in at the end of your cul-de-sac on Beachwood Rd,/~The Mound Police Departme~{~°uld like to know if you are in agreement with this proposedstreet light in or out. [Check One] ~ YES ' "~ ~ ~ If you do not agree with the street light going in, please explain why. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the survey and return it as soon as possible in the enclosed self addressed envelope. Sincerely, Ryan Piper, CSO Mound P.D. LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLIC 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Mark Christensen 5805 Beachwood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Christensen: There has been a petition drafted by some resident's to put a street light in at the end of your cul-de-sac on Beachwood Rd. 'The Mound Police Department'W°uld like to know if you are in agreement with this proposed street light in or out. [Check One~ ,,. · YES..~. NO If you do not agree with the street light going in, please explain why. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the survey and return it as soon as possible in the enclosed self addressed envelope. Sincerely, Ryan Piper, CSO Mound P.D. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION TOM MCCAFFREY RECOMMENDED ADDITIONS AND SUBTRACTIONS OF DOCK SPOTS TO THE DOCK LOCATION MAP. OCTOBER 8, 1998 THE FOLLOWING IS MAY RECOMMENDATION FOR DOCK ADDITIONS, SUBTRACTIONS AND CHANGES. #00030 - REMOVE DOCKSITE 00030 LOCATED AT AVOCET LANE. THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN ASSIGNED FOR 8 YEARS AND THE REMOVAL WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM PRIVATE SHORELINE. #00115 - REMOVE DOCKSITE 00115 LOCATED AT BLUEBIRD LANE. THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN ASSIGNED FOR 8 YEARS AND THE REMOVAL WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY. #00155 - REMOVE DOCKSITE 00155 LOCATED AT CANARY LANE. THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN ASSIGNED FOR 8 YEARS AND THE REMOVAL WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY. #60785 - REMOVE DOCKSITE 60785 LOCATED AT TWIN PARK. THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN USED FOR 6 YEARS AND THE REMOVAL WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY. #60825 - THIS SPOT WAS NOT RENEWED IN 1998 AND REMOVING IN WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY. prJnted on recycled paper #61070 - REMOVE DOCKSITE 61070 LOCATED AT RIDGEWOOD PARK. THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN USED FOR 7 YEARS AND THE REMOVAL WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY. #32750 - ADD DOCKSITE 32750 THIS NEW DOCKSITE REPLACES 32775 WHICH WAS A TEMPORARY DOCK ASSIGNED UNTIL THIS MEETING. IT WAS ADDED IN 1998 FOR MR. SCOTT NAGEL AN ABUTTING OWNER. #32710 - DOCKSITE 32760 WILL CHANGE TO 32710 THIS WILL ALLOW PROPER SPACING FOR THE NEW DOCKSITE 32750 TO BE ADDED. THIS REQUIRES NO PHYSICAL CHANGE TO THIS DOCKSITE. #42800 - ADD MULTIPLE DOCKSITE 42800 SITES A THROUGH J AND REMOVE DOCKSITE 42821, 42856, 42871, 429901 AND 42990. THESE ARE THE OLD DOCKSITE NUMBERS THAT TRANSFERRED TO THE NEW MULTIPLE DOCK AT THE DEVON LANE ACCESS. CITY OF MOUND DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 1998 Present were: Chair Mark Goldberg, Commissioners Jim Funk and Dennis Hopkins, and Council Representative Mark Hanus. Also present were Park Director Jim Fackler, Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey, City Planner Loren Gordon, and Secretary Carla Wirth. Those excused: Commissioner Frank Ahrens. Also in attendance were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmember Leah Weycker, John Kraayenbdnk, and Tom Eikenberry. Goldberg called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. MINUTES Motion made by Funk, seconded by Hopkins, to approve the minutes of the September 17, 1998 DCAC meeting as presented. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA CHANGES Fackler advised that one of the applicants did not qualify and recom~nended Agenda Item 11 be tabled to the November meeting. Agenda approved as revised. PUBLIC LAND PERMIT Fackler stated staff recommends approval of the request from Marilyn Byrnes, 2851 Cambridge Lane for renewal of the previous ConStruction on Public Lands Permit granted by Resolutions #93-87 and #78-209 in order to replace shrubs including a five- year permit for the balance of the improvements as noted in the previously adopted resolutions. Motion made by Hopkins, seconded by Funk, to recommend approval of the Construction on Public Lands Permit for Robert and Marilyn Byrnes, owners of 2851 Cambridge Lane, Lot 10, Bock 38, Wychwo°d, to replant shrubs on Brighton Common, including a five-year renewal for the balance of the Improvements. Motion carried unanimously. VACATION OF CITY PROPERTY Loren Gordon, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., explained the DCAC is asked to review and make recommendation on the Longford Road, Kildare Road, and Kings Lane street vacation request because of implications the proposed street vacations could have on public use, dock issues, and lake access. He presented a map of the area and pointed out the location of the street easements under consideration. Gordon noted the location of the bluff line and areas which are currently under water which includes the road easement for Longford Road. The City Engineer and Streets Superintendent do not feel Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1995 Longford Road, Kings Lane, or this port/on of Ki/dare Road would ever be constructed as roadway so they recommend vacation except for the intersection of Kings Lake and Kildare Road to assure access. They also recommend vacating the stub easements of Kings Lane and Kerry Lane. Gordon noted the storm water retention ponding area which is needed for the development. He explained the topography did not match the developer's site plan so they needed to re-engineer their storm pond and found it would be better for them if they could push the pond area out onto the road right-of-way. Gordon explained that if the vacation is approved, the properties abutting the easements would receive that property. This would create dpadan lots so each could get a dock. Gordon noted the location of the stairway and configuration of the common dock, if that alternate is used. The applicant has indicated it does not matter to him which scenario happens. Gordon stated the question to answer is whether the public's best interests would be served by the proposed vacation. Hanus explained he raised this issue at the Council level, that there may be an interest in vacating. He advised that a multiple dock was already approved for this area. It was noted that there would be either individual docks or a common dock, one or the other. Hanus stated the initial question was if it would do the program any good if more slips would be allowed than allowed by the program or if more BSUs would be available for use elsewhere. He stated if this is reduced, there is less burden on the program for BSUs. Goldberg stated if the road easement is vacated, the BSUs would have to live within the LMCD guidelines for private property. Fackler stated this is correct and the docks would be one per fifty feet. Goldberg asked if this shoreline (440 feet) would stay within the program if it is vacated. Fackler stated it would not since it would be private property. He explained that if vacated the property owners would have to provide a survey to the LMCD and request a variance. Fackler stated the LMCD may provide a hardship for the length of the dock but probably not for the number of BSUs. He stated it may be to the property owner's benefit to form an association and go with a common dock. Hanus noted the need for a lot of record to have a riparian lot so the LMCD might insist on a multiple dock which the property owners may want anyway due to the lower cost. Hopkins stated it would be a positive if seven more people are paying into the Dock Program. He commented on the cost to the City for multiple docks and stated it would be positive for them to remain in the commons. He noted that this common dock would not be the City's responsibility since it would be owned by their homeowners association. 2 ¥ol Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 Goldberg inquired regarding the impact on the City's ability to install their own multiple dock and provide access for nonabutting boaters. Fackler stated it could still be done. Goldberg commented this area is a nice location since it does not involve abutters. Fackler stated this vacation action may set a precedent for other locations. Goldberg stated he thinks the precedent will not be an issue since the City wants to assure there is full access for the nonabutters and this does not impact that issue. Fackler noted it could be an impact since it will take some from the 590. Also, the City needs to show a hardship. Hanus stated these seven slips would use 350 feet and would contribute 244 feet of lakeshore so it is a benefit to the program. He noted this is a brand new consideration so the issues of benefit/negative can be fully addressed as well as the impact to the program. Hopkins suggested the City look for properties to use this program and increase contributors. Fackler stated an option is to vacate Kings Lane and Kildare Road but not Longford Road. Hanus asked if the developer wants to use part of the intersection. Gordon advised that they need some of that intersection area for their storage pond. Hanus noted that if the intersection is vacated, it would be divided into quadrants and be owned by the abutting property. Gordon stated this is correct but he understands that one of the property owners does not want the easement. Hanus stated staff is recommending that if it is vacated certain easements be retained. He asked if an easement would help the City relative to the DCAC if for walkways and pathways. Hopkins restated his support to allow the dock as part of the Dock Program. He stated he does not think these property owners would ever come to the City to request maintenance. Hopkins stated this would be beneficial by making money for the program. Hanus stated the seven docks will go in one way or the other, either through the City bank of BSUs or a private bank of BSUs. If from the City bank, there will be fewer BSUs to use elsewhere. He explained that as access to the lake becomes more valuable there will be more call in the future for the same type of arrangement. Funk agreed that if this property is vacated it would allow the property owner to deal with a multiple dock, water depth, and dock length. Fackler explained the property owner would be required to apply for all permits and variances. If they can show reasonable hardship relative to water depth and reeds, they may be able to get a variance based on hardship. 