1998-12-08AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 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 NOVEMBER 24, 1998,
REGULAR MEETING ................................... 4586-4592
*B.
RESOLUTION 98-RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION ON CASE 98-64,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE WESTONKA
COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATION PROJECT FOR THE
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR
DECEMBER 22, 1998 ........................................ 4593
*C.
RESOLUTION 98-RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL TO GRANT AN EXTENSION FOR THE COMPLETION
OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1999.
4594-4596
*D. PAYMENT OF BILLS .................................... 4597-4613
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-65: UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION,
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GARAGE,
RICHARD KRYCK, 5986 SUNSET ROAD, PID 14-117-24 42 0065 ............ 4614-4627
APPLICATION FOR AN OPERATIONS PERMIT, WELSH COMPANIES, ON
BEHALF OF TRIAX CABLEVISION, 5308 SHORELINE DRIVE
(BALBOA BUILDING) ........................................ 4628-4638
6. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
APPROVAL OF FINAL 1999 BUDGET AND LEVY. (RF3OLUTION
WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY EVENING PURSUANT TO
TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR
MONDAY EVENING).
4584
o
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
A. Department Head Monthly Reports for November 1998 ................ 4639-4659
Rules of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) adopted on November
24, 1998: ............................................ 4660
Rule B - Erosion Control .............................. 4661-4666
Rule N - Stormwater Management for Land Development Projects ..... 4667-4675
Basically Rule N covers the part of Rule B dealing with stormwater management
ponding. It removes the fee that was charged previously and requires larger
developments to have ponding on the development site. Smaller developments
would not be required to have ponds but would require "Best Management
Practices." Read them over and if you have questions, please contact me ............
REMINDER:
ANNUAL TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR
MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1998, 7:30 P.M. PLEASE BRING YOUR
COPIES OF THE PROPOSED 1999 BUDGET WITH YOU TO THE
MEETING. DEPARTMENT HEADS WILL BE PRESENT TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR BUDGET REQUESTS.
Do
REMINDER:
THERE IS NO COMMITI'EE OF THE WHOLE MEETING ON
DECEMBER 15, 1998. NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR
JANUARY 19, 1999.
REMINDER:
THERE WILL BE A SECOND REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ON
DECEMBER 22, 1998, 7:30 P.M.
REMINDER:
HRA MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8,
1998, 7 P.M., MOUND CITY HALL.
REMINDER:
WCCB MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY,
DECEMBER 17, 1998, 5:30 P.M., MOUND CITY HALL.
Ho
REMINDER:
ANNUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY IS SCHEDULED FOR SUNDAY,
DECEMBER 13, 1998, BEGINNING AT 6:30 P.M., AL & ALMA'S.
PLEASE RSVP TO JODI BY DECEMBER 8.
REMINDER:
CITY OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED FOR THE HOLIDAYS AS
FOLLOWS:
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 24, 1998, 12:00 NOON closed in the afternoon
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 25, 1998, closed all day
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1998, 12:00 NOON closed in the afternoon
FRIDAY, JANUARY 1, 1999, closed all day
4585
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 24, 1998
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, November 24, 1998, at ?:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood
Road, in said City.
Those present were: Acting Mayor Andrea Ahrens, Councilmembers Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen and Leah Weycker. Mayor Bob Polston was absent and excused. Also in attendance
were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Attorney John Dean, City Clerk Fran
Clark Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon and the following interested citizens: Bob &
Anne Hunt, Dale & Lorell Becker, Tim Becker and Councilmember Elect Bob Brown.
The Acting Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge
of Allegiance was recited.
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be ad~d 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.
The City Manager stated he would has and item to add to the Agenda
regarding directing the Planning Commission to look at the fence ordinance
and do a study on it. This will become Item 7.A.
The City Manager advised that the Planning Commission tabled Case//98-64,
the Conditional Use Permit for the Community Center at their meeting last
night. Therefore, this Public Hearing will need to be scheduled for the
December 22nd City Council Meeting, not the December 8th Council Meeting.
Councilmember Weycker asked that the Minutes from November 10, 1998, be
removed from the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Hanus asked to discuss the Public Lands Permit, briefly.
*CONSENT AGENDA
*1.0
MOTION made Jensen, seconded by Hanus to approve the Consent Agenda as
amended above. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 16, 1998, SPECIAL
MEETING. MINUTES WERE DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY EVENING.
MOTION
Ahrens, Hanus, unanimously.
'1.1
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINU'IF.8- NOVF.3tBER 24, 1998
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 17, 1998, COMMITTEE OF
THE WHOLE MEETING. MINUTES WERE DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY
EVENING.
MOTION
Ahrens, Hanus, unanimously.
'1.2
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 98-65, UTILITY EASEMENT
VACATION, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GARAGE,,
RICHARD KRYCK, 5986 SUNSET ROAD, PID 14-117-24 42 0065.
SUGGESTED DATE: DECEMBER 8, 1998,
MOTION
Ahrens, Hanus, unanimously.
'1.3
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 98-64, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, TO
REVIEW THE USE TO ALLOW A BUILDING REMODEL PROJECT TO THE
COMMUNITY CENTER TO INCLUDE RENOVATION OF THE
GYMNASIUM AND AUDITORIUM, ADDITIONAL PARKING AND
CHANGES TO THE SITE ACCESS, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO,
277, 5600 LYNWOOD BLVD., PIDS 14-117-24 41 0010, 14-117-24 41 0011, 14-
117-24 41 0052 & 14-117-24 41 0058. SUGGESTED DATE: DECEMBER 22,
1998.
MOTION
Ahrens, Hanus, unanimously.
'1.4
PAYMENT OF BILLS.
MOTION
Ahrens, Hanus, unanimously.
1.5
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 10, 1998, REGULAR
MEETING.
Councilmember Weycker asked to change one sentence on Page 4466, second
paragraph, last sentence which reads "She would like to see this go back to the POSC for
this." Change to read, "It could go back to the POSC for their review."
MOTION made by Weycker, seconded by Jensen to approve the Minutes of the
November 10, 1998, City Council Meeting, as amended. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.6
MOfJJVD CITY COfJIqCIL MIND'IE~- NOVEMBER 2~, 1998
APPROVE REQUEST FOR A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT TO REGRADE A
PORTION KINGS ROAD AS IT RELATES TO ITS VACATION. 0NOTE:POSC
REVIEWED CASE AT ITS 11/12/98 MEETING AND RECOMMENDS
APPROVAL SUBJECT TO TWO CONDITIONS,
Councilmember Hanus stated that there is no proposed resolution for this item. The POSC
recommended the following:
"Motion made by Casey, seconded by Weycker, to approve a Public Lands
Permit for grading on unimproved Kings Lane, as recommended, with the
following stipulations:
1. Reseed the area after the regrade.
®
Erosion control and/or stabilization measures be taken to avoid any
further encroachment onto public lands.
Motion carried unanimously."
Councilmember Hanus also asked if the Council is acting on this POSC recommendation.
so, he would like to see Item//2 of the recommendation changed in the final resolution to
read as follows: "2. Erosion control and/or stabilization measures be taken, to avoid
any further erosion cncroac~mcnt onto of public lands.
If
The City Attorney stated this language would be added to the resolution.
Hanus moved and Weycker seconded the following resolution, incorporating the above
language:
RESOLUTION 98-129
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS
PERMIT FOR FINE LINE DESIGN, ON A
PORTION OF UNIMPROVED KINGS LANE AT
THE INTERSECTION OF KII.DARE ROAD FOR
GRADING IN CONJUNCTION WITH SETON
BLUFF DRAINAGE POND
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.7
CASE 97-31: VARIANCE CONTINUATION, TO ALLOW AFTER THE FACT
IMPROVEMENTS TO ALLOW STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND
MISCELLANEOUS WORK TO AN EXISTING
NONCONFORMING BEACH HOUSE, ANN & BOB HUNT, 5319
BARTLETT BLVD., LOT 28, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION 70
PID 24-117-24 24 0025. (NOTE: PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDED DENIAL. HANUS MADE A REQUFST AT
THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING THAT THE
ORDINANCE RELATING TO BOATHOUSF~q BE REVIEWEl~
BY THE 'PLANNING COMMISSION).
MO~qD CITY COUNCIL MI2KI'IF~- IqOV~IBER 2~, 1998
Councilmember Hanus stated that he mentioned this to the Council at the Committee of the
Whole Meeting November 17th. At the COW Meeting he misspoke when he said it was
tabled at the Planning Commission, because they wanted to review this ordinance before
acting on this case. He reconfirmed with the Planning Commission last night that was their
intention. Hanus stated he has spoken with the Hunts and they are in agreement with
tabling this pending the Planning Commission's review of the ordinance, rather than acting
on a denial tonight. Mr. Hunt was present and agreed.
Councilmember Weycker asked which section of the code is to be reviewed by the Planning
Commission? Councilmember Hanus stated it is the Boathouse/Beach House section of the
code. Councilmember Hanus explained the situation as follows:
There was some work done without a permit and some of it was structural,
(involving replacing some roof rafters and roof sheathing). He stated the
whole roof was re-sheathed and the denial that is in front of the Council now,
for consideration says the building can stay but the roof has to come off which
he feels is absurd. He stated that recognizing the position that everybody,
including the applicant, is in right now, this is an issue that the Planning
Commission needs to look at. It might end up staying the way it is or it might
change, but both the applicant and the Planning Commission agreed that they
need to look at the code because it is not clear enough to know exactly what
should or shouldn't be allowed.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Jensen to table Case//98-31 until no later
than June 1, 1999, subject to review of the Zoning Code by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
The Hunts agreed to the tabling.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded the Weycker, directing the Planning
Commi~ion to review the boathouse provisions within the Zoning Code for
reconsideration and determination as they see fit. The vote was unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
The Beckers, 5205 Beachside Drive, Minnetonka, stated they also own property on Three
Points Blvd. and feel they are being unfairly treated. Mr. Becker stated they have tried to
follow all the rules and regulations that the City has requested of them. He stated that 2
years ago he had his property sold, but at the last minute, it got rejected because of 2.3
cubic yards of dirt.
Mrs. Becker addressed the Council.
The City Attorney explained that here has been a procedural wrinkle thrown into this for
everyone. The City thought it had finished its review of this sometime ago and referred its
conclusions to BOWSR which sent it back to the City for further review. At the last City
Council Meeting, the Council authorized the hiring of a Heating Examiner in order to have
an organized routine mechanism for disposing of this matter as quickly as possible. The City
Attorney explained that the City is in this process right now.
4
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MIN~IF~- NOVEMBER 24, 1998
Mr. Tim Becker stated that they have been asking for preliminary approval from the City so
that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District could hold a public hearing. He further stated
that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of Managers was courteous enough to let
them proceed at a public hearing, but they could not take a final vote. However their staff
did agree with their permit as it applied with the actual fill that they submitted both with that
application and this application. He stated they are now going on 100 days with their
application with the City. He handed out a packet of information for the City Council. He
stated they want to get the property marketable.
The City Attorney thanked Mr. Becker for the material that he submitted and will pass it on
to the attorneys handling this matter for their review. No action was taken.
1.8
RECOMMENDATION FROM DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY
COMMISSION, RE: APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY. (NOTE:
INTERVIEWS WERE HELD ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1998.) ORV
BURMA WAS RECOMMENDED TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF
GORDON TULBERG, TERM EXPIRES 12/31/99.
4552- 4555
The City Manager stated that the candidates were interviewed at the last DCAC Meeting.
He reported that the DCAC has recommended that Orv Burma be appointed to fill the
unexpired term of Gordon Tulberg whose term expires December 31, 1999.
Hanus moved and Weycker seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//98-130 RESOLUTION TO APPOINT ORV BURMA TO
THE DOCKS & COMMONS ADVISORY
COMMISSION TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM
OF GORDON TULBERG, TERM EXPIRES 12/31/99
Councilmember Weycker stated she does have some concerns about appointing
someone who is already on the Planning Commission when other people have applied.
She would prefer to have more of the public involved but feels Mr. Burma will do a
good job.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.9 ADD-ON - FENCE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
Acting Mayor Ahrens excused herself from the Council for this discussion.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Weycker to have Councilmember Jensen
take over as Acting Mayor. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
The City Manager reported that this came about as the result of several recent cases relative
to interpretation of what a fence is versus some other type of structure and what is covered
under the fence ordinance. It is the desire of the Staff to send this on to the Planning
Commission for review and study to give a clearer definition and interpretation of what a
fence really is.
5
MOUND C/'/T COUNC/L M/N/]/Eg - NOP~bIB~R 24, 1998
The City Planner submitted some pictures of some problem areas that many people call
trellises, until the Staff applies the Zoning Code to it and the Zoning Code would say that
what appears to be a trellis is indeed a fence, for lack of another definition within the Zoning
Ordinance to classify it as anything other than a fence. He further explained that the trellises
that we would be called fences in the pictures, would not meet the requirements that the
Code lays out for fences. Some of the trellises may appear not to be fences, but they are
fences and the requirements for those would apply. The Planner explained that the fences or
trellises in the pictures have also not received permits, which is another issue. He
recommended that this section of the Code be reviewed because the fence definition seems to
be a blanket for structures within a yard that are not fences. He asked that the Council refer
this to the Planning Commission for further review to see if there is a more acceptable way
look at this trellis issue and other types of structures that are similar.
Councilmember Hanus stated that another item to look at in the current code is the acceptable
materials for fencing, which are listed specifically as chain link and wood. This would
exclude wrought iron fencing, and the new PVC plastic fencing. He stated he does not
necessarily agree with Staff's interpretation, but if the City goes with the current
interpretation, we will have to issue building permits for ail trellises, arbors, archways, etc.
and if these structures are within 20 or 30 feet of the street, or within 50 feet of the lake,
they are nonconforming which would then require variances.
The Council also discussed fence or trellis size which could also be a problem if it becomes
a barrier.
Councilmember Elect Bob Brown stated he has done a little checking on the trellis versus
fence concept. He stated he stopped at Home Depot and what they call the lattice type
fencing is used for a trellis for ivy or growing things.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Jensen to refer the fence portion of the
Zoning Ordinance to the Planning Commission for study, and redef'mition of
fence versus trellises. The Council asked that this be completed and back to the
City Council by March of 1999.
Councilmember Weycker stated that she knows letters have gone out to people
who are in violation, or questionable on whether it is a trellis or a fence and
she asked how these will be handled in the meantime? The Building Official
stated he will take a relaxed approach on these until the Planning Commission
makes recommendations and the Council decides on the ordinance. The
Council asked that the Building Official notify these people of this action.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Acting Mayor Ahrens returned to the Council.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
A. Financial Report for October 1998 as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director.
B. LMCD Mailings.
6
E.
F.
G.
MOUND ~ COUNCIL MINUTES- NOVEMBER 24, 1998
Memorandum from Jim Strommen, Kennedy & Graven and SRA attorney, re:
Wireless Telecom Tower Siting-Virginia Beach Case.
"Policy Informer" published by the National league of Cities.
Planning Commission Minutes of November 9, 1998.
Park & Open Space Commission Minutes of November 12, 1998.
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. Please RSVP
to Jodi by December 8~.
REMINDER: TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR
MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1998, 7:30 P.M. Continued hearing date is Monday,
December 14, 1998.