3 Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 Goldberg stated he is less concerned about giving up the vacation as long as it is not giving up the opportunity to put in a common dock. Fackler stated this is an area that could have a common dock but would probably not be at the top of the list. Hanus noted there is no access for anyone to go down there. Funk asked if the City would ever realistically look at this area for expansion. Hopkins stated he does not think so. Goldberg stated the benefit would be the funds received. Hopkins stated another benefit is that the City is not responsible for putting the dock in or out or for the maintenance. Goldberg stated there are two main issues: 1) the opportunity to collect $150 per year for each of the seven docks, and 2) a possible precedent setting. Hanus stated another impact is what it may do in the future if the property owners ask the City to handle maintenance of this dock. Hopkins suggested a restriction be added to their covenants to prevent that from occurring. Hopkins asked if there has been any other similar area that has come to the City expecting maintenance of their dock. Hanus stated they only have to ask to be treated the same as other multiples. He suggested that a legal opinion be obtained regarding this potential and asked how this dock would be categorized. Fackler stated a similar situation would be a dredge where the City has done a dredge in some areas with docks but has not done so where there are limited docks since it would not have been as great a benefit. He noted this is a precedent set as well as dprap activity which has been done in some areas but not others. Goldberg noted in this situation they are abutting property owners which is different than with other multiple docks. Funk suggested the decision be based on how it impacts the program today, if at all. He stated he would prefer to minimize City involvement. Hanus stated a way to resolve that would be to change the covenants and insist that they be responsible for the cost of the dock, the dock installation, dock removal, and all maintenance which needs to be to City standards plus they need to pay the fee to the program. Hanus stated the only purpose for the public property would be to receive the annual fee. He stated this is a "draw" on BSUs of the program but a negative in respect to future growth of the program. Fackler reviewed a section of the City Code regarding removal of docks as contained in Section 437:00, Subd. 5. and stated the City has the ability to remove the license and assess the cost if the dock is not maintained to City standards. 4 Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 Hopkins stated it would not serve the public good to give away this land. Funk stated he leans toward supporting the vacation. Goldberg stated he can see both sides of the issue. Gordon explained the recommendations of staff, the Planning Commission, POSC, and DCAC will be presented to the Council. Motion made by Funk, seconded by Hanus, to recommend approval of the street vacation of Longford Road, Kildare Road, and Kings Lane. 2 ayes (Funk and Hanus), I nay (Hopkins), I abstain (Goldberg). Motion carried. Hopkins indicated he voted against because of the loss of income to the Dock Program and he does not believe the City would ever be asked for maintenance. DISCUSS: NEW LOCATION FOR MULTIPLE SLIP DOCKS AND EVALUATION OF EXISTING John Kraayenbdnk, 4768 Tuxedo Boulevard, stated he would like the docks to go in earlier and come out later (mid-October) and to be extended into the lake several sections farther to prevent the boat from digging up dirt. He feels adding two more dock sections would help. Mr. Kraayenbdnk stated due to the storm drain location, the water is only about one and one-half feet deep six feet from the "L" section of the dock. Fackler stated he does not think this dock is out 100 feet but the length is consistent with the docks on either side. McCaffrey noted his boat may be more impacted due to the slip location on the dock. Mr. Kraayenbrink stated this is correct. Goldberg suggested Mr. Kraayenbrink's boat be moved down several slips. Hanus noted that to relocate Mr. Kraayenbrink's boat may just shuffle the problem to someone else. Hopkins commented that the lake is lower now than it has been in several years. Mr. Kraayenbdnk advised that the abutting property owners expressed no problems and appear to support the docks. Consensus was reached to extend this dock length by several sections next spring. DISCUSS: DOCK LOCATION MAP McCaffrey reviewed the recommendation for dock additions, subtractions, and changes as detailed in his October 8, 1998 memorandum. He advised that some docks have been vacated for years due to their location. Goldberg inquired regarding the #32750 dock slip. McCaffrey explained this new dock site was approved in June and this is just a housekeeping issue to adjust the numbers based on the new location. 5 Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission II October 15, 1998 Hanus asked about the Mark Smith property and if the dock was moved. Fackler Stated nothing has been done yet, all the numbers remain the same with the idea to resolve it over the winter. Hopkins asked if any of these sites are good enough for a new dock location. McCaffrey stated this is basically a housekeeping situation and if they were issuable, they would be issued. Motion made by Goldberg, seconded by Funk, to recommend approval of the dock additions, subtractions, and changes as detailed in the October 8, 1998 memorandum from Tom McCaffrey. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSS: LMCD RULE ON SETBACKR Informational; no action required. DISCUSS: REVISED 1999 DOCK APPLICATION FORMS Fackler presented the 1999 Dock Application Form as revised based on the discussion from the September meeting. Goldberg asked if the lottery situation was addressed. Fackler stated that issue was sent to the City Attorney for an opinion. Hanus advised staff of several areas that were not properly updated. DISCUSS: 1999 BUDGET & CAPITAL OUTLAY REQUEST Fackler presented the 1999 Budget and Capital Outlay requests as detailed in his Staff report. Due to the late hour and absence of Frank Ahrens, Goldberg asked that this issue be addressed at the next meeting. This item was tabled to the November 19, 1998 meeting. DISCUSS: NOVEMBER DCAC AGENDA Goldberg requested the addition of discussion of personal watercraft and multiple docks, end of year satisfaction survey and solicitation of input, discussion of additional multiple dock sites to accommodate more non-abutting properties, and discussion of Pembroke Park. REVIEW: APPLICATION FOR DCAC VACANCY This item was tabled upon adoption of the Agenda. FOR YOUR INFORMATION: 6 Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission October 15, 1998 A) LMCD Information B) POSC Minutes C) City Council Meeting D) Committee of the Whole Minutes (was not a September meeting) Monthly Event Calendar Correction of June 18, 1998 Minutes REPORTS: a) City Council Representative b) Park Director c) Dock Inspector No reports were given. ADJOURN Motion was made by Goldberg, seconded by Hopkins, to adjourn the meeting at 9:23 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. '7 TO: FROM: RF..'. MAYOR, CiTY COUNCIL AND CiTY MANAGER GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR OCTOg'I::R FINANCI= DEPARTMI=NT REPORT Investment Activity Bouqht: Money Market 4M Plus 73,925 Money Market US Bank 110,134 Money Market Norwest 377 CP Smith Barney 5.344% 575,168 Matured: CP (349,357) CP (425,337) CP 5;606% (370,068) CP US Bank 5,338% (424,820) Presentation by Barbara A. Gallo, LMC on Year 2000 Project On October 15 1 attended the semiyearly meeting of the city financial system user group. We spent two hours on the topic of the year 2000 issue. The League of Minnesota Cities has made available to cities an Action Guide on the year 2000. Barbara Gallo guided us through the many issues that the year 2000 will bring to cities. A workshop on the subject is being offered to city officials and staff~ To become compliant we will use the Action Guide extensively and we will implement the plan offered in it as much as possible. We are in the process of taking an inventory of the city's computer hardWare and software, automated equipment and services, contracted services and interfaces. At the same time we are contacting vendors to assess the exposure and to obtain assurances from them. We will continUe with these steps and other steps as needed during the coming year. A short video will be made available to us by The League of Cities and hopefully we will share it with the ·council. City of Mound Monthly Report Utilities Month of: October 1998 Residential Commercial No. of Customers: Water Sewer Water Used: (in 1,000 gallons) Billing: Water Sewer Recycle Payments: Water Sewer Recycle 11/03/1998 Utility-98 Total 1,102 126 1,228 1,111 126 1,237 25,012 3,893 Total 28,905 $39,316 $7,867 $47,183 $67,007 $20,414 $87,421 $6.019 $124 $6.143 $112.342 $28.405 $140.747 $38,257 $5,689 $43,946 $72,959 $15,479 $88,438 $6.212 $99 $6.311 $117.428 $21.267 $138.695 Total CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 MEMOI~AItlDIJM DATE: November 5, 1998 TO: FROM: City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~~ SUBJECT: OCTOBER 1998 MONTHLY REPORT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY There were 60 building permits issued in October for a construction value of $ 708,127. We issued 34 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous permits for a total of 94 permits this month, and 679 permits year-to-date. Total valuation now stands at $ 4,768,447. There was one (1) streamlining permit issued. Three (3) more permits have been issued to repair damage to property due to the storm and high winds that hit on May 15, 1998. PLANNING & ZONING The Planning Commission reviewed Seven (7) cases and sent One (1) variance case, Two (2) Street/Utility vacation cases, One (1) Minor Subdivision case, and One (1) Review of a Conditional Use Permit to the City Council. One case was withdrawn and one variance case was tabled. kl printed on recycled paper City of Mound BUlI~DING ACTIVITY REPORT Month: 0£TORFR Year:, 1998 THIS MONTH , ' ' SINGLE FAMILYDETACHED ] 1 103,800 7 874,38q SINGLE FAMILY A~ACHED (CONDOS) ~O FAMILY / DUPLEX 2 MULT~L~ FAMILY (30~ MO~= UNITS) TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS / MOTELS) SUBTOTAL 1 1 103,800 9 1,558,399 COMME~ClA[ SUBTOTAL LTERAT;ONS SWIMMING POOLS 3 23,717 .