The City Manager reported that the City has been served with a lawsuit against the
City by Bill & Dorothy Netka. The matter has been turned over to the City
Attorney's office.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Jensen to adjourn at 8:15 P.M. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
7
RESOLUTION 98-
RESOLUTION REQUF~TING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO PROVIDE A
RECOMMENDATION ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR ITS PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 22, 1998
WHEREAS, the City of Mound and Westonka Schools have formed a joint powers
organization known as the Westonka Community Center Board (WCCB); and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the WCCB is to own and operate a renovated Westonka
Community Center at 5600 Lynwood Blvd., in the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, the WCCB was formed as a result of a bond referendum passed by the
voters of the Westonka School District; and
WHEREAS, the bond referendum was based upon a project to renovate the Westonka
Community Center; and
WHEREAS, a significant amount of time and effort has been dedicated to this project
by the WCCB and its designated committees and subcommittees; and
WHEREAS, a time schedule has been developed and agreed upon by the WCCB and the
Westonka School Board for the renovation of the project; and
WHEREAS, the project requires that a conditional use permit be obtained from the City
of Mound in order to proceed with the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted two public hearings on this matter
and has tabled the item to another meeting scheduled for December 14, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has set a public heating for its meeting of December 22,
1998 to review and consider the conditional use permit recommendation from the Planning
Commission.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council requests and expects
the Planning Commission to provide a recommendation for consideration by the City Council
at its December 22, 1998 public hearing.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if the Planning Commission needs to detail any
concerns, conditions, issues, etc., to the City Council, that they do so in the form of their
recommendation which will be discussed at the City Council's December 22, 1998 public
hearing.
Letter to Dr. Pam veyers
December 2, 1998
Page 2
views having only recently come to my attention.
Because the bonds for the project are being issued by the district, I'm taking the liberty of sending
a copy of this letter to the district's bond approving counsel, as I understand it, Mr. Len Rice, at the
Dorsey law firm. I am advised by the city's legal counsel that the city may have aa obligation to
disclose these matters to you and your bond approving counsel, who in mm, may feel it necessary
to advise the district to make a similar disclosure to prospective purchasers of the bonds.
.~mcerely, Shukle, Jr.
City Manager
CC;
Len Rice, Dorsey
t/l~ayor and City Council
John Dean, City Attorney
December 2, 1998
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Dr. Para Myers
Superintendent of Schools
Westonka Public Schools
5600 Lynwood Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
BY FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL
Re: Westonka Community Center Renovation Project
Dear Pam:
We discussed briefly last week the status of the community center. I understand from you that the
district has scheduled a sale of general obligation bonds for the project on December 7, 1998. There
are some aspects of the city's commitment to the project of which, I think, you should be aware.
As you know, the project requires a conditional use permit and that permit has not yet been granted.
The planning commission and city council schedule for consideration of the CLIP is such that the
city council will not have the CUP application before it until December 22. There can be no
assurance, of course, at this point, that the CUP request will be granted.
I must tell you that the newly elected mayor and newly elected councilmember have asked what
would be required for the city to withdraw from participating in the project as it is presently
proposed by the Westonka Community Center Board (WCCB). I am not certain as to their
reservations about the project, but I suspect that the issues of: 1) Operating costs; 2) Low voter
turnout at the bond referendum; and 3) A preference for demolishing rather than rehabilitating the
existing Westonka Community Center, are in their thinking.
Given these uncertainties, might it not be advisable to delay the bond sale until the new council is
in place and in a position to fully consider these issues? I'm sure you'll recall that all of these points
were discussed at length in the planning for WCCB, and perhaps on further reflection, with those
previous discussions and decisions before them, the new council will view the project more
forceably.
I regret having to inform you of these matters at such a late date, but the newly elected persons'
printed on recycled paper
WESTONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS
I~IDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 277
5600 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
December 4, 1998
Mayor and City Council
City of Mound
5780 Lynwood Blvd
Mound, MN 55364
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I have received a letter dated December 2, 1998 from Edward Shukle, City Manager of the City of Mound
(the "City"), detailing certain reservations concerning the City's commitment to the joint project of the City
and Independent School District No. 277 (the "District") authorized by the voters at the December 4, 1997
election. Although Mr. Shukle's letter does not constitute official action by the City, and because the
District has scheduled the sale of bonds to finance the project for Monday, December 7, 1998, I am
compelled to respond in order to protect the interests of the District and in order to determine the
appropriate course of action.
In light of the reservations expressed in Mr. Shukle's letter, and upon the advice of our financial advisers
and bond counsel, the Distdct has cancelled the bond sale originally scheduled for December 7. The
District will reschedule the sale of bonds to a later date, but bond counsel and our financial advisers have
further advised that in order for the District to proceed with the sale of bonds, it will be necessary for the
City to grant the conditional use permit required for the project on December 22, 1998.
Both the Distdct and the City have previously devoted significant resources to this joint project, and it is
therefore unfortunate that the City's staff has expressed these concerns to the District at such a late date.
I request that the City Council advise me of the City's official intentions with regard to the conditional use
permit at its earliest opportunity so that the District may make plans with respect to the bond sale and the
project.
Pamela J. Myers, IPh. D. -]
Superintendent
C;
Mr. Edward Shukle
Westonka School Board members
Len Rice, Dorsey Whitney, bond counsel
WCC postponement of bond sales 12/98
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
RESOLUTION REQUESTING A NINE MONTH EXTENSION OF
THE DECEMBER 31,1998 DUE DATE FOR REVIEW OF THE CITY OF
MOUND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CONSISTENCY WITH AMENDED
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL POLICY PLANS
WHEREAS, state statutes (Minn. Stat. §473.175-473.871 (1996) requires that cities
(townships) review and revise their comprehensive plans for consistency
with Metropolitan Council policy plans; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has amended its policy plans; and has
provided system statements outlining Council policy relative to the city
(township); and
WHEREAS, the City of Mound is required to review its comprehensive plan for
consistency with the amended policy plans and to prepare a revised
comprehensive plan for submission to the Metropolitan Council by
December 31, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has scheduled and budgeted to complete a review
and update of its comprehensive plan by September 30, 1999;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Mound requests that the
Metropolitan Council grant the City of Mound a nine month extension to
the deadline to complete its comprehensive plan; circulate the revised
document to the adjacent governmental units and affected school districts
for review and comment; and, following approval by the planning
commission and after consideration by the city council, submit the plan to
the Metropolitan Council for review.
MEMORANDUM
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
To: Ed Shukle
From: Mark Koegler
Date: December 2, 1998
Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update
Consistent with the City Council's directive to have the Comprehensive Plan document completed
by the end of the 1~t quarter of 1999, a revised schedule is attached. Prior to submittal to the
Metropolitan Council, there are three stages in the process that need to be completed. The first
stage is the plan preparation which will by performed by our firm and MFRA by the end of March.
Second, is the City review and approval process, which could be completed as early as the end of
May. The third stage is review by adjacent communities and school districts, which by Statue
requires a 60 day review period that would occur in June and July. Barring any delays in any of
the stages, a submittal could likely occur the first part of August.
To avoid any unforeseen delays the attached Resolution requests that the Metropolitan Council
approve a nine month extension for a submittal by September 30, 1999. This date provides ample
time for the plan preparation and review process and allows extra time for any unforeseen delays.
The Resolution is in order for Council approval.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
Bills
December 8, 1998
Batch 8100
Batch 8101
TOTAL BILLS
62,720.12
114,462.82
177,182.94
I'_J
0
Z
/
I
~ 0 I ~
-J
,(
Z
0
"3
:Z~
>..
o
I
LUt.) C3C
J
I',,
ia,
· ~
UJ
0
I&
0
0
o 0
LU~.)
~,~ I Z
*,~ 0,.. LU
D.,. ,,~
I-',,5"'
!
Z
0
0
0
01'
U.JU r~
~9 I Z
"q: ~. I,LJ
U
o 0
UJ~.~ ~
December 8, 1998
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VACATION OF AN
UTILITY EASEMENT
LOCATED AT 5986 SUNSET ROAD,
LOT 30, MOUND SHORES,
PID # 14-117-24 42 0065
P & Z CASE #98-65
WHEREAS, the applicant, Richard Kryck, has requested the vacation of the
utility easement currently used for sanitary sewer on his property at 5986 Sunset Road;
and,
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to vacate the easement and relocate it
in order to build a garage; 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 December 8,
1998, as required by law; and,
WHEREAS, the topography of the site limits the garage location; 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, Staff has reviewed the request and recommended a new
easement be recorded as shown on the survey; 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 utility easement as shown
and described on the easement drawing dated 10-22-98 with the following condition:
5986 Sunset Rd
Kryck
Page 2
1. The new utility easement as described in the survey be recorded, .
2. The current easement remain active until the new easement/~i~ ~
recorded at Hennepin County.
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.
!
DEC-02-1998 17:38
~300 $. Hwy. No.
ADVANCE SURUEYI NG 6124748267
Minnctouka, MN 55345 Phoac (6i2) 474 7964 Fax (612) 474 8267
RICHARD t gYCK
SURVEYED: O~tober, 1998 D~: 0~b~ 22,1999 REVISED*: Octub~27, 1998
~ ~g,~ei~ ~ of ~e ~e~, ~ no~c~ ~ ~c~ was a 3
Ic~ ~o~ ~ s~ ~s ~ v~i~ ~ ~ m I~ $~d at
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
All that part of the West 69.34 aeeet of Lot 30 as measured along the South linc thercof lying North of the
South 474.2 feet aa measured along the East md We~ lines thee'eof in "Mound Shores", Hennepin
County, lVl'~nnesota.
LBGAL DESCRIPTION OF PART OF SEWER EASEMENT PROPOSED FOR VACATION:
All that pan of thc followin~ described strip that lies within thc West 69.34 feet of Lot 30 as mcasurcd
along thc South linc thereof in "Mound Shflr~", Henn~in County, Minnesota:
A suip of land which lies 15 foet on both sides of the following descn'bed c.~r line: Commencin$ at
the Southwest corner of Lot 29 in said "Mound Shotes"; thence South along the East line of said Lot 30 a
dislznce of 11 feet to thc point ofbe~nni%a of the ce~.r ~ u~ be descn'bcd; thcncc Northwesterly
deflc~ins to thc right 135 dct~s from the prolonsnfion of the last descn'ocd linc, f~r a distance of 105
feet; thence dafleetin~ t~ thc left 32 dei~ees from the prolc~ation of the last described line to the
m~rse~ion with the West line of said Lot 30 and said cent~ linc thc~c wnnina~.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REPLACEMENT SEWER I~ASEMENT:
The North 20 feet of the West 15 feet ofgne Sou~h 601.5 feet of Lot 30; ',he North 13 feet of the South
581.5 feet of thc West 69.34 feet of Lot 30 and the North 10 feet of thc South 566.5 feet of thc East 10
feet of the Wcst 69.34 feet of Lot 30; all in "Mound Shores", Henncpia County, Minnesota.
SCOPE OF WORK:
!. Showing thc length and ~on of boundary lines of the abo,~ leB~tl description. TI~
scope of our services docs not include d~t~m,;-;-g what y~u own, which is a legal n~tter.
Please check the lelpd descrip-=~on with your records or consult with competent Ie~al counscl,
if necessary, to make sure that it is correct, and that any mattem of record, such as easements, that
2. Showing the location of exis~ag ~~s we docmefl important.
3. Seeing new monuments or veri~ing old mommaents to ma~k the corners of the ptx~-'rty.
4. While we show proposed ~m,nrovemen~s m your property, we not as f~aafilJar with your
plans as you are nor are we ss familiar with the requLremants of $ovemmemal agencies as their
employees are. We suggest that you review lhe survey to coufirm that the propo~al~ ate what you
in~end and submit the survey to such governmeutal agencies as n~sy have jurisdiction over your
project to gaiu their approval~ if you can.
5. Showing a proposal for a descripfioa of a zeplacemem easement and mpLacemeat s~wer line for an
existing sewer line that runs under your proposed addition for your review and f~r the review of such
governmental agencies as may btve jurisdiction over su~ a proposal.
STANDARD SYMBOLS & CO--IONS:
%" Denotes I/2" ID pipe with plastic plul~ bearin~ S~ate License Number 9235, s~ if"o" b
~led in., then denotes ~tm~ iron monm'-e~t.
CERTIFICATION:
I hereby ceni~ that this survey was prepared by mc or under my direct supervision and that I am
a Prcrfcssional ~cc~ and a Ptofcsaiannl Survcynr under thc l~ws of thc Siatc oflVfi-ncsota.
P.02/02
TOTRL P.02
DEC-02-1998, 15:87 ., ADUANCE SURUEYING 612474826?
P. 02/02.
I
I
1
~UIV~ET t~OAL~
TOTAL P. 82
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
November 23, 1998
MINUTES
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1998
DRAFT
Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Michael Mueller, Cklair Hasse, Frank Weiland, Becky
Glister, Bill Voss, Orv Burma, and Council Liason Mark Hanus. Staff present: Assistant City
Planner Loren Gordon, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent
and Excused: Jerry Clapsaddle.
Public Present: Dr Pam Myers, Bob Bittle, Bob Brown, Leah Weycker, Bill Pinegar, Richard
Kryck, Duane Norberg, Bert Haglund, Vern Brandenburg, and David Braslau.
Meeting was called to order at 7:34 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael.
MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 9, 1998 MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
Weiland stated that on page 4 under "Submittal page A-2" #4, should state, "Designate an area
on-site to land bank an additional 74 parking spaces for future use if necessary."
MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Hasse to approve the corrected Minutes
of the November 9, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 8-0.
Chair Michael recited the procedure for Public Hearings.
BOARD OF APPEALS:
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE #98-65: UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION, TO CONSTRUCT A
DETACHED GARAGE, RICHARD KRYCK, 5986 SUNSET ROAD, PID # 14-117-24 42 0065
Loren Gordon presented the case.
The applicant has filed a request to vacate a utility easement currently used for a sanitary
sewer. The easement provides service access to the residential lot directly west of the property.
The applicant is proposing to vacate the easement and relocate it in order to build a garage.
The topography of the site limit the garage location. Staff has reviewed the request and
recommended a new easement be recorded as shown on the survey. Minnegasco has also
reviewed the vacation request and has no objections.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the utility
easement vacation as requested with the following condition.
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
November 23, 1998
DRAFT
1. The new utility easement as described in the survey be recorded.
DISCUSSION:
Weiland asked about where the easement is. Gordon explained where the easement is
located. Weiland asked if the easement goes down to the lake. Gordon stated no it does not.
Weiland asked if the easement is vacated does the vacated easement get split and goes to
adjacent property owners. Gordon stated that the easement is solely on the Kryck property and
the manhole will remain.
Weiland asked about the telephone lines that run through there. He commented that should be
checked it out.
MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Mueller to recommend staff recommendation.
Gordon stated that this is a public hearing.
Weiland and Mueller retracted their motions.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Chair Michael closed the public hearing.
Mueller requested that the current easement be active until the new easement be recorded.
MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Mueller to recommend staffs recommendation
with the additional condition of the current easement remain active until the new
easement is recorded at the courthouse. Motion carried 8-0.
This case will go to City Council on December 8, 1998.
2
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CASE #98-65
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
5986 SUNSET ROAD, LOT 30, MOUND SHORES
PID # 14-117-24 42 0065
P & Z 98-65
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m.
on Tuesday, December 8, 1998 to consider the approval of a utility easement
vacation located within the R-1 Single Family Residential zoning district.
All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be
given the opportunity to be heard at this meeti~g.-~'.--~"-~,..../'"'-Y"-~'".,~ ~
Kris ..... Li''''-''~' ~q~, P~'n'~g)Secre~a'r'y
Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on November 24, 1998
Published in the Laker, November 28, 1998
printed on recycled paper
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP
DATE: November 24, 1998
SUBJECT: Utility Easement vacation request
APPLICANT: Richard Kryck
CASE NUMBER: 98-65
HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5hhh
LOCATION: 5986 Sunset Road
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The applicant has filed a request to vacate a utility easement
currently used for a sanitary sewer. The easement provides service access to the residential lot
directly west of the property. The applicant is proposing to vacate the easement and relocate it in
order to build a garage. The topography of the site limit the garage location. Staff has reviewed
the request and recommended a new easement be recorded as shown on the survey. Minnegasco
has also reviewed the vacation request and has no objections.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council
approval of the utility easement vacation as requested with the following condition.