~o~ - ~sc .~s,~e.~,~ qq 13q. q39 272 1.180.101 SUBTOTAL 58 554,327 387 2.902.517 COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) 3 50,670 INDUSTRIAL 1 500 .~,c, s~.oo~s ~ 50,000 6 ]56. ]6] SUBTOTAL 1 50,0O0 ]~ 2] ~. 05] RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS 1 2,300 3ON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 2 l, 200 ToT~t .~ouT,o.s 3 3,500 ~ PERMITS t UNITS VALUATION t UNITS VALUATION 60 TOTAl. PERMIT COUNT YEAR-TO-DATE 'BUILDING 6Q 41 ~) FENCES & RETAINING WALLS ~) ~. ] s,G.s 0 8 PLUMBING 11 115 MECHANICAL 14 95 GRADING 0 3 S&W, STREET EXCAV., FIRE, ETC. 7 25 TOTAL Iq4 I R7Q GENERAL PERMIT REPORT FOR MONTH OF OCTOBER 1998 MONTH YEAR DAY PERMIT# ADDRESS CONTRACTOR PERMIT TYPE OCT 98 7 4095 SETON BLUFF OCT 98 7 4097 2121 COMMERCE BLVD OCT 98 20 4'10'1 NORWOOD LN OCT 98 1 4103 5080 WINDSOR RD OCT 98 6 4104 5514 SPRUCE RD OCT 98 7 4105 4510 WILSHIRE BLVD OCT 98 8 4106 3077-3081 DUNDEE LN OCT 98 9 4107 4686 ISLAND VIEW DR OCT 98 13 4108 5963 IDLEWOOD DR OCT 98 13 4109 6460 BAY RIDGE RD OCT 98 14 4111 5621 BARTLETT BLVD OCT 98 15 4112 1916 SHOREWOOD LN OCT 98 16 4113 2929 WESTEDGE BLVD OCT 98 20 4114 5448 SPRUCE RD OCT 98 20 4115 6460 BAY RIDGE RD OCT 98 21 4116 4590 DENBIGH OCT 98 21 .4117 4949 THREE POINTS BLVD OCT 98 21 4118 2301 FAIRVIEW LN OCT 98 21 4119 5116 TUXEDO BLVD OCT 98 21 4120 4858 EDGEWATER DR OCT 98 21 4121 3152 ALEXANDER LN OCT 98 21 4122 1704 EAGLE LN OCT 98 22 4123 1642 HERON LN OCT 98 26 4124 5628 BARTLETT BLVD OCT 98 29 4125 5502 SHORELINE BLVD OCT 98 29 4126 4996 MANCHESTER RD OCT 98 29 4127 3098 ALEXANDER LN OCT 98 29 4128 4773 ABERDEEN RD OCT 98 29 4129 5080 WINDSOR RD MINNEGASCO GRINNELL FIRE PROTECT MINNEGASCO KINGSWAY MECH PAT BRICKLEY RIDGEDALE PLUMB ROARK PLUMBING S T PLUMB & HEAT DEPENDABLE INDOOR STEINKRAUS PRACTICAL SYSTEMS COUNTRYSIDE SERV CURTIS BERG CUSTOM PLUMB STEINKRAUS PRACTICAL SYSTEMS PRACTICAL SYSTEMS SUPERIOR CONTRACT JIM MERCHANT HOLZER P & H CONRAD STARR ADAM HAWKINSON WESTONKA S & W CUSTOM PLUMBING ENERGY ECONOMICS ENERGY ECONOMICS NORBLOM PLUMBING TIM HENDRICKSON KINGSWAY MECH ST EXCAV FIRE/SPRIKLERS ST EXCAV PLUMB/MECH MECH PLUMB MECH PLUMB MECH PLUMB MECH MECH MECH PLUMB PLUMB MECH MECH MECH MECH PLUMB/MECH MECH PLUMB/MECH S & W DISCONN PLUMB ST EXCAV ST EXCAV PLUMB PLUMB S & W CONNECT -r' I-. 0 Z §§~oC~§ o.o~oooo.., oo.ooooo.- ~ ~ 8 0 < -- ~ ~ ~ 0 z z 0 o - ~ o z ~ ~ o _ -- ~ --~ ~ o ~ ~ o ° ~ ~ o~ ~~ o~ ~ ~ o 0~0 -- ~ O0 ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o ~ ~ ~ o ~ o w ~ ~ z ~z ~ ~ o~ z ~ ~ ~ 0000000000000000000000000000000000000 k141 2- 'l- z 0 0 n Z -J ill z 0 0 zd ~ -- 0 u_' · 'i- I.~ '~ ,,~, 0 z 0 .-J cu '~' 0 o o,,, 0 O-r ~ ~'~n, 0 o ~. u.I IZ 0 z -- rF ww~ww ~ Z ~ ~° ~ zo~ z o o 5~~ o~§~ z 0000000000000000©000000000 LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ed Shukle Chief Len Harrell Monthly Report for October, 1998 The police department responded to 1,263 calls for service during the month of October. There were 44..Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included 2 criminal sexual conducts, 1 robbery, 1 aggravated assaulted, 9 burglaries, 30 larcenies, and 1 vehicle theft. There were 72 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 child abuse/neglect, 2 forgery, 3 narcotics, 10 damage to property, 13 liquor law violations, 6 DUI's, 8 simple assaults, 6 domestics (2 with assaults), 4 harassment, 8 juvenile status, and 11 other offenses. The patrol division issued 104 adult and 9 juvenile citations. Parking violations accounted for an additional 9 tickets. Warnings were issued to 110 individuals for a variety of violations. There were 2 adults and 6 juveniles arrested for felonies. There were 28 adults and 47 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There was 1 felony and an additional 5 misdemeanor warrant arrests. The departraent assisted in 11 vehicle accidents, 2with injuries. There were 23 medical emergencies and 47 animal complaints. Mound assisted other agencies on 11 occasions in October and requested assistance 4 times. Property valued at $32,092 was stolen in October and $20,274 was recovered. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - October, 1998 HI. INVESTIGATIONS The investigators worked on 1 criminal sexual conduct case and 5 child protection issues accounting for 47 hours of investigative time. Other cases included assault, burglary, terroristic threats, damage to properly, forgery, NSF checks, theft, harassment, and absenting. Formal complaints were issued for false imprisonment and terroristic threats, 5th degree assault, sale of alcohol to minor, 1st degree criminal damage to property, theft by swindle, illegal waste collection, alter shoreline without permit, and dog at large. Personnel/Staffirlg The department used approximately 45 hours of overtime during the month of October. Officers used 29 hours of comp-time, 51 hours of vacation, 49 hours of sick time, and 8 holidays. Officers earned 31 hours of comp time. Several officers attended a one day mandatory training course through PTAC, all officers attended FATS (situational shooting decisions), and defensive tactics in October. Two officers attended a course on conflict resolution, two attended a course on school violence prevention, and two continue to attend the Wilson Supervisory Leadership course. I attended the International Chiefs of Police Conference in Salt Lake City. I attended my committee meeting for Community Policing and also a meeting on training for police. I attended the general sessions where the featured speakers Atty. Gen. Janet Reno and FBI Director Louis Freeh. Seminars attended included: Constitutional Law and Recent Supreme Court Decisions Community Policing Problem-Solving School Violence Prevention 7 Habits of Implementing Community Policing 21 st C.t~ntury Leadership Police Executive Researoh Forum, discussion & d~bat~ Sex, Lies, and Video Tape-Internal Affairs Issues Survival for Police Chiefs Computex Crime: Seizing the Evidence The Disgruntled & Malcontent Employee Your Department's Ethics and Image V. COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICERS Officers Holzerland and Piper addressed 25 animal complaints, 48 ordinance violations, and 117 miscellaneous calls for services. Four citations were issued. The reserves donated 84 hours to the community and the department in the month of October. The unit currently has seven members. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 1998 OFFENSES CLEARED EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED REPORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARED ARREST ADULT JTJV PART I CRIMES Homicide Criminal Sexual Conduct Robbery Aggravated Assault Burglary Larceny Vehicle Theft Arson 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 30 1 1 2 2 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PART II CRIMES Child Abuse/Neglect 1 Forgery/NSF Checks 2 Criminal Damage to Property 10 Weapons 0 Narcotic Laws 3 Liquor Laws 13 DWI 6 Simple Assault 8 Domestic Assault 4 Domestic (No Assault) 2 Harassment 4 Juvenile Status Offenses 8 Public Peace 2 Trespassing 0 All Other Offenses 9 44 2 3 4 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 3 0 0 13 12 6 0 0 6 6 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 31 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 1 TOTAL 72 0 10 38 28 47 PART II & PART Property Damage Accidents 9 Personal Injury Accidents 2 Fatal Accidents 0 Medicals 23 Animal Complaints 47 Mutual Aid 19 Other General Investigations 1,041 TOTAL 1,141 HCCP 5 Inspections 1 TOTAL 1,263 13 42 30 53 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT OCTOBER 1998 GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY THIS YEAR TO LAST YEAR MONTH DATE TO DATE Hazardous Citations 53 Non-Hazardous Citations 49 Hazardous Warnings 18 Non-Hazardous Warnings 43 Verbal Warnings 60 Parking Citations 9 DWI 6 Over .10 5 Property Damage Accidents 9 Personal Injury Accidents 2 Fatal Accidents 0 Adult Felony Arrests 3 Adult Misdemeanor Arrests 33 Juvenile Felony Arrests 6 Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests 47 Part I Offenses 44 Part II Offenses 72 Medicals 23 Animal Complaints 47 Ordinance Violations 48 Other Public Contacts 1,041 535 451 161 414 774 289 60 40 75 29 0 22 339 57 205 329 657 287 560 383 8,436 781 683 205 581 809 492 79 65 70 35 0 41 368 35 177 245 689 261 557 275 7,681 TOTAL 1,618 14,103 14,129 Assists 48 531 603 Follow-Ups 80 714 503 HCCP 5 64 33 Mutual Aid Given 11 158 156 Mural Aid Requested 4 58 88 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 1998 DWI More Than .10% BAC Careless/Reckless Driving Driving After Susp. or Rev. Open Bottle Speeding No DL or Expired DL Restriction on DL Improper, Expired or No Plates Stop Arm Violations Stop Sign Violations Failure to Yield Equipment Violations H&R Leaving the Scene No Insurance Illegal or Unsafe Turn Over the Centerline Parking Violations Crosswalk Dog Ordinances Code Enforcement Seat Belt Overweight Vehicles Miscellaneous Tags TOTAL 6 5 0 9 0 40 1 0 21 0 1 0 0 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 1998 Insurance Traffic Equipment Crosswalk Animals Trash/Derelict Autos Seat Belt Trespassing Window Tint Miscellaneous TOTAL WARRANT ARRESTS Felony Misdemeanor 32 16 19 0 0 17 0 0 0 13 97 3 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 0 0 Run: 3-Nov-98 10:48 PRO03 Primary ISN's only: No ~-~e Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 i Activity codes: All Property Status: All Property Types: All Property Descs: All Brands: All Models: All Officers/Badges: Ail Prop Prop ~p Desc Inc no MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Property Report STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED ISN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen Date Recov'd Quantity Act SN Stat Stolen Value Recov'd Value Code Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Prop type Totals: Report Totals: 20,000 20,000 1.000 700 0 3.000 135 0 2.000 83 0 4.000 260 0 1.000 48 0 1.000 ~ 210 0 1.000 306 30 9.000 4,045 0 5.000 1,710 0 2.000 