1. The new utility easement as described in the survey be recorded.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
Rev. 1/30/97
Application for
STREET / EASEMENT VACATION
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
Planning Commission Date:
City Council Date:
Application Fee: $250.00
CityPlanner )1'5-9g Minnegasco li-5-q8
City Engineer }!-~.Z:~_~_ Police Dept. I%-'~-O~ GTE
Public Works %~i~-~_~ Fire Dept. Other
~lease t ,e or )tint the following in~ '~n:
Adjacent Address ~ ~
ADJACENT
PROPERTY Name of Business
(APPLICANT'S ~D Block Plat, ~/~
PROPERTY) Lot
ZONING Circle: ~-~ R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1
B-2
B-3
DISTRICT
OF STREET
TO BE
VACATED
FOR
REQUEST
PUBLIC NEED
FOR THIS
~ND?
Date
Print Applicant's Name
Applicant's Signature
Date
28.9 - - -
18.91
AS PER PAGE
208, BOO( 2520
I
Zl
~"ROAD EASEUENT AS
' PE~ DOC..185978
,, , ~
EX]S11NG
' '.---' ~t'"~-~N; S~ UN;
RECEIVED
0 C T 2 8 1998
MOUND PLANNING & INSR
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 #98-65
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
5986 SUNSET ROAD, LOT 30, MOUND SHORES
PIDS # 14-117-24 42 0065
P & Z 98-65
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, November 23, 1998 to consider the approval of a utility
easement vacation located within the R-1Single Family Residential zoning district.
All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be
given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. .
"Y~-r'~-l~uist,/Pla?. n./'~g Secretary
Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of affected property on November 10, 1998
Published in the Laker, November 14, 1998
printed on recycled paper
Mmnegasco'
A XOlP. gllvI ENERGY COMPANY
Peggy James
Planning & Inspections
5431 Maywood Road
Mound, MN. 55364-1687
RE:
Sewer Easement Vacation
Case #98-65
Minnegasco easement number 65-19
November 6, 1998
Dear Ms. James:
With reference to the proposed easement vacation mentioned above, Minnegasco
does have an existing natural gas service line in a portion of the easement to be
vacated.
However, Minnegasco does have an exclusive easement recorded in Book 2520 of
Deeds on page 208 as document number 3574935, as shown on the survey for
Richard Kryck. A drawing of the easement is enclosed for your reference.
Minnegasco therefore has no objection to this vacation.
Thank you for the advance notice and please send me a copy of the "final action" of
this proposal.
Respectfully,
MINNEGASCO
Steven Von Barg(~n
Right-of-Way Administrator
700 West Linden Avenue
P.O. Box 1165
Minneapolis, MN 55440-1165
GENEILAL ZONING LNFOI~fATION SIIEET
.,..-f.d.~ .J~rua-~l r~C~. ~--I : ,--A--~A:IO000 ~ ~"EA"I~O00~r-
Required Dt .ldth: ~ I .....
(frontage on an improved public
Existing ~t Width_ ~ ' */~ _, Depth ~ F ~/,
SE?BACKS REQUIRED~
PRINCIPAL BUILD~N~ --
FRONT,
SZD,, . s , ~0 '
~ N
EXISTING ~/OR PROPOSED 8ETBACKS~
FRO~
FRONT ~ N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
SlO~: N S E W
~SHO~
ACCESSORY BUILD~I~e~
FRONT: N S E W
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W _ 4' or §'
SIDE: N S ze W 4' oz' I~'
REAR: N S E W 4'
LAKESNOP~: _. S0' /measuredJrom O,~.W~ )
IS THIS
CONFOm4INO? XES
FRONT: N S e W
FRONTI N $ E W
SIDE: N S E W
REAR: N S E W
LAKESHORE:
WILL THE PROPOSED IMPROV~MENaT$
ACCESSORY BUILDI~
CONFORM? YES NO. .
,r::., :,L' ~ ~ ~v " '~ . ~O
· . ~ ~ ...... '. .;~., -'.,'..U~
.... , ~ · ~ ' . .< ;. ,; . .;: ~ . '~5~.
?,..~.- ~. :.: _, --'. ~. -.. .<'k. :';.,-/
' ' ' . · ,-.Q-. 3<' '-' f ..."5-5'.
..~-.-g .... ¥ :.::?
~ o ~ . o
~ o ~ - .- ~
~ :5'."
)a ~ :'?'~ :':-:'o
ZO'
December 8, lgg8
RESOLUTION #98-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN OPERATIONS
PERMIT TO ALLOW WAREHOUSE AND OFFICE
SPACE FOR TRIAX TELECOMMUNICATIONS
LOCATED AT 5308 SHORELINE DRIVE
(BALBOA BUILDING)
WHEREAS, Triax Telecommunications will maintain an office and
warehouse area of 8,131 square feet for warehousing of parts used for cable
television installation, and;
WHEREAS, the warehouse will have one full time employee that will
oversee the daily operations during the business hours of 7 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Monday through Friday. The business operations necessitate coordination with
cable installation contractors who will be on site as needed to schedule projects,
and;
WHEREAS, cable television equipment that will be stored on site include
the following materials: cable and fiber-optic wire, connectors, splitters,
grounding wire, galvanized stakes, cable boxes made of metal and plastic, car
type batteries, and other hardware used for cable installation. Most of this
equipment will be stored on wood pallets with cable wire wound on large wooden
spools, and;
WHEREAS, Triax anticipates three deliveries and three shipments per
day during normal business hours by semi-trailer and smaller delivery trucks,
and;
WHEREAS, warehousing is permitted in the PlA district as stated in
Section 350:680 Subd. 6(B)(2), and;
WHEREAS, adequate parking is available for employee use within the
property and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, to approve an Operations Permit for Triax
Telecommunications for an occupancy of approximately 8,131 square feet within
the Balboa Building, providing that the nature of the business and products
stored on the premises remains essentially unchanged. Approval is conditioned
on compliance with all building and fire codes.
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
TO: Mound City Council
FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP
DATE: December 8, 1998
SUBJECT: Triax Cablevision Operations Permit - Balboa Center
OWNER: Balboa Center Ltd. Parmership
LOCATION: 5308 Shoreline Drive
EXISTING ZONING: Planned Industrial Area (PIA)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Industrial
BACKGROUND: Triax Cablevision has submitted an operations permit for space they are
currently occupying addressed as 5308 Shoreline Drive. Neighboring businesses include Diamond
Animal Health and Infiniti marketing. The space encompasses approximately 8,131 square feet,
with warehousing area occupying over 8,000 square feet and office space over 100 square feet.
The space will be used to warehouse cable television equipment including cable and fiber-optic
wire, connectors, splitters, grounding wire, galvanized stakes, cable boxes made of metal and
plastic, car type batteries, and other hardware used for cable installation. Most of this equipment
is stored on wood pallets, the cable wire is wound on large wooden spools. Warehousing is
permitted in the PIA district as stated in Section 350:680 Subd. 6(B)(2). Improvements to the
space are minimal as most of the inventory is organized on the floor and stacked on pallets. The
office space includes a room for the warehouse manager and a conference room used periodically
by contractors for coordinating projects.
A manager, responsible for the facility and inventory will occupy the premise during the hours of
operation from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. Other people at the facility include
various contractors that will use the conference room on an as needed basis for project
coordination. Triax anticipates an average of three deliveries and three pickups per day. Deliveries
will be made by semi-truck and other commercial delivery companies such as UPS, RPS, and
Federal Express. Pickups will be made by local installers and contractors typically using smaller
pickup trucks and vans.
In addition to the warehousing space, Triax will be submitting an application for a 50 feet by 50
feet outdoor storage area. The storage area is proposed to be located at the west end of the
parking area along Lynwood. This application is not part of this review as it requires an update of
the conditional use permit. The case is anticipated to go to the Planning Commission in January.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
p. 2
Triax Cable Operations Permit
December 8, 1998
As of the writing of this report the Fire Inspector had not yet inspected the space. Any fire and
safety issues that are recommended need to be adhered to by the tenant.
DISCUSSION: The proposed company operations fit within the range of uses outlined for the
Planned Industrial Area District. As primarily a warehousing operation, the building is certainly
conducive to the company operations. There will be a total of 6 of truck trips per day generated
by the use, including deliveries and pickups. They are scheduled to occur during the warehouse
hours of operation Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. which is a compatible traffic schedule
with the surrounding neighborhood. Aside from a pending outdoor storage permit, Staff has no
other concerns with the use.
In evaluating the merits of a conditional use the Council may make the following findings in
rendering a decision. These conditions which may be considered include but are not limited to the
following:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities have been or are
being provided.
4. That adequate measures have bee or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and
loading space to serve the proposed use.
5. That adequate measures have bee 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
resuk.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City.
9. The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion.
lO. Existing adjacent uses will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade
brought about by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Council approve the operations permit for Triax
Telecommunications as requested with the following condition:
1. The Fire Inspectors recommendation for compliance to any fire and safety code issues be
adhered to by Triax Telecommunications.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
OPERATIONS PERMIT APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND, 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD, MOUND, MN 553~604
Phone: 472.0600, FAX: 472-0620
City Council Date: I,~- b-
_ Operations Permit Fee:
Distribution:
City Planner: I[- I~-~(~ Building Official
Other:'~ ~c~'~(.~"3~-y,_<,- ~ ~- ~°I
Uses by Operations Permit'~ Within any Planned Industrial Area, no structure or land shall
be used for the uses listed within the Zoning Ordinance, Section 350:680, Subd. $.
(attached), except by operations permit. Criteria for granting operation permits is the
same as listed in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:525, Subd. 1, A - L (attached).
All operations permits must be approved by the City Council. Applications must be
received two weeks prior to the City Council meeting to allow time for staff review. The
City Council meets on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month. The City Council
meetings are held at City Hall in the Council Chambers, and commence at 7:30 p.m. The
applicant or a representative is encouraged to be present at the meeting.
Section 1 - Application Information
CITY' OF ~.our~?
~25o.oo ~
1. Street Address of Property:
2.
Legal Description of Prpperty: Lot
Additi°n ~-~,~!!0~ ~t(:~ ~'~' PID
Owner's Na~rne: ~)~,~/'~J/~~'~/~-~ Phone~,l z) ~ 7--770 ~
Address: -
Applica~ (if other than owner). _ ~3 7-/O ~O
~uaress /~ ~~~ ~ ~ O~ , ~ :' ,
Section 2 - Business Information
Block
1. Name of Business 'Tv~ FcLq('
2. Total Floor Area ~, !-~ i _~¢ r~.
Manufacturing Area
Sales Floor Area
Office Area
Warehouse Are~ _
Other (please specify)
Describe Nature of Business
Wholesale
Retail
e
Location (cite unit number or attach floor plan) ~'~,~ 8
Number of Employees: l"t shift j/ 2°d shift
~rd shift
Adjacent Uses (list businesses)
Section 3 - Business Operations
1. Describe Pro.ducts produce~ or services offered (attach product brochures if
..
~x~-~ r---
available)
What types of materials will be shipped into and/or stored within the
premises ? ~w~ -(~.'~-~¢.~,~,,~.. c~ 1,~o)/.7~z~,-¢~¢
Will materials be shipped by: rail Semi truck ~
Other (specify) ~, ~,.~'- ~? 77u.,e.~
Will delivery vehicles be stored on the property? Yes
No ~
Does the business plan future expansions at this location? Yes __
No ~ If yes, describe amount of anticipated expansion and
timing.
Will the business require any modifications to the exterior of the existing
building including but not limited to doors, windows, overhead doors, cooling
towers, HVAC units, etc? Yes No ~
If yes, please describe and attach a floor plan and exterior building elevation
drawings.
Will the proposed operation involve: Noise Generation' Yes ~
If yes, describe source and amount
No
Odor Generation: Yes No ~
amount
· If yes, describe source and
Toxic and/or Hazardous Waste Generation: Yes
If yes, describe source and amount
No ~
Provide a detailed listing of all chemicals which will be discharged into the
sanitary sewer system.
Will the operations include either interior or exterior storage of bulk
chemicals? Yes ~ No ~X~ If yes, attach floor plan and/or site plan
showing location and describe spill/leakage containment provisions.
Other than chemicals, will the operation require outdoor storage of an
materials~ Yes ~ ~,~ ,- - .. ~
· - ,~,, · ~ yes, oescrl~e materials and attach site
plan showing locations and identifying proposed screening by type and
location. ~
Section 4 - Certification
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any
required papers and plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I
consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any
authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting,
maintaining and removing such notic~e~as may be required by law.
Signature of Applicant ~.~.. 7~_~ ~__~,~z.~..~_~_~ Date
Section 5 - City Review and Action
Reviewed by: Building Official
City Engineer
City Manager
Fire Chief
Other
City Planner
MATERIALS STORED AT
5308 SHORELINE DR.
· CABLE USED IN CABLE TELEVISION, WHICH INCLUDES
FIBER-OPTIC, UNDERGROUND, OVERHEAD (HUNG FROM
TELEPHONE POLES), AND SMALLER GAGE THAT CONTECTS TO
CUSTUMERS HOMES. MOST CABLE IS COOPER WITH A PLASTIC
SHEETH.
· DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONNECTORS, AND SPLITTERS USED
TO SPLICE CABLE TOGETHER, OR CHANGE THE SIZE. THESE ARE
MADE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF METAL, AND ARE MADE TO
PROTECT FROM WEATHER.
· COOPER GROUND RODS, AND WIRE.
· CALVINIZED WIRE AND GROUND RODS, OR STAKES.
· BATTERIES, USED TO BOOST SINGNAL. UP TO 150 ON SITE
AT ONE TIME.
· MOST PARTS STORED ON WOOD PALLETS, PLUS A STACK OF
TWENTY ON HAND.
· ASSORTED HARDWARE USED TO INSTALL, COVER, HOLD,
SPLIT, HOUSE, OR OTHER RELATED TO CABLE TELEVISION.
Telecommunicatlm
Shorel Dr.
Mound, MN 55364
November 17, 1998
Triax is a cable television company. Our primary goal is to provide excellent cable television pictures
Tdax Telecommu~ons Company, LLC. is the successor company to Tdax cornmunications
corporation which was founded in 1982 and has been lhe management company for a number of cable
television limited partnerships. Triax has restructured its cable television assets into systems, which are
prirna~ly located in Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin and Iowa through the recapitalized partnership of
Triax Midwest Associates, I_ P. Tdax is a ~ company and is highly respected in the cable
industry and the finandal community.
Triax intends to use the space Icx:ated at 5308 Shoreline Dr., in Mound as a warehouse, storage area.
Triax has a number of projects, such as upgrade the Minnetonka television cable system. As parts
needed for such a project are shipped from a vendor, T~ax requires space to accumulate these parts
until all the parts needed have arrived, and the project can proceed. Triax also intends to maintain an
invent(xy of parts needed for repair, home installation, and upgrades for local subscribers. A list of
materials that will be warehoused at this location is attached.
television. Triax will maintain the area in a p~-c,'essional manor, making sure it does not become
unsightly or hazardous.
The Tdax "wa~house" will operate ~ 7am and 4pm, Monday trough Fdday. One pa"son will
be on site dudng these houm. The second ofrme maybe used by a co,~act coordinator on an
unscheduled basis.