3,742 0 11.000 85 0 1.000 335 0 1.000 433 244 12.000 32,092 20,274 54.000 Brand Model Page Off-1 Off-2 Assnd Assnd Run: 3-Nov-98 12:24 CFS08 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/2~/98 - 10/25/98 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Res~lted: All Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: Ail Grids: All Patrol Areas: All Days of the week: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS 9000 SPEEDING 40 9001 J-SPEEDING 9 9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 1 9014 STOP SIGN 1 9022 EXHIBITION DRIVING 2 9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 2 9040 NO SEATBELT 2 9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 8 9150 NO TRAILER PARKING 1 9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 9 9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 21 9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 9 9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE 3 9253 STOP ARM VIOLATION/NO TICKET 1 9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 3 9313 FOUND PROPERTY 11 9315 UNCLAIME DESTROYED ANIMALS 2 9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 2 9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 9 9564 DOG BARKING 1 9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS 1 9710 MEDICAL/ASU i Page Run: 3-Nov-98 12:24 CFS08 Primary ISN's only: NO Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 /'~e range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: Ail Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: All Grids ~ All Patrol Areas: All Days of the week: Ail MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS 9730 MEDICALS 19 9732 MEDICALS/CI 3 9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED 6 9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT 2 9810 LOITERING/LURKING 5 9900 ALL HCCP CASES 5 9904 OPEN DOOR/ALARMS ~y20 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 1 9921 INSPECTIONS CITATION 2 9930 HANDGUN APPLICATION 10 9931 HANDGUN DENIALS 1 9933 RESTRAINING ORDER ON FILE 3 9945 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 3 9950 INFO/INT 1 9980 WARRA~S 6 9992 MUTUAL AID/8100 11 9993 MUTUAL AID/6500 6 9994 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 2 A2335 ASLT 2-INFLICTS BODILY HARM-ICNIFE ETC-CHLD-ACQ 1 /~--'~57 ASLT 4-FE-INFLICTS BOD HARM-HANDS ETC-POLICE 1 A5351 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM 1 A5355 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-C~LD-ACQ 2 BY ACTIVITY CODE Page Run: 3-Nov-98 12:24 CFS08 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: Ail Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All Patrol Areas: Ail Days of the week: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS A5356 ASLT 5~MS-INFLICT BD HRM-IJJ%NDS-CHLD-S~ A5455 ASLT 5-MS-FEARBOD HRM-HANDS-ETC-C~LD-ACQ A5505 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY ~ARM-NO WEAP-CHLD-ACQ A5542 ASLT 5-T~RT BODILY HARM-OTH WEAP-ADLT-ACQ A5543 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-OTH WEAP~ADLT-ST~ AL351 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM AL352 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY ~M-H~DS-ADLT-AC AL442 DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY )QkRM-OTH WEAP-AD-ACQ B1264 BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN WEAP-COM THEFT B3364 BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-N-UNK WEA/~-COM THEFT B3464 BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT B3494 BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT B3694 BURG 3-OCC NRES NO FRC-U-UN1( I~F~AP-COM ~ B3764 BURG 3-UNOCC NILES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT B4990 BURG 4-AT FRC RES-U-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT DA540 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK I3060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD J2501 TRAFF-C.M-DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJ-UNK VEH J2E01 TRAF-ACC-(~4-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV J2U01 0.20 OR MOPE BAC J3501 TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE 94 .9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 Page Run: 3-Nov-98 12:24 CFS08 Primary ZSN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 ~ range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All Patrol Areas: All Days of the week: All ACTZVI~"f CODE DESCRIPTION MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT AI~YSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ,/~001 ~'~3005 M4106 M4140 M5313 M5350 Plll0 P3110 P3120 R3155 ~ 11 NUMBER OF INCIDENTS J3E01 TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 3 J6501 ENq{ANCED/DWI W/IN 10 YRS OF FIRST 2 PRI/ALCOHO 1 J6R01 ENq{ GMD DWI - REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO TEST - MV 1 K5552 FALSE IMPRISON-INTENT CONFIN-HA.NDS-ADLT-ACQ 1 L1073 CSC 1-UNKACT~ACQUAINT-13-15 YR-F 1 L1B41 CSC I~CONTACT-OTH FAMILY-UND AGE~13-F 1 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER 3 JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO 2 LIQUOR-PROCI/RING LIQUOR FOR A MINOR 1 LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 3 JUVENILE-CURFEW 3 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 3 N3030 DIS~//RB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CON-DUCT 2 N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING CO~u'NICATiONS 4 N3380 VIOLATION OF HA/~ASSMENT P~ESTRAINING ORDER 1 PROP DAMAGE-FE-PRIVATE-UNq( INStaNT 3 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 6 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT 1 ROBB-SIMPLE-HIGHWAY-STRONGARM-CHiLD_ACQ 1 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-BUSINESS FNDS-MONEY 1 TB169 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-WATERCR~-OTH PROP 1 TC159 THEPT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP I Page Run: 3-Nov-98 12:24 CFS08 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: Ail Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All Patrol Areas: All Days of the week: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS TF025 TF029 TF159 TG021 TG029 THEFT-201-500-GM-BUILDING-FIP-EARMS THEFT-201-500-GM-BUILDING-OTH PROP THEPT-201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP THEFT-LESS 200-MS~BUILDING-MONEY THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-OTH PROP TG039 T}{EFT-LESS 200-MS-COIN MACH-OT}{ PROP TG069 TG151 TG159 U2497 U3028 U3288 U3498 VA021 X2200 X3080 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY T~EFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR lrER-OTHER THEFT-GM-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 THEFT-MS-ISSU~ WORTHLESS C"AECK-200 OR LESS THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS THEFT-FE-AUTO-MORE T~L~N 2500 CRIM AGNSTADMJUST-GM-GIVE FLEE NAM-POL CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-OBST LEGAL PROCESS 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 5 8 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 Report Totals: 336 Page Run: 3-Nov-98 9:48 OFF01 Primary ISN's only: NO Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 ff~,e range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 - Dispositions: All Activity codes: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All ACT ACTIVITY CODE DESCRIPTION A2335 ASLT 2-INFLICTS BODILY HARM-KNIFE ETC-CHLD-ACQ A4357 ASLT 4-FE-INFLICTS BOD HARM-HANDS ETC-POLICE A5351 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICTATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM A5355 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-STR ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-HANDS-ETC-CI~LD-ACQ ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-CHLD-ACQ ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-OTH WEAP-ADLT-ACQ ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-OTH WEAP-ADLT-STR DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-HNDS-ADLT-AC DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM~OTH WEAP-AD-ACQ BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM T~I~FT BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 3-OCC NRES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM TI{~ BURG 3-UNOCC NRES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 4-AT FRC RES-U-UNK WEAP-13NK ACT DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 13060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECTOF A CHILD J2501 TRAFF-GM-DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJ-UNK VEl{ A5356 A5455 A5505 A5542 a3 AL351 AL352 AL442 B1264 B3364 B3464 B3494 B3694 B3764 B4990 DA540 /-~00 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS Page ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT REPORTED POUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED i 0 i 0 i 0 0 1 100.0 i 0 1 0 i 0 0 i 100.0 i 0 i 0 0 i 0 I 100.0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 100.0 I 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 I 0 0 0 1 i 100.0 i 0 I 0 0 0 I i 100.0 i 0 i 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 i 0 1 0 0 i 0 I 100.0 I 0 I I 0 0 0 0 0.0 I 0 i 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 i 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0 i 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0 I 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0.0 i 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0.0 I 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0.0 I 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0 i 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 i 0 1 0 i 0 0 i 100.0 2 0 2 0 I I 0 2 100.0 i 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0 Run: 3-Nov-98 9:48 OFF01 Page 2 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 Dispositions: All Activity codes: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING J2E01 J2U01 J3501 J3E01 J6501 J6R01 K5552 L1073 L1B41 M3001 M3005 TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 0.20 OR MORE BAC TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV ENHANCED/DWI W/IN 10 YRS OF FIRST 2 PRI//kLCOHO ENH GMD DWI - REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO TEST - MV FALSE IMPRISON-INTENT CONFIN-HANDS-ADLT-ACQ CSC 1-UNK ACT-ACQUAINT-13-15 YR-F CSC 1-CONTACT-OTH FAMILY-UNDAGE-13-F JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO M4106 LIQUOR-PROCURING LIQUOR FOR A MINOR M4140 LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 M5313 JUVeNILE-CURFEW M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY N3030 DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COI~JNICATIONS N3380 VIOLATION OF HARASSMENT RESTI~INING ORDER Plll0 PROP DAMAGE-FE-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT P3120 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT R3155 ROBB-SIMPLE-HIGHWAY-STRONGARM-CHILD-ACQ TBlll THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-BUSINESS FNDS-MONEY ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 10 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 66.6 100.0 0.