The iiari'~ at the '~arehouse" will consist ~ semi-tnJcks, UPS, RPS, and Feder~ Expre~___ deliveries.
On average, this is three tolal deliveries a day. Materials will be picked up from the "warehouse" by
local installers and contractors using pick-up lrucks for the most part. On average three pickups are
Robert Messano (Bob)
T~]x Telecommunicalions
5308 Shoreline Dr.
Mound, MN. 55364
T~ephone 472-3091
Fax 472-4130
TR I/kX
CAB LEVI S I0 N
Robert Messano (Bob)
Triax Mound Warehouse
Phone Number (612) 472-3091 Fax (612) 472-4130
Office
Triax Engineering
14162 Commerce Ave. Suite 100
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone (612) 440-9650 Fax (612) 440-9660'
Attn. Lynn Mayer
Corporate Headquarters
Triax Telecommunications Co. L.L.C.
100 Fillmore, Suite 600
Denver, Co. 80206
Phone (main) (303) 333-2424
Out-of-state (800) 541-7056
00T-13-98 TM' 11:22 ~ i,,IELSH OOS. PROPERTY MGMT F,~ NO. 3390585
TEXHIBIT "B"
P. 03
! I
oo
0CT-13-98 TU E i1:22 RI9 IJEL SH CO . PROPERTY MGMT
BocuHlv ~e~sic shall be rewrned to L~ee.
thereof es ~ r~ult of Ih0 ~ovisions of [1~ p~agreph,
~ ~m of ch~ Leass 0r 8nV r~wal thoreot, m u~on z~ ear,er
lamination of ~is Lease. Lessee shall ha~ no r~h~ ~ en~icipa~
~um of s~0 depo~i~ by wi~hholdlng any amo~
otherwise conv~ or dispo~ of i~ interest n this Cea;~, ~esm may
a~i~ s~id se~r~ deposit or any balance ~emor
~eslgn~, w~reupon ~ssM s~1l ~ re~osoa ~rom a6 6abgi~ for the
r~n or repaymen~ et such secmky deposit a~
~otely to ~ said ass;~e for the r~um ~ repayment o~ said
~cuh~ ~ep=~t. ~ai~ se~riw ~ ~a[I
encumb~ed ~ Levee wi~ut t~ ~en ,cons~t of,L~s~..~
uny a$sign~[ or en~mbran¢O wJthe~ SuCh conSont
Lasso. n ;he evem of any righ~l and pormJ~ed asslgnmen~ of this
Lease by L~soe, said se~y deposit shall ~ d~emed
~ssor 8g a depodt m~de by the assignee, and Le~sor s~all n~ve no
further liabiliw wi~ respe~ to ~e return of sa~ ~OC~ de.sit TO
tl~e Les~e.
The Demised Premises shall be used and occupied by
~.~see ~olely for ~he purposes of qonetal office and s~rage of
inventOry and ecluipment associated ~:h ~un~ cab~
i~.,~ so ~ona ~-~b~ use ~ ,n
~ ~nonces a~ govemmemal reg~at~
and Premises. T~ Dem~ ~em~
~r tl~ot, in aoomdande w~h any requirement of law or of any
public a~iw, Lessor shall ~ o~ 0ed on aocoum of the purpose or
manner o~ &aid ~Re to make any ~d~on or ol~a~ion tO or ~ the
B~ldlng. T~ Demand Premises ~hall not ~ used in a~ manner
which will ~croeee the ~e~ required ~o
for fire a~ e~ndod oover~e in~ran~ coveri~
~ss~ ~1~ o~py t~e O~ised P~e~es, oon~ i~ business and
comrol its agent. ~o~es. inv~ee8 and visko~ in
is awful a~ reptnablo on~ wJ~ no: ~rmk or ~eate any nui~e.
noise, od~. m o:he~e interfere
~enant ~ U~ Buildl~ ~ i~ normal ~u~ness
manag~m of ~o Bu~l~ng. Loser's use of t~ D~is~ Promi~
equico:, ~ope~Y or ~o:eHals owned or
Levee er ~Q ~omers and ~up~s shall not ~0 perm~ed.
ACCESS TO DEMISED PREMISES:
12. The Lessee agrees To permit the Lessor and the author[zed
reprosectativeS of the Lessor to enlet The Demised Premises at all
Times during usual business hours UpOr~ reasonable verbal
nolJc~ for the purpose of inspeC[ing the same and making any
necessary repairs 'co the Demised Premises and performing anV work
therein ~l~at may be necessary to comply with any laws, ordinances,
rutes, regulations or reauiremenES of anv public autho~¥ or of the
Board of Fire Underwriters or any similar body or that the LesSor may
deem necessary To prevent waste or deterioration in connection with
the Demised Premises. Nothing here n shal imply any duw upon the
part of the Lessor to do 8ny such work which, under anY prey sion of
this Lease, the Lessee may be required to .perform and the
performance d~ereof by the Lessor shall not eon~stute a waiver of
~ Lessee's default in foiling to perform tlle same. The Lessor may,
during the progress of any work in the Dem~ed Premises, keep and
store upon the Demised Premises all necessary materials, tools and
equ~ment. The Lessor shall no: in any event be liable for
inconvenience, annoyance, distu(10ance, loss of business, or other
damage o! the Lessee by reason of making repairs or the
performance of any work in the Demised Premises, or on,aceoullt.~o.f
b~inging m-~tcrials, supplies and equipment into or tnrough m~
Dem~ed Premises during the course thereof an~ ~he obligations of
the Lessee un(let Thi~ Lease shall not Thereby be affected in any
manner whatsoever.
Lessor reserves the right tO enter upO~ the Demised
Premi=e= o: any time in the event of an emergency and at eeasonable
hours upon reasonable verbal notice to exhibit :he Demised
Premise= to prospe~we purchaSers Or other~,, and ~O exhlbi/ the
DemisC~J Premises to prospective Lessees and to the display "For
Lo~' or ~iiml~3~ signs on wi~qdow$ or door& in the Demised Premises
cJuring the last One HundreO Twenty (1201 days ~f thc term of this
Lease, ali w~theUt h~ndrance 6r mOlostaz~-b'~by Les~e.
FRX NO, '3390585 05
EMINENT DOMAIN:~
13. In the event of any eminent domain or cOn.rosaries
proc0e~ng m ~iva~e sNe ~ ~u thereof in ro~c~ ~o ?c Premises
dur;~ ~a term thereof, ~e following provolone shalr apply:
a. I~ ~e wh~e of the Premises sha~ be ac~uk~
~ned by emi~nt domain for any Du~ic ~ qu~i~u~ie
~. then ~ te~ of ~is Lease shal cea~ a~ te~inate as of
~e date ~ssession shall ~ ~ken in sUCh preceding and all rentals
s~ll ~ pa~ up ~ that date.
b. R ~y P~ ~ns~ut~g less ~an
Premises s~ be acauir~ or ~ndemned as aforesaid, end
eve~ ~at such pa~iN taki~ or condemner, s shall ~edally aflo~
the De.sea Pm~s so as to rend~ ~e Dem~ed Premiss
unsuita~e for t~ ~si~ss of t~ ~ssee, in the reasonable option of
LessoL then the t~m of this Lease ~all ~ase and terminate
the d~e ~s~ion shall be taken by ~e ~ndemnlng aut~rlty ~d
rent 5~11 be paid to ~e d~e of ~ch termlnat~n.
[n ~ ~ent of a ps.iai ~aking condcmna~ion of the
~s wh;~ s~O not ma~e~iall~ ~e~ ~ Demised Premises so
to re~ the D~ Premises ~sui[able for the
~.~see. in ~e reachable opinion d tl~ Less~, tl~ Lease shall
condn~ ~ full force a~ effect b~ ~ a propo~ion~e abatemem
of ~e ~ase Rem a~ ~d~onal Rem based on ~he po~ion, if any, Of
daVe fOllo~g ~ d~e pos~ssio~ snail DO taken e~ mu
a~. et ~'s intends to r~t~e. Upon ~es~r
ele~ien to re~. Lessor s~ll ~ence ~totateon a~
r~mre t~ Bu~ing a~ t~ Demi~e~ Pre~ises
prom~, su~ to delays be~ Le~sor s con~ot and eezays
t~ maki~ of ~emna~n or sale proceeds adjustme~s by ~ss~:
end L~see shall have ~o right to ~minate this Lea~ excc~ as
herein provided. Upon ~m~6~ion of such ~eszoraZion, the r~t shall
be a~ based u~n ~Re po~ion, if ony, of the ~mlsed Premi~
re~or~.
In the event of any condemnation
afor~d,=~hether w~le or ps.iai, the ~=aoe sh~l not be ent~ed
~o any part of the award ~id for ~ con0emnation a~ Lessor is to
~ccoi~ the full amoum of su~ awed, the Lessee ~reby ax~esslV
waiving any r~h: to claim TO any pa~
d. A~h aa d~ages in t~ evem o~ any
co~emn~lon Shaft ~ to ~e L~or ~ether ~uc~ ~amage~
awar~d as ~mpensatlon f~ dimities tn value
to ~e [~ Of the D~ed ~em~, Lessee shall ha~
~aim and recov~ ~m ~e ~n~mni~ eu~h~[y, ~ :,ct f~m
Less~, ~ c~pen~ion as may be so~ately av::rded
all d~maoe ~ ~ssoo'~ ~ine~ ~ reaso~ o~ ~a
for or on acceun~ of any c~ ~ 1ess ~ wnicn ~esseo mig~
remov;~ Le~ee'~ mercha~i~, f~ure, ~. leose~
impro~men~ m~d equi~e~ However, LeSSee s~ll
aga~ ~or ~ moKe ~ cialm w~ ~e condomnlng ~u~r~ for
tho ~ of i~ leasehold ee~te, any un~Xpked ~erm or
~S~le ron~wsI m oxtonsi~ of ss~ ~ese or Io~ of any possible
Lease.
DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION:
14., In the event of any domage or de, s~'yct[o.n, to.the Pre.m.'?~__
by fire or other cause during the term hereot zne TOllOWlng prowS~Ons
shall apply:.
a. If the Building is damaged by fire or any othe~
cause To such extent that The cost Of restoration, as reasonably
est mated 0¥ Lesso~, win equal or ,exes. ed. thiny.perc.en.t._(_3_O,%...!_.of_t.~r
---'---~n[ value af the Building lexcJusn;e ct Iou~r~on~ ju.=~ ~.~
of ,he al.me..e, then Lo.or ?v, no later t.an
sixtieth (60th) day following the damage, give Lessee wri~en nogce
Ot Lessor's elecT~on to terminate -.his LeaSe.
b. If the cost of res~or~mn os. es~.'m~ed by
will equal or exceed fifty percent i50%) of said replacement vmue m
the BuiRfing a~[ if ~he Demised Premises are nat Suitable a= a result
of said damage for the purposes tot which they are demised
hereunder, in the reasonable opinion o~ Lessee, then Lessee may, no
later thaA the sixtieth (BOth day following the damage, give Less~
written notice of elect~on to terminate Th S Lease.
c. If the cost of res~oratlon as estimated by Les&or
shall amount TO less tl~an thirty porcer~ ($0%1 of said replacement
value of the Building, or it, despi~e thc co.~T, Lessor doeG not elo~c
terminate this Lease, Lcssm ~nall rc~.-~O~o the ~iiding and the
Demised PremiSeS with reasonable promptne-r~, .Su~ec[. to
beyond Lessor's control and delays in the making Ct ~suranCe
sdju~'men*,~ by..Lessor; and Lessee shall not be reepor~i~e
restoring or repatnng leasehold improvements of the
d, In the event of either of The eleCTionS tO
terminate. This Lease shall be deemed to terminate on the date of the
f. ~mdl~oaul'U P9 7Ve~.c%tria~,do¢
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMOEAIIfDI, fM
DATE:
December 3, 1998
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~ [
NOVEMBER 1998 MONTHLY REPORT
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
There were 35 building permits issued in October for a construction value
of $ 998,957. we issued 20 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous
permits for a total of 55 permits this month, and 734 permits year-to-date.
Total valuation now stands at $ 5,749,404.
Two (2) 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 FOUr (4) cases and sent Two (2)
variance case and One (1) Street/Utility vacation to the City Council. One
(1) Conditional Use Permit case was tabled.
kl
printed on recycled paper
December $, 1998
RESOLUTION ID8-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL GENERAL FUND
BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,893,580;
SETTING THE LEVY AT $1,868,660
LESS THE HOMESTEAD AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA)
OF $491,790, RESULTING IN A FINAL
CERTWIF-D LEVY OF $1,376,870;
APPROVING THE OVERALL BUDGET FOR 1999
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota,
does hereby adopt the following final 1999 General Fund Budget appropriations:
City Council 73,000
Promotions 4,000
Cable TV 1,500
City Manager/Clerk 196,900
Elections/Registration 3,150
Assessing 64,800
Finance 176,020
Computer 27,550
Legal 103,480
Police 1,048,010
Emergency Preparedness 4,960
Planning/Inspections 224,370
Street 472,050
City Property/Buildings 82,690
Parks 170,950
Recreation 38,410
Contingencies 20,000
Transfers 181,740
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 2,893,580
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, does hereby direct the County Auditor to levy the following taxes for collection in
1999:
SPECIAL LEVIES
Bonded Indebtedness
Unfunded Accrued Liability of Public Pension Funds
Total Special Levies
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE LEVY
TOTAL TO BE LEVIED FOR 1999
Less Homestead Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA)
FINAL CERTIFIED LEVY
December 8, 1998
85,950
33.350
119,300
1,749,360
!,868,660
-491,79Q
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, does hereby adopt the final overall budget for 1999 as follows:
As per above
2,893,580
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Area Fire Service Fund
Capital Improvement Fund
Cemetery Fund
Dock Fund
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
409,680
1,016,680
6,970
92,710
1,526,040
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Recycling Fund
Liquor Fund
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS
126,780
576,390
446,150
920,390
2,069,710
December 8, 1998
SUMMARY
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Enterprise Funds
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
2,893,580
1,526,040
2,069,710
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, hereby held a Public Hearing on Monday, December 7, 1998, for consideration of
he 1999 Proposed Budget and determined that the December 14, 1998, meeting was not
necessary.