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 100.0 0.0 Run: 3-Nov-98 9:~8 OFF01 Primary ISN's only: NO Date Reported range: 09/26/98 - 10/25/98 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 ' Dispositions: All Activity codes: Ail Officers/Badges: All Grids: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVI~ DISPOSITIONS Page 3 ACT ACTIVITY ..... OFFENSES CLEARED CODE DESCRIPTI6N OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED TB169 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-WATERCPJ~FT-OTH PROP 1 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0 TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP I 0 I i 0 0 0 0 0.0 TF025 THEFT-201-500-GM-BUILDING-FIRF_J%RMS i 0 i 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 TF029 THEFT~201-500-GM-BUILDING-OTE PROP i 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 TF159 THEFT~201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTE PROP 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0.0 TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY 1 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0.0 TG029 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-OTH PROP 2 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 50.0 TG/39 THEFT-LESS 200~MS-COIN MACH-OTH PROP i 0 I 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 ~ 9 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0 TG151 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY 5 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0.0 TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OT~ER 8 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0.0 U2497 THEFT-GM-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 i 0 I I 0 0 0 0 0.0 U3028 THEFT-MS-ISSUE WORTHLESS CHECK-200 OR LESS 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 100.0 U3288 TEEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS i 0 i 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 U3498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS i 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 VA021 THEFT-FE-AUTO-MORE THAN 2500 i 0 i 0 0 0 1 1 100.0 ×2200 CRIM AGNST ADM 0~3ST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL i 0 i 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 ×3080 CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-OBST LEGAL PROCESS I 0 i 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 Report Totals: 109 2 107 52 24 18 13 55 51.4 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 To: Mayor, City Council and City Manager From: Joel Krumm, Liquor Store Manager Date: November 2, 1998 Re: October 1998, Monthly Report When the month began I was a little bit nervous about simply equaling the sales of October, 1997. When I looked back a year ago I saw that we had a huge month. Sales were $144,102.00. I felt that to duplicate those numbers would be a feat in itself. To surpass them would be out of the question. Well lo and behold when the dust finally settled we ended up $14,280.00 ahead of October of last year. How this could possibly happen, I don't know. I'll take it though. It used to be that when Labor Day was over things really died around here. We used to be able to count on September and October as being months that we could depend upon relaxing and resting up for until the big holiday rush. Not so any more. The upswing in sales begins in April and goes through the November and December holidays right up until Super Bowl in late January. Then we have February and March to sit back. But who knows. Perhaps in the near future February and March will for sake us and the madness will be a yearly cycle. printed on recycled paper RECEIVE OCT MINUTES OF THE QUARTERLY MEETING OF THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY October 21, 1998 Pursuant to due call and notice, the quarterly meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at the Burnsville City Hall, Burnsville, Minnesota on October 21, 1998, commencing at 4:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair, Jim Gates. 2. ROLL CALL: Bloomington Bumsville Columbia Heights Edina Fridley Hopkins Lauderdale Mound Savage West St. Paul Jim Gates and Charles Honchell Steve O'Malley and C_harlie Crichton Kevin Hansen John Wallin John Haukaas Jim Gessele Rick Gatschow Mark Hanus Dave Hulton Skip Stefaniak Also present was general counsel, Jim Strommen, of Kennedy & Graven. It was determined that a quorum of the members was present. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Minutes were of the July 15, 1998, Quarterly Meeting were approved by motion of Mr. Hanus, seconded by Mr. Hansen. The motion passed unanimously. As a quorum of the votes necessary to conduct business was not present at the July meeting, acts taken by the committee the whole in July were ratified at the October meeting. The fa'st was ratification of the approval of the budget for 1999. Mr. O'Malley moved to ratify the 1999 budget, and Mr. Hansen seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Hanus moved to ratify payment of the claims, and Mr. O'Malley seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 4. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: Mr. Wallin reported on the financial status of the SRA as of September 30, 1998. (Report attached). Mr. Wallin was authorized to contact the two member cities that had yet to pay their second half assessments. The issue of Medina's nonpayment for 1998 was discussed. Medina had served notice that it would withdraw as of 1999 but was still obligated to pay its assessment for 1998 under SRA Bylaws. Notwithstanding the Bylaw requirements, the Board moved to notify Medina that the assessment obligation was waived for 1998 and will be written off the books as a receivable. This motion was brought by JMS-152194 SU160-3 Mr. O'Malley and seconded by Mr. Gates, which passed unanimously. Counsel for the SRA was directed to send a letter to Medina to that effect. It was noted that the financial health of the SRA was good and the organization was on budget going into 1999. Mr. Gates moved to accept the report. Mr. Gessele seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 5. US WEST GENERIC COST PROCEEDING: Mr. Strommen reported on the status of this PUC proceeding where the actual cost of facilities to serve US West customers in various locations throughout Minnesota is being determined. This has been a complex, often delayed and hotly contested case. The SRA has opted to monitor the case only because of the great expense. The administrative law judge is scheduled to issue a report on the averaged cost of wholesale service to US West customers. The argued cost ranges from a low of $12.50 per month by AT&T to a high of $23 by US West. The prediction is that a wholesale cost in the range of $18 per month will be recommended by the ALI. This is an averaged cost. It is likely that the actual cost of service to most SRA members is lower because of the dense population and its effect on lowering cost of service. In a later proceeding and after a Universal Service Fund is established at both the Federal and State levels, the deaveraging of costs and retail rates will be taken up by the PUC. At that point the actual retail cost of telephone service will be established for purposes of possible retail rates. 6. US WEST ALTERNATIVE REGULATION PLAN: Mr. Strommen reported that the SRA, US West and several other parties agreed on language in a proposed 5 year plan of capped local service rates for US West customers. The proposal would have reduced i:esidential ' rates for SRA-member residential customers by .77 a month and business customers by up to $3 a month. Significantly, the SRA obtained agreement from US West not to attempt to pass right- of-way management costs through to municipal residents as a line item on the US West bill. The PUC accepted those provisions but made other modifications to the Plan that may or may not be accepted by US West. Comments are to be made at the end of October. At that time US West will determined whether to go forward with the Commission-modified Plan (which includes greater supervision over US West) or withdraw the Plan. If US West withdraws the Plan it may file a rate case. 7. ELECTRIC UNDERGROUNDING: Mr. Strommen reported on the status of municipal rights and undergrounding of electric facilities in the right-of-way. Mr. Strommen reported that the NSP v. City of Oakdale, case is before the Court of Appeals. It has been fully briefed. It will be argued in November and decided by early 1999. At stake is the right of municipalities to require electric undergrounding and potentially not be required to reimburse the electric utility for the undergrounding. It is within the authority the PUC, however, to charge back increased rates for location specific higher costs against customers living within a city requiring undergrounding. The electric and telecom utilities are watching this case closely and seek to have limits placed on a city's right to require undergrounding and require the utility to bear the initial expense, without PUC intervention. IMS-152194 sm6o-3 2 8. ROW UTILITY USE RULEMAKING: Mr. Strommen reported on the current status of the Commission rulemaking proceeding establishing uniform standards for utility use in right-of-way other than state trunk highways. Mr. Strommen reported that the PUC recently met and adopted proposed rules (copies were provided at the meeting and are available upon request). In general, the Commission exercised broad authority to establish roles on most ROW use issues, including fees. It also exercised jurisdiction over gas, electric and cable companies through rules, subject to franchise agreements that may be in effect at any time~ There is a serious question regarding the intent of the 1997 ROW legislation and Commission authority. Mr. Strommen reported and the Board members recall the stated intent of the legislation was to retain management control in the hands of local government units. The structure asserted by the Commission is more statewide rule oriented with Commission review authority over utility-municipality disputes. This is new jurisdiction by the Commission, if it is upheld. It is likely that the scope of rules will be challenged both as to the types of subject matter made part of the roles (e.g., fees) and the inclusion of gas, electric _and cable utilities. According to projected schedules, the rules may be finally adopted on March 1999. There are a number of consensus rules. The narrowing of authority of municipalities in the rules would fall more in the gas and electric area in which municipalities now enjoy the broadest right- of-way police powers. The provisions on telecoms are generally new and needed clarifications of ROW rights and responsibilities. The Board moved to authorize continued SRA participation in this process, by motion of Mr. Gates, seconded by Mr. Hanus. The motion passed unanimously. (A copy of the ROW rules memo is attached to these minutes). 9. LOCATION OF ANNUAL MEETING; GUEST: Discussion was held regarding the location of the next meeting and possible guests. Two guest candidates were discussed. It was agreed that we would first contact the Public Utilities Commission and invite one or more of the Commissioners to attend. If that were not possible we would contact the League regarding possible industry representatives to discuss the status of electric deregulation. Mr. Gessele offered to investigate the possibility of holding the annual meeting at the new Hopkins Art Center. Mr. Gessele has since confirmed that the Hopkins Art Center is available for the annual meeting, including a tour of the facility. This will provide a very interesting site for the annual meeting. All Board delegates and available electric representatives from SRA members are urged to attend this annual meeting. The Hopkins Art Center will provide a festive location and if the Public Utilities Commission agrees to allow a Commission to attend, the SRA will want to ensure a high level of participation. 10. CLAIMS: Kennedy & Graven submitted a claim for $17,047.96. Also included in claims were $975 payable to George M. Hansen Company, auditors of the SRA. Mr. Gates moved to accept the claims and Mr. Hansen seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. JMS-152194 . sm6o-3 3 11. ADJORNMENT: Attachments: ROW Rules Memorandum SRA financial statement Statement of Financial Position At 5:30 p.m. the meeting was adjourned. JMS-152194 4 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY ANALYSIS OF CHANGE IN CASH BAIJ~NCE FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 Balance at January 1 Additions: Interest income Insurance Rebate Special Assessments -See attached schedule 1998 10,754.93 20.66 0.00 73,400.00 Total Additions $ 73,420.66 $ 84,175.59 Deductions: Kennedy & Graven - services $ 43,598.00 Kennedy & Graven - costs 3,426.09 Chesapeake Regulatory - services 0.00 Chesapeake Regulatory - costs 0.00 LMCIT -insurance 949.00 Audit 0.00 Bank charges 20.31 Dinner - guests 97.33 Total Deductions $ 48,090.73 $ 36,084.86 Balance at September 30 1997 9,638.24 14.45 0.00 68,800.00 68,814.45 78,452.69 36,162.53 3,475.65 3,985.60 14.40 942.00 0.00 0.00 101.72 $ 44,681.90 $ 33,770.79 Note A: The breakdown of legal and expert fees and costs: General $ 7,837.78 $ 22,936.29 U S West 3,112.15 11,536.45 Minnegasco 0.00 1,040.00 Gas Unbundled ~08.00 0.00 Legislative ROW 7,711.07 6,582.98 ROW Task Force 418.50 0.00 Electric Utility Investigation 0.00 283.50 Personal Communications Leases 0.00 189.00 1998 NSP Gas Rate Case 243.00 0.00 612 Area Code Docket 21,608.54 1,069.96 F, AS Agreements 527.05 0.00 Underground Utilities 918.70 0.00 U S West - AFOR 4,539.30 0.00 Total Legal and Expert $ 47,024.09 $ 43,638.18 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY STATUS OF ASSESSMENTS RECEIV~BLE As of September 30, 1998 Birchwood' VOTES ASSESSMENT PAID 1 $ 400.00 $ 400.00 $ BALANCE DUE 0.00 Blaine Bloomington Brooklyn Park Burnsville Circle Pines Columbia Heights Deephaven Eden Prairie Edina Fridley Golden Valley Greenwood Hastings Hopkins Lakeland Lauderdale Long Lake Maple Grove Maple Plain Maplewood Medina Minnetonka Minnetrista Mound New Brighton North St. Paul Orono Osseo Plymouth Robbinsdale Roseville Savage Shakopee Shoreview Spring Park Spring Lake Park St. Louis Park Wayzata West St. Paul Woodbury 8 3,200.00 3,200.00 18 7,200.00 7,200.00 12 . 4,800.00 4,800.00 11 4,400.00 4,400.00 1 400.00 400.00 4 1,600.00 1,600.00 1 400.00 400.00 8 3,200.00 3,200.00 10 4,000.00 4,000.00 6 2,400.00 2,400.00 4 1,600.00 800.00 1 400.00 400.00 4 1,600.00 1,600.00 4 1,600.00 800.00 1 400.00 400.00 1 400.00 400.00 1 400.00 200.00 9 3,600.00 3',600.00 1 400.00 400.00 7 2,800.00 2,800.00 1 400.00 10 4,000.00 4,000.00 1 400.00 400.00. 1 400.00 400.00 5 2,000.00 2,000.00 3 1,200.00 1,200.00 2 800.00 800.00 1 400.00 400.00 11 4,400.00 4,400.00 3 1,200.00 1,200.00 7 2,800.00 2,800.00 2 800.00 800.00 3 1,200.00 1,200.00 5 2,000.00 2,000.00 1 400.00 400.00 1 400.00 400.00 9 3,600.00 3,600.00 1 400.00 400.00 4 1,600.00 1,600.00 5 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 800.00 0.00 0.00 800.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 000 OiO0 0 O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 189 $ 75,600.00 $ 73,400.00 $ 2,200.00 * Has been paid since September 30 MEMORANDUM JAMES M. STROMMEN Attorney at Daw Direct Dial (612) 337-9233 e-mall:jswommen @ kennedy-graven.corn MEMO #4 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: City Managers/Administrators/Directors/Altemates Suburban Rate Authority October 7, 1998 Telecom PUC ROW Rulemaking PUC ACTION There has been a .significant development in this mlemaking procedure establishing ROW management rules for utilities including the ROW, including cities. On September 23-25, the PUC heard arguments regarding the scope of its authority under the 1997 ROW Act and specific rules proposed by the industry and the League of Cities. At this point, the PUC will issue proposed rules for comment and potential adoption in 1999. It is clear that the PUC has asserted broad jurisdiction over all phases of ROW constructior standards and fee structure,. Also, the PUC has interpreted the legislation as allowing the PUC to promulgate rules on construction standards in the ROW for telecoms and gas, electric and cable providers. The PUC agreed that the terms of any existing and future franchise would prevail over any rules, however. This raises a new issue in the negotiation of franchises. When these rules have been promulgated (assuming they are not overturned as being overly broad) they will become part of the negotiation for new franchises. In the absence of a franchise, cities will no longer be empowered with traditional rights to location and relocation in the ROW but will be subject to PUC issued rules on those matters. The League and the SRA expressed their opinions that the PUC was not empowered to assert such broad jurisdiction either over non-telecoms or over so many phases of traditional city ROW management, e.g., location and relocation permit fees. It is possible that these matters will be resolved at the PUC or in the courts during 1999 and 2000. On the other hand, the substance of the rules is yet to be finally determined and may be rules with which the cities can function adequately. The PUC's argument, however, is that uniformity is necessary across the board to ensure adequate competition between and among all utilities. 1997 Telecom PUC Row Rulemaking Page 2 This will be a very important issue at the October meeting and your views on the matter are invited. I will attempt to provide a copy of the proposed roles as soon as they are published. CURRENT IMPACT ON SRA CITIES The ROW management picture becomes ever more complicated as we move through the PUC mlemaking procedure and the PUC asserts broad jurisdiction. The following are points to remember for cities at this point: 1. Cities retain full authority to enact right-of-way management ordinances consistent with the 1997 ROW Act. The PUC has issued no roles yet. Such rules may be appealed, and, a result, not go into effect in 1999. So as of this moment, there is no PUC rule on any issue. If the PUC preliminary position is upheld, the ROW management rules will affect all right-of-way users, including non-telecoms. Franchised utilities such as gas, electric and cable, however, will be governed by the terms and conditions of the franchises on the various affected provisions such as location, relocation, permit fees, abandonment, undergrounding, street vacation requirements, etc. In the absence of a franchise and if the PUC jurisdiction is upheld, PUC rules will govern city ROW management over gas and electric companies. o o o The franchise right over gas, electric and cable, including the right to raise revenue through franchise fees, is not challenged by the proposed rules. Right-of-way management of telecoms by municipalities will largely be controlled by PUC rules unless the PUC's enabling jurisdiction under the 1997 Act is found to be narrower than the PUC has asserted. This will become significant when the PUC roles are finally issued in 1999, probably in June. The PUC assertion of jurisdiction is another preemptive act over cities, in addition to the significant preemption over city zoning rights in wireless telec~otnmunication tower siting matters. It is clear that the industry is gaining some headway in its position that locat government units are barfers to competition, incapable of uniformly and fairly facilitating entry of the new technology in the ROW. JMS-151121 ~$~ SU160-3 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND 1996 GMHCo GEORGE ~/tAMSEN CONIPANY, PA. ,4 Profe~rional Corporation of ~'f'ted Pu~Fta,4c.,~ou.tant; INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT The Board of Directors Suburban Rate Authority Minneapolis, Minnesota We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of the Suburban Rate Authority as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related statements of income, expense and retained earnings, and cash flows for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Authority's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Suburban Rate Authority as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. August 4, 1998 1433 UTICA AVENUE SOUTI-L SUIT~ 260 M:I~IJ~, Iv~OTA 55~16 61~5~5-2566 FAX 61~5a~-7557 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BALANCE SHEETS DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND 1996 Cash Accounts receivable Total assets ASSETS 1997 $ 10,755 LIABILITY AND KETAINED EAKNINGS (DEFICIT) Liability Accounts payable Retained earnings (deficit) - Unreserved Total liability and retained earnings $ 25,499 (14,744) 1996 $ 9,391 247 $ 9.638 $ 12,761 (3,123) See accompanying notes to financial statements. SUBURBAN KATE AUTHORITY. STATEMENTS OF INCOME, EXPENSE AND RETAINED EARNINGS (DEFICIT~ YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31~ 1997 AND 1996 1997 Income Member contributions $ 68,800 Reimbursements Interest earned 27 Total income $ 68,827 1996 $ 65,000 3,300 84 $ 68,384 Expense Legal services $ 71,476 $ 59,904 Kate consultant 7,293 12,867 900 875 Audit 672 697 Insurance 800 Shared costs 107. 