City of Mound
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month: NOVEMBER Year: 1998
THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE
NEWRESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION II tl PERMITS t # UNITS I VALUATION II#UNITS I VALUATION
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED i i 80,000 8 954,384
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (CONDOS)
TWO FAMILY /DUPLEX 2 2 665,788 4 l, 349,803
MULTIPLE FAMILY (3 OR MORE UNITS)
TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS / MOTELS)
SUBTOTAL 3 3 673,788 12 2,304, 187
OFFICE I PROFESSIONAL
.u~uc ~ sc.oo~s
SUBTOTAL
ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDt~ 2 102,96 t 32 1,324,509
~tc~s 6 18~369 61 216~066
sw~um~ ~oots 3 23 ~ 717
REMODEL - MISC RESIDENTIAL 21 116,888 '293 :1,296,989
REMODEL- MULTIPLE DWELLINGS :~ , .i 1 8,5 7 6
SUSTOTAt 31 325, 169 418 ,227,686
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) 3 50,670
INDUSTRIAL [ 500
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS i 0 2 2,300
NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 2 [ t 2 0 0
VOVA~ OE~OUT~O~S [ 0 4 3 ~ 500
~ PERMITS ~ UNITS VALUATION ~ UNITS VALUATION
35
TOTAL *
35 3 998,957 447 5,749,404
PERMIT COUNT I THIS MONTH I YEAR-TO-DATE
"BUILDING 35 447
FENCES & RETAINING WALLS 1 22
SIGNS 0 8
PLUMBING 5 120
MECHANICAL 8 103
GRADING 0 3
S&W, STREET EXCAV. FIRE, ETC. 6 31
I 55 I 734
TOTAL
0
z
0
I-
z
0
0
Il=
0
LU
n
Z
I'- 0 CD
O0
0000000
zzzzzzz
0 000 000 0000000000 O0
Z Z Z Z Z ZZZZZZZ Z ZZ ZZ ZZ Z ZZZZZ Z ZZ Z
GENERAL PERMIT REPORT FOR MONTH OF NOVMEBER 1998
MONTH YEAR DaY PERMIT # ADDRESS
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
NOV
CONTRACTOR
98 23 4100 LYNWOOD-CHURCH-BELM MUELLER-PRIBYL/GTE
98 23 4110 MONTGOMERY & WILSHIR MUELLER-PRIBYL/GTE
98 3 4130 4709 HAMPTON RD ABEL B & C
98 5 4131 2991 HIGHVIEW LN AL'S MASTER PLUMB
98 9 4132 3038 PELICAN POINT CIR WESTONKA S&W
98 9 4133 3048 PELICAN POINT CIR WESTONKA S&W
98 9 4134 2530 LAKEWOOD LN DENNIS GEFFRE
98 10 4135 3038 PELICAN POINT CIR DITTER INC
98 10 4136 3048 PELICAN POINT CIR DITTER INC
98 12 4137 4661 BEDFORD RD CULLIGAN
98 12 4138 1942 SHOREWOOD LN PRACTICAL SYSTEMS
98 12 4139 2137 NOBLE LN SUPERIOR CONTRACTOR
98 12 4140 3054 BRIGHTON COMMON COUNTRYSIDE
98 12 4141 2878 PELICAN POINT CIR SURGE
98 12 4142 3167 DRURY LN K & K HTG
98 18 4143 6240 LYNWOOD BLD LEGEND HTG
98 18 4144 4643 HAMPTON RD LEGEND HTG
98 23 4145 LINDEN TO RAMBLER MUELLER-PRIBYL/GTE
98 30 4147 6449 BAY RIDGE RD CITY VIEW PLUMB
PERMIT TYPE
ST EXCAV
ST EXCAV
MECH
PLUMB
S & W CONNECT
S & W CONNECT
PLUMB
MECH
MECH
PLUMB
MECH
MECH
MECH
PLUMB
S & W CONNECT
MECH
MECH
ST EXCAV
PLUMB
TO: MAYOR, CiTY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
FROM: GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: NOVEMBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
Investment Activity
BOuqht:
Money :Market
Money Market
Money Market
CP
CP
CP
US iBank 5:552% 250,495:
Smith Barney 5.457% 700,560
.Smith Barney 5.457% 314,508
MatUred:
Money Market 4M PI us (75,000)
Money Market US Bank (216,000)
Money Market Smith Barney (506)
Money Market Norwest (363,000)
CP Smith Barney 5,644% (310,258)
CP Smith Barney 5,655% (309,635)
CP US Bank 5,445% (246,724)
Cities 1999 Le_~islative PoliCies
On November 20th the City Manager and I attended the League of Minnesota
Cities Policy Adoption Conference. The Governor-Elect ~gave the opening speech.
A number of discussions followed on the year 2000 issue, electric deregulation,
and on how Legislators see cities and how to tell thecity story effectively.
At the end of the conference the 1999 legislative policies were approved
with some minor changes. If you have an interest in getting a co py of the cities'
platform for the 1999 legislative session, please let us know.
Recyclino Association of MN.. CpnferenCA
"1 am sure that most of you have seen the long-white'bagS that farmers would use to store
silage. It is now the method .used in composting. SKB, a private company, collects
yard waste, food waste and paper products, puts them through a grinding process,
and then blows them into bags which are 200' long and 5' wide. After ten to twelve days
the material Changes into comPOst.
The city of Hutchinson is using this method. They collect the material 'from the
homes and, once transformed into compost, they use it for planting. Eventually,
they hope to be able to bag it and sell it."
City of Mound
Monthly Report
Utilities
Month of: November 1998
Residential Commercial
No. of Customers:
Water
Sewer
Water Used:
(in 1,000 gallons)
Billing:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Payments:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
12/03/1998 I
Utility-98
Total
1,159 123 1,282
1,161 123 1,284
20,636 2,940
Total
23,576
$34,652 $5,932 $40,584
$67,106 $16,694 $83,800
$6.237 $124 $6.361
$107.995 $22.750 $130.745
$38,611 $6,596 $45,207
$67,631 $16,305 $83,936
$5.950 $97 $6.047
$112.192 $22.998 $135.190
Total
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY~NOOD 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: December 3, 1998
Re: November 1998, Monthly Report
Eleven down and one to go. So far for the year, gross sales are $1,636,864.00. Last year at this
same time sales were $1,499,895.00. As you can see the year is progressing very nicely. We are
on a pace of 8 1/2 % - 9% over last year even if we only match last December's sales this month.
And the nice thing about this increase is that its not simply due to price increases. Sure, that has
something to do with it. But we are also experiencing a noticeable rise in our customer base. For
example, so far this year we have had 109,182 customers. For the first eleven months of last year
we had 103,929 customers. So it seems to be a combination of both with 40% of it being due to
inflation and 60 % of it having to do with new sales.
I purposely left out reporting on November because really, except for Thanksgiving, it's a pretty
boring month. We were up though. Approximately $2,700. Have a good Holiday season.
printed on recycled paper
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Telephone 472-0621
Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ed Shukle
Chief Len Harrell
Monthly Report for November, 1998
STATISTICS
The police 'department responded to 1,232 calls for service during the
month of November. There were 19 Part I offenses reported. Those
offenses included 2 criminal sexual conducts, 1 aggravated assaulted, 12
larcenies, 3 arson, and 1 vehicle theft.
Them were 47 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 2 child
abuse/neglect, I forgery, 5 narcotics, 7 damage to property, 5 liquor law
violations, 3 DUI's, 4 simple assaults, 3 domestics (1 with assaults), 2
harassment, 7 juvenile status, and 8 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 120 adult and 4 juvenile citations. Parking
violations accounted for an additional 16 tickets. Warnings were issued to
151 individuals for a variety of violations.
There were 2 adults and 3 juveniles arrested for felonies. There were 26
adults and 9 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were 4 felony
and an additional 5 misdemeanor warrant arrests.
The department assisted in 5 vehicle accidents, 2 with injuries. There
were 26 medical emergencies and 39 animal complaints. Mound assisted
other agencies on 17 occasions in November and requested assistance 5
times.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - November, 1998
Il. INVESTIGATIONS
The investigators worked on 1 criminal sexual conduct case and 4 child
protection issues in November. Other cases included arson, assault,
damage to property, forgery, theft, feeling a police officer, missing person,
narcotics, fraud, harassment, and absenting.
Formal complaints were issued for assault, disorderly conduct, altering the
shoreline without a permit, permit juvenile mischief, DWI, and underage
consumption.
Personnel/Staffing
The department used approximately 38 hours of overtime during the
month of November. Officers used 48 hours of comp-time, 54 hours of
vacation, 18 hours of sick time, and 16 holidays. Officers earned 43 hours
of comp time and 34 hours at double time.
Several officers attended a one day mandatory training course through
PTAC. Two officers continue to attend the Wilson Supervisory Leadership
course. Several individuals attended a course on Y2K issues for the state
and our computer system.
COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICERS
Officers Holzerland and Piper addressed 31 animal complaints, 62
ordinance violations, and 171 miscellaneous calls for services. Six
citations were issued.
The reserves donated 126 hours to the community and the department in
the month of November. The unit currently has eight members.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
NOVEMBER 1998
OFFENSES CLEARKD EXCEPT- CLEARF, D BY ARRESTED
I~EPORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARED ARREST ADULT JUV
PART I CRIMES
Homicide
Criminal Sexual Conduct
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Burglary
Larceny
Vehicle Theft
Arson
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 2 1 1
1 0 0 1 0 2
3 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL
PART II CRIMES
Child Abuse/Neglect 2
Forgery/NSF Checks 1
Criminal Damage to Property 7
Weapons 0
Narcotic Laws 5
Liquor Laws 5
DWI 3
Simple Assault 4
Domestic Assault 1
Domestic (No Assault) 2
Harassment 2
Juvenile Status Offenses 7
Public Peace 1
Trespassing 0
Ail Other Offenses 7
19 0 0 4 2 3
1 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 4 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 4 3 1
0 0 5 6 0
0 0 3 3 0
0 0 2 2 0
0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 1 6 0 6
0 0 i 2 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 2 3 4 2
TOTAL 47
I 4 26 26 9
PART II & PART IV
Property Damage Accidents 2
Personal Injury Accidents 3
Fatal Accidents 0
Medicals 26
Animal Complaints 39
Mutual Aid 17
Other General Investigations 1,014
TOTAL 1,101
HCCP 3
Inspections 62
TOTAL 1,232 I
4 30 28 12
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT NOVEMBER 1998
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
THIS YEAR TO LAST YEAR
MONTH DATE TO DATE
Hazardous Citations 54
Non-Hazardous Citations 71
Hazardous Warnings 30
Non-Hazardous Warnings 58
Verbal Warnings 72
Parking Citations 16
DWI 3
Over .10 3
Property Damage Accidents 2
Personal Injury Accidents ~3
Fatal Accidents 0
Adult Felony Arrests 6
Adult Misdemeanor Arrests 31
Juvenile Felony Arrests 3
Juvenile,Misdemeanor Arrests 9
Part I Offenses 19
Part II Offenses 47
Medicals 26
Animal Complaints 39
Ordinance Violations 62
Other Public Contacts 1,014
589
522
191
472
846
305
63
43
77
32
0
28
370
60
214
348
704
313
599
445
9,450
875
756
216
700
886
531
84
69
81
37
0
42
393
36
184
256
741
284
604
301
8,755
TOTAL 1,568 15,671 15,831
Assists 42 573 652
Follow-Ups 117 831 577
HCCP 3 67 36
Mutual Aid Given 17 175 176
Mutal Aid Requested 5 63 98
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
NOVE1VIBER 1998
CITATIONS
DWI
More Than .10% BAC
Careless/Reckless Driving
Driving After Susp. or Rev.
Open Bottle
Speeding
No DL or Expired DL
Restriction on DL
Improper, Expired or No Plates
Stop Arm Violations
Stop Sign Violations
Failure to Yield
Equipment Violations
H&R Leaving the Scene
No Insurance
Illegal or Unsafe Turn
Over the Centerline
Parking Violations
Crosswalk
Dog Ordinances
Code Enforcement
Seat Belt
Overweight Vehicles
Miscellaneous Tags
TOTAL
ADULT
3
3
1
4
0
42
3
0
30
1
2
0
7
0
8
0
2
16
1
2
0
6
0
136
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
NOVEMBER 1998
Insurance
Traffic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony
Misdemeanor
36
36
27
0
0
23
0
0
0
17
139
5
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12
Run: 1-Dec-98 14:23 PR003
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Re~)orted range: 10/26/95 - 11/25/98
/'~' Activity codes: All
'~Property Status: Ail
Property Types: All
Property Descs: All
Brands: All
Models: Ail
Officers/Badges: All
Prop Prop Inc no ISN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen
Tp Desc SN Stat Stolen Value
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Property Report
STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DAT~ P~EPORTED
Date Recov'd Quantity Act
Recov'd Value Code
Brand
Model
Page
Off-1 Off-2
Assnd Assnd
0 Prop type Totals: 1
B Prop type Totals: 200
D Prop type Totals: 260
E Prop type Totals: 1
0 Prop type Totals: 4,639
R Prop type Totals: 171
/'~'~ Prop type Totals: 140
Y Prop type Totals: 75
**** Report Totals: 5,487
0 1.000
0 1.000
0 1.000
i 1.000
0 2.000
0 1.000
0 2.000
0 3.000
I 12.000
R%/n: 1-Dec-98 14:05 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: Ail
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
9000 SPEEDING 42
9001 J-SPEEDING 2
9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 3
9008 ILLEGAL PASSING 1
9013 J-OPEN BOTTLE 1
9014 STOP SIGN 2
9017 J-FAILURE TO YIELD 1
9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 7
9020 CARELESS/RECKLESS 1
9026 OVER THE CENTER LINE 2
9030 CROSSWALK VIOLATION 1
9034 STOP ARM VIOLATION 1
9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 1
9040 NO SEATBELT 6
9100 PARKING/ALL OT~ER 16
9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 4
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIP. ED
9211 J-PLATES/NO-EXPIRED-IMPROPER 1
9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 8
9240 (~GE OF DOMICILE 2
9253 STOP ARM VIOLATION/NO TICKET ~ 2
9301 LOST PERSONS i
Page
Run: 1-Dec- 98 14:05 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
' 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
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
POUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS
FOUND PROPERTY
FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED
PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDE/~TS
PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS
B/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC.