246 Other Total expense $ 80,448, $ 75,389 Increase (decrease) in retained earnings $(11,621) (3.123) (14.744) Retained earnings (deficit) January 1 Retained earnings (defiot) December (7,005) 3,882 See accompanying notes to financial statements. SUB--AN RATE AUTHOP~Y STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND 1996 Cash flows from operating activities Cash received from members and others Cash paid for services and to suppliers Interest received Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities Cash January 1 Cash December 31 1997 $ 69,317 (67,980) 27 $ 1,364 9,391 Reconciliation of increase (decrease) in retained earnings to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities Increase (decrease) in retained earnings Adjustments to reconcile increase (decrease) in retained earnings to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (Increase) decrease in accounts receivable Increase (decrease) in accounts payable Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities $ (11,621) 247 12,738 1996 $ 68,300 (87,197) 84 $ (18,813) 28,204 $ 9.391 $ (7,oos) (247) (11,561) $ (18.813~ See accompanying notes to financial statements. 4 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITy NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMBNTS DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND 1996 Note 1 - Organization The Suburban Rate Authority is a state-wide organization, financed by member contributions, to participate on behalf of its members in the regulatory proceedings of the Minnesota Public Service Commission or other rate setting bodies. The Authority was established in accordance with Minnesota Statutes that authorize governmental units to join together to provide services or perform duties that they could do themselves. The Authority is considered a governmental unit, but is not a component unit of any of its members. As a governmental unit the Authority is exempt from Federal and State income taxes. Membership of the Authority consisted of the following municipalities as of December 31, 1997: Birchwood Hopkins Orono Bloomington Lakeland Osseo Brooklyn Park Lauderdale Plymouth Burnsville Long Lake Kobbinsdale Circle Pines Maple Grove Koseville Columbia Heights Maple Plain Savage Deephaven Maplewood St. Louis Park Eden Prairie Medina Shakopee Edina Minnetonka Shoreview Fridley lVfinnetrista Spring Park Golden Valley Mound Spring Lake Park Greenwood New Brighton Wayzata Hastings North St. Paul West St. Paul Woodbury Each member has one vote for each 5,000 population or fraction thereof. Members of the Authority are to make contributions to the Authority if it is determined that such contributions are necessary. The duration of the Authority shall be for a term of three years and thereafter on a year-to-year basis. Upon dissolution, the net assets shall be distributed to the members of the Authority. SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) DECEMBER .31, 1997 AND 1996 Note 2 - Accountin~ Policies The accounting policies of the Suburban Rate Authority conform to generally accepted accounting principles applicable to proprietary funds of governmental entities. The following is a summary of the significant policies: Basis of Accounting - the accrual basis of accounting is followed. Under this basis income is recognized when earned and expenses are recorded as incurred. Comparative Data - Comparative data for the previous year have been presented to provide an understanding of changes in financial position and operations. Note 3 - Cash In accordance with applicable Minnesota Statutes, the Authority maintains deposits at depository banks authorized by the Board. Minnesota Statutes require that all deposits be protected by insurance, surety bond or collateral. If collateral is pledged as protection for the deposits, the market value of the collateral must at a minimum be 110% of the deposits not covered by insurance or bonds (140% in cash of mortgage notes pledged). Cash at December 31, 1997 and 1996 consisted of a checking account and a money market savings account at the designated depository. All funds were fully insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Note 4 - Risk Management Suburban Rate Authority is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts, errors and omissions, etc. The Authority participates in the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) to provide its general liability coverage. LMCIT is a public entity risk pool currently operating as a common risk management and insurance program for participating Minnesota local governmental units. 6 GMHCo GEORGE M. HANSEN COMPANY, P.A. A Profe&xional Corpor_~'__~n ofC.~rd~d PubllcA~ountan~ AUDITORS' REPORT ON LEGAL COMPLIANCE.. The Board of Directors Suburban Kate Authority We have audited the financial statements of the Suburban Kate Authority, as of and for the years ended December 31, 1997 and 1996, and have issued our report thereon dated August 4, 1998. The financial statements are the responsibility of the Authority's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements based on our audits. Our audits were made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the provisions of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Local Government promulgated by the Legal Compliance Task Force pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sec. 6.65. Accordingly, the audits included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Local Government, covers five main categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, and claims and disbursements. Our study included all of the listed categories except public indebtedness since the Authority has no indebtedness. The results of our tests indicate that for the items tested, the Authority complied with the material terms and conditions of applicable legal provisions. Further, for the items not tested, based on our audits and the procedures referred to above, n~ng came to our attention to indicate that the Authority had not complied with such legal provisions. :":': This report is intended solely for the use of the Suburban Kate Authority and should not be used for any other purpose. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this report, which is a matter of public record. August 4, 1998 1433UTICAAVENU~SOUTH, SUrI~260 Mllq'NEAPOLIS, ~OTA 55a16 61~5a6.2566 FAX 61~54a,-7557 Office of City Administrator October 16, 1998 Dear Fellow Law Enforcement Officers: It is with deep appreciation that we extend our thanks for the assistance the members of your department provided to the City of Saint Peter and the Saint Peter Police Department in the days, weeks, and months following the March 29th tornado. Your presence provided our residents with a sense of security they otherwise would not have had following the storm. The people in Saint Peter have experienced extreme sadness and frustration as many struggle to rebuild their lives. The emotional to!l the tornado caused is something that none of us could ever have imagined the day before the tornado and something that we will never forget in the years afterward. And while we suffered major losses, we feel truly blessed because of the wonderful outpouring of support and encouragement we have received from people all over Minnesota and the United States. The contribution each of you have made on behalf of the people of Saint Peter touched the hearts of all of us and we ask that you accept the enclosed certificate of appreciation along with our most heartfelt thanks for the help you have provided Saint Peter. With best wishes for the health and happiness of everyone in your community, SAINT PETER POLICE DEPARTMENT ~. ~zcer Paul Hagen c. cer Chris Nelson Sue Pope Office Support Supervisor Amber Schott Communications Technician Jim Card Communications Technician Sgt. Loren J~nsen Of~r Dav'~.pi_n ~ Officer Bob Mal;t Officer Curt Tuma Amy Filipek Communicatiens Technician ~.. . , Jean ~andland Communications Technician Pilaf Stone C munications T chnicia~ Sgt. Jerry Yushta Offio~e~-G,_.M_M...ork-, ~,'1 ,' Connie Clark Communications Technician Carol Jensen Communications Technician Malinda Meyer Community Service Officer Lisa Boehlke Communications Technician Municipal Building 227 South Front Street · Saint Peter, Minnesota 56082-0270 o 507-931-4840 Fax507-931-4917 Ernergency 931-1550 ~ ~1 WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHE~S, "MARCH 29, 1998 TORNADO" CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION the City of Saint Peter and Nicollet County xvere victhns of a massive tornado on March 29, 1998; and over 2,200 homes suffered structural damage as a result of the tornado; and the entire City electric system was destroyed resulting in no electric service to homes and businesses for up to two weeks following the storm; and debris covered City streets making most streets hnpassable without the use of snow plows and front end loaders; and the large amount of devastation combined with the nmnber of people in town to view the damage or help with cleanup efforts required additional security measures to ensure the safety of residents. employees and volunteers froxn area law enforcement agencies, utility companies, private electric contractors, building inspection deparUnents, street departments, relief agencies, and federal and state emergency management agencies were instrumental in aiding Saint Peter in the days and weeks following the tornado; and these dedicated volunteers went above and beyond the call of duty in their response to the tornado emergency by working side by side with City personnel in an effort to restore a safe and healthy conummity for our citizens; and through the combined efforts of City persounel and these volunteers the City of Saint Peter is successfully recovering and rebuildh~g. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mayor Jerry K._ Hawbaker, do hereby tender this certificate of recognition on behalf of the City Cotmcil and the citizens of Sabot Peter and surrounding areas to the MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT in appreciation for outstanding service and dedication to protecting the citizens of our community following the March 29, 1998 tornado. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Saint Peter to be affixed this 16th day of October, 798. Tc~dtydAPjmal~i n~ st rat or Y DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: October 28, 1998 Commissioners Judy Chumley, Deputy Clerk of the Board MEMBER AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS - 1998-1999 ANNUAL LIST As required under the Open Appointment policy, attached is the Annual List of Member-At-Lar9e Appointments that terms are due to expire. Vacancies are due to be announced shortly, with a closin9 date of December 31, 1998, and interviews to take place sometime in January, 1999. Please note that the Watershed District.Boards will not be part of this annual round, as they are the exception and will be announced later. Attach: cc: Jeff Spartz, County Administrator Bob Hanson, General Services Kay Mitchell, Clerk of the Board Barb, Keske, TEA Bill Brumfield, TEA Gary Van Beusekom, TEA Dulcie Ha~edorn, Plannin~ & Development Sharon Johnson, CASH BD Sue Zuidema, Community Health Jim Mara, Community Health Pat O'Connor, Taxpayer Svs David Hough, County Attorney Duane Stanley,.Commitment Defense Project Bill Meronek, Commitment Defense~Project Charles Brown, Library Cindy Ahrens, Library Harvey Linder, Family & Children Svs Laurie Kaye, Family & Children Svs Phil Eckhert, Environmental Svs Joel Settles, Envionmental Svs Rafe Viscasillas, Human Resources Luanne Laurents, Human Resources MEMBER AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS - 1998-1999 ANNUAL LIST - Page 2 cc: continued Don Koverman, Director County Extension Service 1525 Glenwood Ave No Minneapolis, MN 55405 Douglas Bryant, Superintendent Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District 12615 County Rd 9 Plymouth, MN 55441 Mental Health Association of MN 2021 E. Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN 55413 Citizens League 708 South 3~ Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55415 H. C. League of Women Voters 81 So. 9tn Street, Suite 335 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Ronald Harnack, Water & Soil Resources Bd Louis Smith, Esq., M'haha Creek Ray Haik, Esq., Nine Mile Creek Paul Haik, Esq., Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Various Municipalities (Watershed Districts) (Judy Nally, City Golden Valley) (City of Eden Prairie Mgr.) & Joyce Provo World Web (H.C.) - Stephanie McNamara Carolyn Marinan, Public Affairs Tom Hayes, Public Affairs Laurie Kleven, Public Affairs 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 0 o Bob Schmidt 4708 Island view dr Mound, MN 55364 11-4-98 To: Jim Fackler, Park Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound, MN 55364 Jim, I would like to apply for the vacant seat on the Dock and Commons commission. I moved to Mound in 1987 and have been a non-abutting dock site holder at the Devon commons since then. I have lived on Lake Minnetonka for 35 years, so I have a good knowledge of how the lake has evolved over the years. I have enjoyed the benefits of the commons program and want to contribute towards its future. Thank you, Bob Schmidt 472-3860 home 931-5876 work Greg Eurich 5585 Sherwood Drive Mound, MN 55364 October 26, 1998 RECEIVED OCT 2 § lggO City Offices 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 To the City of Mound: Please consider me as a candidate for the membership position open on the Mound Dock Commons Commission. My wife, two daughters, and I have lived in Mound since 1995. We moved here from St. Bonifacius, where we resided for 19 years. During that time, I served on the St. Bonifacius Park Board for over three years. We currently hold a commons dock with the City, and have enjoyed the use of a dock for the last three summers. I am a Certified Public Accountant, and am currently employed at Washington Scientific Industries in Long Lake as their Accounting Manager. I would like to assist the City and its representatives in making wise, informed decisions concerning the dock commons program. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, September 27, 1998 City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN. 55364 Please consider my application for the open vacancy on the City of Mound's Dock & Commons Advisory Commission. I am a new resident of the City of Mound, and would like to actively participate and volunteer my time to help the City with recommendations. Please see my attached resume for my work history and background. If you would like a work reference, my current supervisor is a City Councilmember for the City of Shorewood. His name is John Garfunkel and his work number where he can be reached is: 828-8538. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Carl R. Erickson 3087 Alexander Lane Mound, Mn. 55364 472-1956 3087 Alexander Lane CARL ERICKSON · Mound, MN55364 · Telephone (612) 472-1956 CAPABILITIES PROFILE Innovative, multi-faceted professional who will bring to the workplace a positive attitude, a flexible and agile mental character and a strong, broad based skill set. Educated in all phases of business management and will provide leadership that will keep your organiTation at the forefront of the industry. EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS People Management o Developed an effective workforce and increased productivity 36% while reducing turnover 95 %. o Created a strong desire to succeed in subordinates by applying Management by Objectives philosophy. o Increased work quality by creating self-directed work teams within department. Communications o Created written document that established procedures and objectives for work unit. o Effectively builds relationships with a wide range of personnel. o Coordinates essential MIS/Operations functions. o Served as liaison to nationwide vendors. Responsible for the preparation and distribution of reports. Computer Systems 0 0 Extensive use of IBM Mainframe application. Working familiarity with contemporary database and relational marketing techniques including statistical analysis support. Carl R. Erickson page 2 EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE April 1998-Present SUPERVALU- Central Support Analyst 1989-April 1998 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (Benefit Redemption Branch) Contracted by SHEPARD-PATrERSON - Minneapolis, MN Computer Operations Analyst 1986-1989 INTCO TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. - Lakewood, NJ Mechanical Line Supervisor 1981-1985 UNITED STATES NAVY- USS NIMITZ CVN-68 Norfolk, VA 2nd Class Petty Officer EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA - Minneapolis, Minnesota Carlson School of Management 1992-1997 B.S.B. in Business Management Jack Collins Memorial Scholarship Recipient Deans List BRICK COMPUTER SCIENCE INSTITUTE - Brick, NJ Certified Computer Programmer 1988 PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Minnesota Association of Urban Management Assistants International City/County Management Association 5852 Idlewood Rd Mound, MN 55364 (612) 472-7783 11/04/98 Members, City of Mound Docks and Commons Commission, I am applying for the open position on the Docks and Commons Commission. I have been a ten year resident of Mound with a deep interest in the future growth and development of our community. I have been an avid user of Lake Minnetonka for over eighteen years, having fished and boated exclusively on this lake. I am also an active member of the United States Power Squadron, Lake Minnetonka Chapter. Since I trailer my boat I have not required the use of the dock program, however, I am planning a significant equipment upgrade in the near future which would make trailering prohibitive and docking an imperative. My education background is in municipal planning, development and public administration. I feel that this background, in addition to my commitment to our community and to the development of Lake Minnetonka would make me an asset to the commission. Gregory A. Neubert Gregory A. Neubert 5852 Idlewood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Telephone: (612) 472-7783 OBJEC____TIVE: STRENGTH___~S: ABILI__TIES: ~DUCATION: WORK ~XPERIENC___~E: Appointment to the City of Mound Docks and Commons Commission. Aggressive, assertive, goal oriented professional with background education in public affairs, public administration, planning and development. Qualified to initiate, develop, organize and administer viable programs, with experience in public and technical environments. Strong verbal and written communication skills. January 1983 to January 1987; ~ of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. GPA: 3.16 September 1982 to December 1983; ~ndiana ~, Purdue. ~, Fort Wayne, Indiana. GPA: 3.57 February 1978 to June 1978; Federa~ Aviation Administratio~ Academy, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. June 1972 to February 1973; United States Naval Air Traffic Control Schools ~ through ~, United States Naval Air Station, Glynco, Georgia. November 1988 to present; Holaday Circuits Inc., Minnetonka, Minnesota. Current Positio___ n: Previous Position: Process Engineer. Production Scheduler, Premium Time Expediter/Coordinator, Tooling Scheduler/Coordinator. 12/93 - 10/6/95. Previous Positio___ n: Rework and Repair Technician. 12/93. 11/89 Previous Position: Electrical Test and Repair Technician. 11/88 - 1 MILITARY RECORD: ORGANIZATION MEMBERSHIP_______~S: January 1988 to November 1988; Advance Circuits, Minnetonka, Minnesota. Position: Electrical Test and Repair Technician. Other work experience: Retail store manager. Retail sales. Air traffic controller. December 1970 to December 1976. Dranch: United States Marine Corps. Rank: E-4, Corporal. Occupational Specialties: Infantryman (Spec 0ps), Air Traffic Control Specialist, Control Tower Supervisor and Training NCO. Discharge Classification: Honorable. United States Power Squadron, Lake Minnetonka Chapter.