DOG BITE
9312
9313
9314
9430
9450
9451
~9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS
11
1
3
2
1
1
2
23
5
2
1
7
4
1
5
12
2
1
1
9730 MEDICALS
9732 MEDICALS/CI
9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED
9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT
9802 PUBLIC ASSIST
9810 LOITERING/LURKING
9900 ALL HCCP CASES
9904 OPEN DOOR/Al.4%RMS
9920 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
9921 INSPECTIONS CITATION
9930 I~%NDGUN APPLICATION
%2 OFP VIO. CRIME CONTROL & LAW ENF ACT OF '94
9933 l%EST~AINING ORDER ON FILE
9934 RESTRIu-r~D FROM POSS. FIREARM/DESTRUCTIVE DEV.
Page 2
Run: 1-Dec-98 14:05 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: Ail
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: Ail
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
9950 INFO/INT 1
9980 w~S 9
9990 MISC. VIOLATIONS 1
9992 MUTUAL AID/8100 7
9993 MUTUAL AID/6500 4
9994 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 6
A2342 ASLT 2-INFLICTS BODILY HAR/~-OTH WEAP-ADLT~ACQ 1
A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD ~SRM-}5~NDS-ASLT-AC 1
A5353 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ADULT-STR 1
A5453 ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-F2tNDS-ETC-ADLT-STR 1
A5456 ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-HANDS-ETC-C~LD-STR 1
AL354 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY F~%RM-HANDS-CH-FAM 2
AL551 DOM ASLT-MS-PEAR BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM 1
C32C1 FORGERY-MS-UTT-POSS-PLACE~CHK-201-2500-PER 1
D5700 DRUGS-SCE 3 CONT SUB-ATT PROC-UNK TYP-UNK C~AR 1
DA540 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK 1
DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 2
DE578 CON SUB 2-POSSBSS-AMPHET-NOT APPLICABLE 1
E2700 ESC-FE-FLEE AN OFFICER IN MV 1
Flllc ARSON 1-INHAB-NO WEA-SG RESID-$299 OR LESS 1
F320B ARSON 3-F£-UNINHB-NO WEA-UNK PROP-S300-999 1
F420C ARSON 3-MS-UNINHB-NO WEA-OT PROP-S299 LESS I
Page
Run: 1-Dec-98 14:05 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
~ i range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
HOW Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
0fficers/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
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UN-DER INFLUENCE
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV
CSC 1-CONTACT-ACQUAIN~r-D-ND AGE-13-M
CSC 5-NO CONSENT CONTA-POS ALv~-16-17-F
JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO
LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21
JUVENILE-CURFEW
JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
SALE OF TOBACCO TO CHILDREN
DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COt~UNICATIONS
OBSENITY-MS-INDECENT EXPOSURe-OTHER-ADULT
PROP DAMAGE-FE-PUBLIC-UNq( INTENT
PROP D~J~AGE-GM-PRIVATE-D-NK INTENT
PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
PROP DAMAGE-MS-BUSINESS-UNK INTENT
LITTER-UNLAWFUL DEPOSIT OF C4%RBAGE-MS
STLN PROP-FE-POSSESS-VEHICLES-501-2500
THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-MOTORVEH-OTH PROP
~AEFT-201-500-GM-YARDS-O~ PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-COIN MACH-OTH PROP
J3501
J3E01
L1B72
LAA55
M3005
M4140
./~"~ ~l 3
M5350
M7401
N3030
N3190
03692
Pl120
P2110
P3110
P3130
P3600
Q1227
TB159
~9
TG021
TG039
Page 4
Run: 1-Dec- 98 14:05 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received= Ail
Activity Resulted: Ail
Dispositions: Ail
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: Ail
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfore Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP 2
TG069 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP 1
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER 2
U1991 FRAUD-FE-OTHER ACT~20000 MO~E 1
U3498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS 1
X2200 CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL 1
X3080 CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-OBST LEGAL PROCESS I
**** Report Totals:
321
Page
Run: 1-Dec-98 14:13 OFF01
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
· ~'" ~ range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 1
..... OFFENSES CLEARED
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
A2342
A5352
A5353
A5453
A5456
AL354
AL551
D'5700
DAS~0
DCS00
DE578
E2700
FlllC
F320B
7420C
33501
J3E01
L1B72
LAA55
5
M4140
M5313
ASLT 2-INFLICTS BODILY HARM-OTH WEAP-ADLT-ACQ 1 0 I i 0 0 0 0 0.0
ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC i 0 i 0 i 0 0 I 100.0
ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ADULT-STR i 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0
ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-HANDS-ETC-ADLT-STR i 0 i 0 I 0 0 I 100.0
ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-HANDS-ETC-CHLD-STR I 0 i I 0 0 0 0 0.0
DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-C~-FAM 2 i i i 0 0 0 0 0.0
DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM 1 0 i 0 i 0 0 I 100.0
FORGERYoMS-UTT-FOSS-PLACE-CHK-201-2500-PER I 0 i 0 0 0 i i 100.0
DRUGS-SC}{ 3 CONT SUB-ATT PROC-UNK TYP-UNK CHAR i 0 i I 0 0 0 0 0.0
DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK i 0 i 0 i 0 0 1 100.0
DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 100.0
CON SUB 2-POSSESS-AMPHET-NOT APPLICABLE 1 0 i 0 i 0 0 1 100.0
ESC-FE-FLEE AN OFFICER IN MV i 0 I 0 0 i 0 1 100.0
ARSON 1-INHAB-N0 WEA-SG RESID-$299 OR LESS 1 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0.0
ARSON 3-FE-UNIN~B-NO WEA-UNK PROP-S300-999 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
ARSON 3-MS-UNINHB-NO WEA-OT PROP-S299 LESS i 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0
TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 100.0
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UN]( INJ-MV 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 100.0
CSC 1-CONTACT-ACQUAINT-UND AGE-13-M i 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
CSC 5-NO CONSENT CONTA-FOS AUTH-16-17-F I 0 i 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 100.0
LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
JUVENILE-CURFEW 3 0 3 0 0 ~ 0 3 100.0
Ru~: 1-Dec- 98 14 .. 1] OFF01
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 10/26/98 - 11/25/98
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
Page 2
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
M7401 SALE OF TOBACCO TO CHILDREN
N3030 DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLYCONDUCT
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS
03692 OBSENITY-MS-INDECENT EXPOSURE-OTHER-ADULT
Pl120 PROP DAMAGE-FE-PUBLIC-UNK INTi~NT
P2110 PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK I~
P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
P3130 PROP DAMAGE-MS-BUSINESS-UNK INTENT
P3600 LITTER-UNLAWFUL DEPOSIT OF GARBAGE-MS
Q1227 STLN PROP-FE-POSSESS-VEHICLES-501-2500
TB159 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
TF059 THEFT-201-500-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP
?G021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY
['G039 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-COIN MACH-OTH PROP
FG059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP
?G069 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP
PG159 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTORVEH-OTHER
11991 FRAUD-F£-OTHER ACT-20000 MORE
'33498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS
X2200 CRIM AGNSTAD~4JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL
~3080 CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-OBST LEGAL PROCESS
'*'* Report Totals:
2 0 2 0 0 I 1 2 100.0
i 0 I I 0 0 0 0 0.0
I 0 i 0 I 0 0 1 100.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
i 0 i i 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 i I 0 0 0 0 0.0
I 0 I i 0 0 0 0 0.0
4 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 f
1 0 1 0 I 0 0 1 100.0
2 0 2 0 I 0 i 2 100.0
i 0 i 0 0 I 0 I 100.0
i 0 i I 0 0 0 0 0.0
i 0 I i 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 I 100.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100
1 0 < 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
64 1 63 29 20 10 4 34 53.9
Gray Freshwater Center
Hwys. 15 & 19, Navarre
Mail:
2500 Shadywood Road
Excelsior, MN 55331-9578
Phone: (612) 471-0590
Fax: (612) 471-0682
Email:
admin @ minnehahacreek.org
Web Site:
www. minnehahacreek.org
Board of Managers
Pamela G. Blixt
James Calkins
Lance Fisher
Monica Gross
Thomas W. LaBounty
Thomas Maple, Jr.
Malcolm Reid
Printed on recycied paper containing
at least 30% post c~--mumer waste.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Improving Quality of Water, Quality of Life
December 1, 1998
RECEIVED DEC 2 lg§8
To Municipal Liaisons:
Enclosed are rules of the Mirmehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD)
adopted on November 24, 1998, as follows:
Rule B- Erosion Control
Rule N-Stormwater Management for Land Development Projects
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 103D.341, a copy of each rule was
addresssed to the official governing body of your municipality on
November 30, 1998.
These rules were developed with the collaboration of a task force
including municipal representatives, the Board of Water and Soil
Resources, the Metropolitan Council, environmental organizations,
consulting engineers, and MCWD managers and staff; they embody the
recommendations of the task force to a very large extent. With its
adoption of the rules the Board also passed a resolution committing itself
to undertake a further process of review with stakeholders, in order to
determine the need to revise either of these rules, and to make any
revisions, by the begSz~ng of the construction season next Spring. To that
end, we welcome all further comments, now and in the coming months,
arising from your review of and implementation of the rules.
S~ely,
RECEIVED DEC 2 lg98
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
RULE B
EROSION CONTROL '
1. POLICY.
It is the policy of the Board of Managers to require preparation and implementation of erosion
control plans for land disturbing activities, in order to limit erosion from wind and water;
reduce flow volumes and velocities of stormwater moving off-site; reduce sedimentation into
water bodies; and protect soil stability during and after site disturbance. These measures
should reflect the following principles:
(a) Minimize, in area and duration, exposed soil and unstable soil conditions.
(b) Minimize disturbance of natural soil cover and vegetation.
(c) Protect receiving water bodies, wetlands and storm sewer inlets.
(d) Protect adjacent properties from sediment deposition.
(e) Minimize off-site sediment transport on trucks and equipment.
(f) Minimize work in and adjacent to water bodies and wetlands.
(g) Maintain stable slopes.
(h) Avoid steep slopes and the need for high cuts and fills.
(i) Minimize disturbance to the surrounding soils, root systems and trunks of trees
adjacent to site activity that are intended to be left standing.
(j) Minimize the compaction of site soils.
2. DEFINITIONS.
All terms not specifically defined here shall have the meaning given in the Definitions section
of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Rules. If not defined there, they shall have their
common-sense meanings.
"Agricultural activity" means the use of land for the production of agronomic,
horticultural or silvicultural crops, including nursery stock, sod, fruits, vegetables,
flowers, forages, cover crops, grains, and Christmas trees. Agricultural activity also
includes grazing.
Adopted Rule B
November 24, 1998
"Land-disturbing activity" or "land d/sturbance' means any disturbance to the ground
surface that, through the action of wind or water, may result in soil erosion or the
movement of sediment into waters, wetlands or storm sewers or onto adjacent property.
Land-disturbing activity includes but is not limited to the demolition of a structure or
surface, soil stripping, clearing, grubbing, grading, excavating, filling and the storage of
soil or earth materials.
PERMIT REQUIREMENT.
Unless specifically excepted by section 4 of this rule, land-disturbing activity shall require a
permit incorporating an erosion control plan approved by the District and shall be conducted in
accordance with that plan.
4. EXCEPTIONS.
The following land-disturbing activity shall not be subject to the requirements of this rule:
(a) Activity that: (1) disturbs an area of less than 5,000 square feet; and (2) involves
the grading, excavating, filling, or storing on site of less than 50 cubic yards of soil or
earth material.
(b) Routine agricultural activity.
(c) Emergency activity immediately necesdary to protect life or prevent substantial
physical harm to person or property.
5. PERMIT APPLICATION.
A written application for an erosion control permit shall be submitted by the owner of a site or
an authorized representative. The application shall contain the following:
(a) Site address.
(b) Property owner's name, address and telephone number.
(c) Names, addresses, telephone numbers and responsibilities of all contractors,
subcontractors and other persons who will engage in the land-disturbing activities.
(d) Names, addresses and telephone numbers of persons responsible for preparing
the erosion control plan.
(e) Documentation of all applicable county, municipal or township approvals for
the proposed action or a statement that no such approvals are required.
(f) Application date.
Adopted Rule B
November 24, 1998
(g) A statement that the applicant: (a) consents to site inspection by the District and
its authorized agents at reasonable times as necessary to evaluate the permit application
or determine compliance with the requirements of this rule; and (b) will notify the
District and afford access for District inspection as set forth at paragraph 11.
(h) Signature of each property owner with a certification that he or she understands
that the proposed activity must be conducted in compliance with this rule and the
approved erosion control plan, and that the application is complete and accurate to the
best of his or her belief. When a property owner is not a natural person, the application
shall bear a signature of one authorized to act on the owner's behalf and documentation
of the signatory's authority.
(i) An erosion control plan as described at paragraph 6 of this rule.
(j) A soils engineering report as described at paragraph 7 of this rule, if requested
by the District.
(k) A geological report as described at paragraph 7 of this rule, if requested by the
District.
(I) A statement that the applicant is aware of fee requirements set forth at Rule J of
the District's rules and agrees to pay that fee as determined due by the District.
6. EROSION CONTROL PLAN.
The erosion control plan is a separate document that shall include the following:
(a) A vicinity map showing:
(1) The site location in relation to surrounding roads, steep slopes, other
significant geographic features, buildings and other significant structures.
(2) All receiving waters, including lakes, streams, wetlands, stormwater ponds,
ditches and storm sewer catch basins, within 1000 feet of the area to be
disturbed.
(b) Site plans for existing and final proposed conditions drawn to appropriate scale.
The plans shall contain:
(1) Contours sufficient to show drainage on and adjacent to the site.
(2) Site property lines.
(3) Identification and location of all on-site water features and facilities including
any lake, stream or wetland; any natural or artificial water diversion or detention
area; any surface or subsurface drainage facility or stormwater conveyance; and
any storm sewer catch basin.
Adopted Rule B
November 24, 1998
(4) Location of all trees and vegetation on site, with identification of that which
is intended to be retained.
(5) Location of buildings and structures on site.
(6) Proposed grading or other land-disturbing activity including areas of
grubbing, clearing, tree removal grading, excavation, fill and other disturbance;
areas of soil or earth material storage; quantities of soil or earth material to be
removed, placed, stored or otherwise moved on site; and delineated limits of
disturbance.
(7) Locations of proposed runoff control erosion prevention, sediment control
and temporary and permanent soil stabilization measures.
(c) Plans and specifications for all proposed runoff control erosion prevention,
sediment control and temporary and permanent soil stabilization measures.
(1) Plans and specifications shall conform to the provisions of the manual,
"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" (Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, reprinted 1994), as revised, or if a facility or measure is not addressed in
that manual then to the provisions of the "Erosion and Sediment Control
Manual" (Hermepin Conservation District, 1989), as revised.
(2) Plans shah provide that stockpiles of soil or other materials subject to erosion
by wind or water shall be covered, vegetated, enclosed or otherwise stabilized or
protected in accordance with the amount of time the material will be on site and
the manner of its proposed use.
(3) Plans shall include measures and procedures to reasonably minimize site soil
compaction and shall provide that all compacted soil shah be broken up to a
depth of at least six inches before revegetation.
(4) Plans shah provide that aH fabric fences used for erosion and sedimentation
control and all other temporary controls shall be removed promptly when the
District has determined that the site has been permanently restabilized.
(d) A detailed schedule indicating dates and sequence of land alteration activities;
implementation, maintenance and removal of erosion and sedimentation control
measures; and permanent site stabilization measures.
(e) A detailed description of how erosion control, sediment control and soil
stabilization measures implemented pursuant to the plan will be monitored, maintained
and removed.
Adopted Rule B 4
November 24, 1998
(f) On the request of an applicant proposing to landscape an improved residential
property and a finding that certain required information is not needed to assess the
characteristics of the property and the adequacy of proposed control measures, the
District may reduce the submittal requirements of this section.
7. SOILS ENGINEERING AND GEOLOGY REPORTS.
On a determination that the condition of the softs is unknown or unclear and that additional
information is required to find that an applicant's proposed activity will meet the standards
and purposes of this rule, the District may require soil borings or other site investigation to be
conducted and may require submission of a soils engineering or geology report. The report
shall include the following as requested by the District:
(a) Data and information obtained from the requested site investigation.
(b) A description of the types, composition, permeability, stability, erodibility and
distribution of existing soils on site.
(c) A description of site geology.
(d) Conclusions and revisions, if any, to the proposed land-disturbing activity at the site
or the erosion control plan, including revisions of plans and specifications.
8. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
The District may require any additional information or data as it finds relevant and necessary
to evaluate and act on an application.
9. PERFORMANCE BOND.
In accordance with Rule K, the District may require the applicant to file a bond or other surety
in a form approved by the District and an amount the District deems necessary to ensure the
implementation of the erosion control plan and the integrity and continued function of the
measures described in the plan. The surety shall be maintained until final site stabilization, as
determined by the District, or until the District otherwise advises the applicant in writing.
10. MAINTENANCE.
On any property on which land-disturbing activity has occurred pursuant to a permit issued
under this rule, the permittee shall, at a minimum, inspect, maintain and repair all disturbed
surfaces and all erosion and sediment control facilities and soil stabilization measures on a
daily basis until land-disturbing activity has ceased. Thereafter, the permittee shall regularly
inspect, maintain and repair soil stabilization measures until vegetative cover is established.
Adopted Rule B
November 24, 1998
11. NOTIFICATION AND INSPECTION.
The applicant or its authorized agent shall notify the District in writing at the following points:
(a) On completing installation of perimeter erosion and sedimentation controls.
(b) On completing land-disturbing activities and putting into place measures for final
soil stabilization and revegetation.
(c) When the site has been permanently stabilized and revegetated.
(d) When all temporary erosion and sedimentation controls have been removed from
the site.
At each stage indicated, the applicant shall not proceed with site activity until the District has
been notified. At the stage indicated at paragraph ll(a), the applicant shall not proceed with
site activity until the District has been notified and allowed two full business days to inspect
the site and, as necessary, confer with the applicant. Within the two days specified, the District
may advise the applicant that it is extending the period for inspection by up to five additional
business days.
Adopted Rule B
November 24, 1998
RECEIVED DEC 2 lg98
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
RULE N
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to:
(a) Require stormwater facilities to be included in land development projects where
practicable and effective.
Co) Manage stormwater and snowmelt runoff on a regional or subwatershed basis
throughout the District to:
(1) promote effective water quality treatment, where feasible, prior to discharge
to surface waterbodies and wetlands;
(2) limit developed peak rates of runoff into major surface water bodies to less
than or equal to existing peak rates; and
(3) promote infiltration of both precipitation and runoff.
2. APPLICABILITY OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
As provided herein, before commencing any land-altering activity, a developer of land for
residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public roadway uses shall submit a stormwater
management plan to the District, and secure a permit from the District approving the plan. All
permit applications shall conform to and be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Rule A
of these rules The plan shall provide for compliance with the requirements of this rule for BMP's,
rate control and water quality control, as applicable. The applicability of the stormwater
management requirements set forth in this rule to a given development or redevelopment is set
forth at paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section and summarized in Figure 1.
(a) Single-Family Homes. A permit is not required for the construction or
reconstruction of a single-family home or its residential appurtenances.
Co) Single-Family, Developed or Redeveloped Subdivisions. A permit is not required
from the MCWD for construction on less than two (2) acres with a density of two (2) units
or less per acre. A permit is required for residential development or redevelopment of
subdivisions with a density of two (2) units or less per acre on sites of two (2) acres or
more, as follows:
(1) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of two (2) acres or more
but less than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in
section 3 of this rule are required;
Adopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
FIGURE 1. SUMMARY OF STOR1VrWATER MANAGEMENT
PERMITTING AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
ON THE BASIS OF DEVELOPMENT TYPE AND DENSITY
PROJECT REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
SINGLE FAMILY HOME NO PERMIT
CONSTRUCTION
SUBDMSION NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RATE RUNOFF QUALIT~
SINGLE FAMILY CONTROL, BMP'S AND RATE
DENSITY < 2 UNiTS/AC CONTROL, BMP'S
SUBDIVISION NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RUNOFF QUALITY AND
SINGLE FAMILY RATE RATE CONTROL, BMP'S
DENSITY > 2 UNITS/AC CONTROL,
MULTI-UNIT BMP'S
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL BMP'S RUNOFF KATE CONTI<OL, RUNOFF QUALITY
INDUSTRIAL AND BMP'S AND RATE
INSTITUTIONAL; CONTROL, BMP'S
MIXED USE
ROADS, ~TIiEIZ'I'S & BMP'S
HIGHWAYS
(< 1 ACRE NEW
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE) i
ROADS, 5TRi!ETS & RUNOFF RATE RUNOFF QUALITY
HIGHWAYS CONTROL, BMP'S AND KATE CONTROL
(> 1 ACRE NEW BMP'S
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE)
~/21 21 sI 41 s 81 ~01~sl 201
NOTE:
SUBDIVISION/PROJECT AREA (acres)
Density calculation is based on total site area including dedicated areas.
Adopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
(2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of eight (8) acres or
more but less than twenty (20) acres, the best management practices provisions set
forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of
this rule are required;
(3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of twenty (20) acres or
more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water
quantity control provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions
set forth in section 5 of this rule are required.
(c) Medium to High Density Residential Land Development. A permit is not
required for the development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions with
single-family units at a density of more than two (2) units per acre, or_for multi-unit
residential development or redevelopment, on a site of less than two acres. A
permit is required for development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions
with a density of more than two (2) units per acre, or multi-unit residential
development or redevelopment, on a site of two or more acres as follows:
(1) For development or redevelopment of two (2) acres or more but less
than five (5) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in
section 3 of this rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment of five (5) acres or more but less
than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in
section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of
this rule are required;
(3) For development or redevelopment of eight (8) acres or more, the best
management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity
control provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set
forth in section 5 of this rule are required.
(d) Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional Development or Redevelopment;
Mixed Use. A permit is required for commercial, industrial, institutional or mixed
use development or redevelopment as follows:
(1) For all development or redevelopment, the best management
practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of one-half (1/2)
acre or more but less than eight (8) acres, the best management practices
provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions set
forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
Adopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
(3) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of eight (8) acres
or more, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the
water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality
provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required.
(e) Roads, Streets and Highways. A permit is not required for the maintenance or
improvement of a public or private road, street or highway_not otherwise regulated under
paragraphs (a) through (d), if the project does not result in a net increase in impervious
surface. A permit is required for a public or private road, street, or highway project that
results in a net increase in impervious surface area, as follows:
(1) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of less than
one (1) acre, the best management practices in section 3 of this rule will be required;
(2) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one (1) acre
or more, but the total project area is less than five (5) acres, the best management
practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the water quantity control provisions
set forth in section 4 are required to treat the increase;
(3) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one (1) acre
ore more and the total project area is five (5) acres or more, the best management
practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control provisions set
forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule
are required to treat the increase;
(4) Sidewalks and trails that do not exceed ten (10) feet in width and are
bordered by a pervious buffer of at least five feet on each side do not require a
permit and are not included in any calculation of net increase in impervious surface
when part of a road or street project. The interruption of pervious buffer by streets,
driveways or other impervious surfaces crossing a sidewalk or trail does not
invalidate this exception provided that these impervious surfaces do not exceed 25
percent of the area of the required pervious buffer.
(f) Performance Bond. A performance bond or other surety in a form satisfactory to
the District is required for all activity, including clearing, grading, and excavation, that
results in the disturbance of five (5) or more acres of land. The District will not require a
performance bond or other type of surety from cities, townships, municipal corporations,
counties, the state or federal government, or agencies of any of the aforementioned.
(g) Common Scheme of Development. In determining stormwater management
requirements under this section, development or redevelopment on adjacent sites under
common or related ownership shall be considered in the aggregate. The requirements
applicable to a development or redevelopment under this section shall be determined with
respect to all development that has occurred on the site, or on adjacent sites under common
or related ownership, since the date this rule took effect.
/ldopted Rule N
November 24, 1998 4
o
(h) Additional Development or Redevelopment on Developed Sites. When the
impervious area on a site is increased by 50 percent or more, the requirements
imposed by this rule will be determined with respect to the site in a pre-
development condition. When the impervious area on a site is increased by less
than 50 percent, the requirements imposed by this rule will be determined with
respect to only the additional impervious surface and site alteration proposed.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS.
BMPs consist of structural and non-structural practices. BMPs must be incorporated in all projects
requiring a permit under this rule and must be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual
"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas (revised July 1991) and its future revisions. Other BMPs
not addressed in the MPCA manual may be allowed on an experimental basis if their use will
generate new and useful data or information regarding effectiveness of the practice. All
applications for which compliance only with BMP's is required shall delineate buildings and
structures showing that door and window openings are a minimum of two feet above the 100 year
high water elevation. The following table is a summary of the MPCA BMPs and their
effectiveness for removal of metals, phosphorus, nitrates, and suspended solids from stormwater,
and for controlling rates and volumes of runoff.
BMP Type _E~,ec;.;veness of Selected BMPs
Metal.~._~s Phosphorus Phosphorus Nitrate._____~s _Solids Floatables Rate I .Volume Control
Co~,-ol
Structural
~'nfiltration (no overflow) high high high high high high yes yes
Dry Detention (24 hr) moderate Iow Iow Iow mode~..[= outlet yes Iow
specific
Oil/grit separators moderate Iow no no Iow yes no no
Skh~i~rs no no no no no yes no no
Grass st,dp/swale moderate Iow Iow Iow moderate Iow Iow Iow
!Diversions no no no no design specific no partial partial
Non-structural
Wetlands yes yes* yes* yes* yes yes yes partial
organic litter management Iow yes yes yes yes yes no no
Street sweeping yes yes yes
yes yes no no
fertilizer management ** mod.high mod-high
no no no no
!catch basin cleaning Iow no no no Iow*** no no
~ub-grade preparation no
non-phosphorus fertilizers
/ldopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
,Temporan/
Temporary silt fence yes yes no no yes*** no no no
Straw bales yes yes no no yes*** no no no
Temporary sediment basin yes yes design specific
yes outlet design Iow
specific specific
Rock enh-ance pad no no no no yes no no no
* Natural wet]ands can also contribute nutrients
** No data to evaluate effectiveness
*** Small volumes only
CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Development on a site shall not increase the peak rate of stormwater runoff from the
rate that existed before the development. The_criterion shall be analyzed and met for
runoff- producing events of critical duration with return frequencies of 1, 10 and 100 years
in the subwatershed in which the site is located.
(b) Natural existing low areas will be used, where feasible, for detention of runoff to
comply with rate control criteria. Reservoir routing procedures and critical duration runoff
events shall be used for design of detention areas and outlets.
(c) The proposed project shall not adversely affect water levels off the site during or after
construction.
(d) Runoff tributary to the project must be accommodated in the analyses and design of
new stormwater management facilities.
(e) The volume of runoff may not increase due to the project when the receiving area of
said runoff is landlocked and not capable of handling the increased volume of runoff. In
addition, the applicant shall either own or have proper rights over the landlocked property
to handle water from the development. Back-to-back 100-year runoff events will be used to
analyze holding capacity and freeboard for landlocked areas.
(f) All stormwater rate control facilities shall be located above the projected 100-year flood
elevation for the site and within drainage, utility and/or towage easements to provide
access and to prevent future alteration or encroachment.
(g) Water quantity control methods and facilities used or constructed pursuant to this rule
shall be in conformance with approved Municipal Stormwater Management Plans.
(h) Outfall structures shah incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scouring.
(i) New buildings and structures shall have door and window openings a minimum of
two feet above the 100 year high water elevation.
Adopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
6
5. WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Facilities shall be established on site to meet the water quality standards of this section.
Facilities, including wet detention ponds and other oS?Stems using BMP's in addition to or
in place of ponding shall be designed for at least 50 ~o phosphorus removal efficiency. The
applicant shall use the PondNet model, or a model approved by the Board as equally
applicable, to determine removal efficiency, using a 2.5" rainfall. Total tributary drainage
area shall be used to calculate permanent pool volume. Pond outlets shall remove
floatables from runoff before discharge for a I year event. All ponds must provide a ten
(10) foot safety bench at a slope no steeper than 10H:IV and two (2) feet of freeboard above
the 100 year pond level.
(b) Quality control facility outfall structures shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion
and scouring.
(c) New buildings and structures shall have door and window openings a minimum of
two feet above the 100 year high water elevation.
6. REQUIRED EXHIBITS (SUBMIT IN DUPLICATE).
(a) If the water quantity or water quality provisions set forth in sections 4 and 5 of this rule
apply to a proposed development, plans certified by a professional engineer registered in
the State of Minnesota and reflecting the following items shall accompany the permit
application (one set of plans must be full size; one set must be reduced to a maximum size
of 11" x 17"):
(1) Property lines and delineation of Iands under ownership of the applicant.
(2) Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff from off-site and proposed
and existing subwaterSheds on-site.
(3) Proposed and existing stormwater facilities location, alignment, and elevation.
(4) Delineation of existing on-site wetland, marshes, shoreland, and/or floodplain
areas.
(5) Identification, description, permeability and approximate delineation of site
soils in both existing and proposed as-developed condition, for applications
proposing infiltration as a stormwater management practice.
(6) Existing and proposed normal, and 100 year water elevations on-site.
(7) Existing and proposed site contour elevations at two foot intervals, related to
NGVD, 1929 datum.
(8) Construction plans and specifications of all proposed stormwater management
facilities.
Adopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
o
(9) Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for the 1, 10 and 100 year critical
events, existing and proposed conditions.
(10) All hydrologic, water quality, and hydraulic computations completed to
design the proposed stormwater management facilities.
(11) Documentation indicating conformance with an existing municipal
stormwater management plan. When a municipal plan does not exist,
documentation that the municipality has reviewed the project.
(12) Delineation of any flowage easements or other property interests dedicated to
stormwater management purposes, including, but not limited to, county or judicial
ditches.
(13) Documentation that the project has received a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit from the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) if required by the MPCA, once available.
(b) A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet
structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures, and all other stormwater facilities.
The maintenance agreement shall specify the methods, schedule and responsible parties for
maintenance and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District's
Maintenance Agreement Form. A Maintenance Agreement Form will be provided to the
applicant for use by the applicant as a maintenance agreement or as guidance if the
applicant desires to draft a separate maintenance agreement. The maintenance agreement
must be filed of record in the county recorder's office before any land-altering activity
occurs at the site.
(c) Geotechnical soil boring results if available.
EXCEPTIONS.
(a) If the District has approved a municipal stormwater management plan for a
municipality, or for a subwatershed within a municipality, the requirements of this rule
may be deemed satisfied upon showing of compliance by an individual developer with the
municipal plan.
(b) The peak flow requirement of this rule will be waived on a determination by the Board
of Managers that a downstream facility(ies) is in place or has been ordered and the
facility(les) is designed with adequate capacity to limit the peak runoff rate from the
subwatershed under fully developed conditions. The peak flow requirement of this rule
may also be waived on a determination by the Board Of Managers that the time of
concentration of the downstream receiving water body is sufficiently long such that
limiting the peak rate of runoff from the project has either no practical effect or an adverse
effect.
Adopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
(c) The water quality requirement of this rule will be waived on a determination by the
Board of Managers that a downstream facility(les) is in place or has been ordered and the
facility(ies) is designed to remove at least 50% of the total phosphorus from runoff entering
the facility from the subwatershed under fully developed conditions.
(d) The requirement of paragraph 4(a) or paragraph 5(a) that peak flow or stormw~iter
quality be managed on site will be waived on a determination by the Board of Managers
that meeting the requirement on site is infeasible; that an off-site facility treating the runoff
from the applicant's development or its equivalent will allow the applicant to meet the
requirement or provide equivalent management; and that the applicant, before
commencing any land-altering activity, will hold the legal rights necessary for design,
construction and long-term operation and maintenance of the facility.
~ldopted Rule N
November 24, 1998
9
DRAFT
RECEIVE, 7 lg98
LAKE MINNETO~ CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Save the Lake Advisory Committee
10:30 a.m., Tuesday, November 17, 1998
LMCD Conference Room
Lili McMillan, Chair; Marleane Callaghan, MCWD; Tom Maple, MCWD; Paul Pedersen,
Gray's Bay Marina; Gene Strommen; Gene Partyka, LMCD Board; Greg Nybeck, LMCD
Executive Director; Roger Winberg, LMCD Administrative Technician.
~ALL MEETING TO ORDER.
McMillan called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m.
REVIEW OF 10/20/98 MINUTES.
The minutes from the 10/20/98 Save the Lake Advisory Committee meeting were accepted as
submitted.
PLANNING FOR ~ FEBRUARY "SAVE THE LAKE" RF~OGN1TION DINNER.
McMillan discussed the upcoming Save the Lake Recognition Dinner. She recommended the
theme of the Dinner be related to Lake Minnetonka, yet be fun for those that attend. She noted
an event with better attendance is desired.
The Committee discussed attendance at past Dinners and how some other conflicts might have
impacted them.
Pedersen noted one of these conflicts might be the national boat show in Florida during that
time of year. The Committee discussed the idea of scheduling the 1999 Dinner so that it does
not conffict with this boat show. Pedersen stated he would get back to District staff on the
dates of the national boat show.
Lord Fletcher's and the Lafayette Club were mentioned as possible sites for the Dinner. A
menu from the Lafayette Club was distributed to the Committee for their review. A possible
date of February 11, 1999 was discussed for the Dinner.
Callaghan suggested Doug Jensen, Director of the MN Sea Grant Program, as a posa'ble
speaker for the Dinner.
Save the Lake Advisory Committee Minutes, 11/17/98, Page 2
UPDATE ON USE OF CONSERVATION CORPS OFFICERS FOR ZEBRA MUSSEL
Strommen summarized a discussion he had with Michelle Bratager, Coordinator of DNR
Inspections, regarding the use of Conservation Corps Officers to assist in the spraying of boats
at public accesses to prevent the introduction of zebra mussels. He noted they have some
logistical concerns including equipment availability, timing, water availability, fuel
arrangements, spray supplies, and staff training. He added the DNR has questions on how this
might conflict their other assigned responsibilities.
Pedersen asked the Committee if anyone is familiar with background of the Conservation
Corps program.
Nybeck stated there is a mandate that requires a minimum of 20,000 hours of inspections on
infested waters in the State of Minnesota. He added he believed the main objectives of the
officers are to inspect watercraft leaving these waters and to educate the public about exotics
species. He concluded he was unsure whether the officers had the authority to issue citations.
Pedersen suggested the public might be better served if these mandated hours are spent during
peak hours at the most commonly used public accesses on the lake.
McMillan stated it might be beneficial if the District provides a game plan to the DNR on what
public accesses, what days, and what hours Conservation Corps officers should be on Lake
Minnetonka. She asked Pedersen what he thought could be effective in preventing the
introduction of zebra mussels at launch sites.
Pedersen stated educational literature is available to the public who use his access to the lake
from his property. He noted because they have a high rate of repeat customers, it makes it
easier for them once they are properly educated. He added staff has been trained to pay
special attention to watercraft with out-of-state license plates. He stated he has a high-pressure
sprayer that he uses to spray boats if there is sufficient time. He noted one drawback with his
high-pressure sprayer is the water is not hot enough. He concluded he believed the message of
cleaning boats to prevent the introduction of zebra mussels is getting out to the public because
he has received phone calls asking about it.
The consensus of the Committee was to extend an invitation to Bratager to the next meeting to
further discuss this agenda item.
DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL WATER OUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IN
HADq~DS AND JENNINGS BAYS.
Maple provided the Committee a summary of water quality on Lake Minnetonka, with
emphasis on Halsteds and Jennings Bays. He commented:
· The two main contributing factors to the poorer water quality on the west-end of the lake
are Six-Mile and Painters Creeks. He noted Six-Mile Creek, which runs into Halsteds
Bay, and Painters Creek, which runs into Jennings Bay, contribute a significant amount
Save the Lake Advisory Committee ~[il~utes, 11/17/98, Page
of nutrient loading in these bays, especially phosphorous. It is estimated that 60,000 to
70,000 pounds of phosphorous are loaded annually into Lake Minnetonka.
He added due to the shallowness of Jennings and Halsteds bays, the water column is
constantly being loaded with phosphorous stirred up by propeller movement.
Alum treatments provide a short-term solution to phosphorous problems while retention
ponds provide long-term solutions.
Callaghan stated the MCWD, the Hennepin Conservation District, the NRCS, and the U of M
Extensions Services has recently submitted an EQUIP grant application. She noted the focus
of the grant is to address best land management practices in the raising of livestock and horses.
She concluded the results of the program would be manure and pasture education that benefits
water quality for small livestock producers.
OTFIER DISCUSSION.
Strommen suggested some members of the Advisory Committee coordinate a meeting with
DNR in the near future to discuss concerns expressed regarding spraying boats at public
Nybeck suggested that Herb Suerth be invited to attend that meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:46 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lili McMillan, Chair
Save the Lake Advisory Committee
DRAFT
LAKE MINNETONKPr CONSFAIVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
7:00 PM, Wednesday, November 18, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Babcock called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Douglas Babcock, Tonka Bay; Andrea Ahrens, Mound; Bert Foster, Deephaven;
Tom Gilman, Excelsior; Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Gene Partyka, Minnetrista; Sheldon Wert,
Greenwood; Lili McMillan, Orono; Kent Dahlen, Minnetonka Beach; Craig Eggers, Victoria; Greg
Kitchak, Minnetonka. Also present: Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Gregory Nybeck, Executive
Director; Roger Winberg, Administrative Technician.
Members absent: Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Bob Rascop, Shorewood; Herb Seurth, Woodland.
CltAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock
· The 11/25/98 Regular Board meeting has been cancelled due to the Thanksgiving holiday.
· The Open House for the new District Office is scheduled on 11/19/98 from 4-7 P.M.
· An Executive Session was conducted at the 10/28/98 Board meeting to discuss the performance of
the Executive Director. He noted he would be discussing results of this with Nybeck in the near
furore.
READING OF MINUTES - 10/28/98 LMCD Regular Board Meeting
MOTION: Nelson moved, Partyka seconded to approve the minutes of the 10/28/98 Regular Board
Meeting as submitted.
VOTE: Ayes (8), Abstained (1, Dahlen); motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.)
Steve Osmera, 3900 Shoreline Drive, stated he recently received a letter from Hennepin County
Environmental Services that indicated the home he purchased in the past couple years would not have
dockage through the County's multiple dock license. He expressed concern with allowing only 25
overnight storage spaces when there is a demand for 31. He requested an agenda item be scheduled for
the 12/9/98 Board meeting to allow for a formal presentation.
Kitchak and Gilman arrived at 7:05 p.m.
Babcock directed staff to work with Mr. Osmera in facilitating an agenda item for the 12/9/98 meeting.
He provided a summary of the District's position on the Hennepin County multiple dock that relates to
the Streaters Park addition. He noted:
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
Novoml r lg, lOOS
Page 2
· The District has not removed anything that is currently licensed. He noted there might
have been a discrepancy in 1998 between Hennepin County and the District regarding the
number of approved overnight storage BSU's and the number of permits they issued to
residents for overnight storage.
· The Sheriff's Water Patrol dock has been included in the multiple dock facility, as
recommended by LeFevere. He added it previously had not been licensed.
· A historical review was conducted by District staff of the multiple dock facility. He noted
it was recognized that an error was previously made that allowed the number of BSU's
currently approved in comparison to what Code allows. He stated a special density license
was approved in the mid 1980's; however, it should not have been because the interest of
the property cannot be tied to a specific group of landowners. He noted the Board
concluded this license was granted in error and decided to grandfather what exists today in
a legal, non-conforming status.
· Hennepin County might feel obligated to provide dockage based on the deed; however,
they are obligated to obtain a multiple dock license annually from the District. He noted
they submitted applications to convert six transient BSU's to six overnight storage BSU's
this past spring.
· The Board considered the applications this summer but denied them because current Code
provides for substantially less than what the applicant is approved for. He noted the Board
had concern with 'the expansion of overnight storage BSU's because of the grandfathered
status.
· There might have not been a clear understanding of District policies and procedures and
how they relate to Hennepin County's policies and procedures. He noted this might have
been the cause of the current situation in which homeowners are looking for additional
dockage.
Osmera stated he believed they are not seeking anything other than what they have been permitted for
back to 1996 with Hennepin County. He suggested the denial of the applications by the District would
substantially hurt his property value because he purchased it assuming it had lake access.
Babcock clarified the District has not approved changes for Hennepin County's multiple dock license
the past three years. He m-stated Hennepin County might have issued more overnight storage slips
than what they are approved for by the District.
Nybeck reviewed a staff memo that highlighted historical research of the multiple dock facility. He
noted that 25 overnight storage BSU's have been approved, without change, for Hennepin County since
1986.
Osmera questioned whether some of the transient BSU's could be used for overnight storage.
Balx:ock stated the Board concluded to not allow the conversion of transient to overnight storage BSU's
because the Code prohibits it. He questioned why Hennepin County issued 31 overnight storage BSU's
wheu~ey are only approved for 25. He suggested it might be more appropriate for the home owners
to resolve this with Hennepin County rather than the District because they are responsible for the
distribution of the 25 BSU's.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
November 18, 1998 Page 3
A homeowner questioned whether boats stored beyond the licensed 25 BSU's for overnight storage in
1998 were legal.
Babcock stated from a District perspective, any boats stored on an overnight basis beyond 25 were
illegal.
Nybeck clarified when the application was denied this summer, Hennepin County indicated there were
up to six boats being stored beyond licensed overnight storage BSU's approved. He noted the Board
agreed to allow them for the duration of the 1998 boating season.
Babcock stated if an apartment building was constructed on the Streaters Park Addition, would all the
residents be entitled to dockage on the lake? He noted the Board decided there needs to be a limitation.
Mike Brandt, on behalf of Hennepin County, addressed the issue of approved overnight storage BSU's.
He noted Hennepin County was aware of the demand for additional overnight storage BSU's and was
working with previous District Administrative Technician Nancy Randall. He stated the County was
concerned with the total number of BSU's rather than overnight storage BSU's. He concluded they
were unclear that a new license needed to be secured when there was a conversion of transient to
overnight storage BSU's. He suggested there might have been a communication breakdown between
the District and Hennepin County offices.
McMillan suggested these docking and boat density issues should have been discussed when the
developer approached the City of Spring Park for proper permits.
Babcock reviewed the 1997 multiple dock license issued to Hennepin County and stated he believed it is
clear on the breakdown of overnight and storage BSU's. He noted the license states that no overnight
parking is allowed in the 40 transient slips.
Foster stated the ordinances of the District have been established over the years to have some
management and control of Lake Minnetonka. He added there is a view of the District that transient
slips are a benefit to the lake because they provide destination points and are a relief to boat density
during peak periods. He noted he appreciated the situation where there is a demand for 31 overnight
storage slips when there are only 25 approved; however, he questioned whether the District can be held
responsible when it has been quite clearly identified on the license granted to Hennepin County.
Babcock stated if the homeowners had approached the District 'prior to purchasing their homes to verify
whether 31 overnight storage BSU's were approved, they would have learned that Hennepin County is
licensed for only 25 based on District records.
Kitchak questioned whether a homeowners association has been formed to discuss this issue with
Hennepin County. He also questioned whether there were 25 watercraft parked on an overnight basis
this past summer. He added he believed the transient slips are providing a service to the lake, noting
he was unable to use them once this summer because they were full.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
November 18, 1998
Osmera stated he attended the public hearing on 5113198 for the pending applications.
whether the conversion of transient slips was discussed at this public hearing.
Page 4
He questioned
Kitchak stated he believed the District is not the governmental body to resolve this situation. He noted
they need to discuss this with Flennepin County, the realtors, and the developer.
Nelson commented on how the developer or realtors might have mislead the residents. He expressed
concern with this issue and stated he discussed it with city officials. He noted the City of Spring Park
assured him that the developer was informed that dockage rights do not necessarily go with the
development of the property.
L~Fevere stated he recalled the District has seen similar cases where residents claim they have been told
they have dockage rights by a realtor. He noted he has told developers over the years to not guarantee
property owners they have dockage rights because that is subject to reasonable regulations. He added
rules can change over time and there is no entitlement to the lake.
Weft stated he believed the District cannot solve this problem. He suggested the residents work with
the Hennepin County such as alternating the use of the 25 overnight storage BSU's with the 31
residents.
LeFevere stated all the owners of the parcels in the Streaters Park addition have deeded dock access to
the property in question. He added the solution would be easy if there were only 25 properties
demanding dockage for the 25 approved overnight storage BSU's. He noted the problem exists because
there is a current demand from 31 properties. He suggested the residents consider forming an
association to impose covenants against all their properties to prevent the demand from increasing.
Brandt stated that District staff indicated to Hennepin County that the conversion of transient to
overnight storage BSU's should not be a problem because they had sufficient public amenities for the
special density license. He noted he believed there is shared blame from all parties involved. He
suggested the District consider grandfathefing the license at 31 overnight storage BSU's rather than 25.
lie concluded he believed this would solve all problems other than the District setting the precedent for
conversion.
LeFevere stated the application received from the Hennepin County for 1998 was to expand six
overnight storage BSU's. He noted any confusion about this 1998 application could not account for
what happened in prior years and could not have been relied on in prior years. He concluded there is
no legal authority that requires the District to grant 31 overnight BSU's at this site.
Nyheck addressed the comment that District staff forwarded feedback that approval of the conversion of
transient slips should not be a problem. He stated when the applications were received from Hennepin
County, staff believed the multiple dock facility was conforming to Code. He added staff might have
indicated the applications had sufficient public amenities to be considered by the Board; however, he
did not recall feedback that approval should not be a problem, lie concluded after the public hearing
held to discuss the applications, it was recognized the problem exists in that it currently is a legal, non-
conforming facility and that Code prohibits conversion of use.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
November 18, 1998 Page 5
LeFevere concurred when the Board initially reviewed the application, there were abundant Public
amenities that justified amending the special density license. He added the rescinding of the special
density license did not cause a problem for 1998 because they received more overnight Storage BSU's
than they should have. He concluded if there was a misunderstanding by staff, it had no impact prior
to 1998.
Babcock concluded the Board understands this is a tough issue and hopes this discussion benefits the
residents in resolving the issue.
CONSENT AGENDA- Consent Agenda items identified by "*" will be approved in one motion unless
a Board member requests a discussion of any item, in which case the item will be removed from the
Consent Agenda.
McMillan requested the Minutes from the 11/17/98 Save the Lake Advisory Committee meeting be
removed from the consent agenda because they have not been completed.
Foster moved, Nelson seconded to approve the items on the consent agenda, removing the Minutes
from the 11/17/98 Save the Lake Advisory Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Items so
approved include 2C, Hennepin County Sheriffs Water Patrol Significant Activity Report, and 3A,
Minutes from the 11/13/98 EWM/Exotics Task Force meeting.
1. WATER STRUCTURES
A. Minnetonka Yacht Club (Site 1), staff recommends approval of 1998 renewal w/o change
application.
MOTION: Foster moved, Ahems seconded to approve the 1998 renewal without change
application for Minnetonka Yacht Club, Site 1.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
LAKE USE & RECREATION
A. Ordinance Amendment, Third reading of an ordinance relating to launching of watercraft
infested with zebra mussels.
Foster questioned whether there has been feedback from the DNR.
Babcock stated feedback has been received back from Gary Montz, Coordinator of Zebra
Mussels for the DNR. He noted he expressed concern with the draft ordinance amendment,
especially the required 30-day drying period. He added the DNR believes scientific
documentation states that mussels cannot survive beyond 15 days and that they cannot support
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
November 18, 1998 Page 6
the ordinance amendment as written. He concluded he has encouraged the DNR to take a
.., stronger position on zebra mussels on a statewide basis some years ago and that he believed
adopting the ordinance would resolve some of the issues around Lake Minnetonka.
McMillan stated the 30-day drying period was discussed at thc 11/13/98 EWM/Exotics
Taskforce meeting. She questioned whether the District adopting another ordinance will
accomplish the goals and objectives established to prevent the introduction of zebra mussels.
She stated she believed the 30 day period is too long and that the District should focus more on
the education of the public.
Nelson concurred with McMillan that the 30-day drying period is too long. He noted the same
discussion took place when the zebra mussel Code was established for special event participants.
lie suggested the 15-day drying period discussed by the DNR might be more appropriate.
,. Foster noted the DNR memo states that veligers are much more fragile than adult zebra mussels.
lie added he has pushed the Board for more education in recent years.
Babcock stated he believed there are other scientific studies that differ from the opinion of the
DNR. He added the 30-day drying requirement in the draft ordinance amendment is consistent
with the special event ordinance.
MOTION: Foster moved, Nelson seconded to table third reading of the draft ordinance
amendment to allow staff to determine what scientific evidence is available
regarding drying and to allow staff time to evaluate the two ordinances.
VOTE: Ayes (9), Nayes (2, Babcock and Gilman); motion carded.
B. Update on 11/17/98 SheriWs Water Patrol Annual Joint & Cooperative Agreement meeting.
Foster updated the Board on the meeting.
·
·
He noted:
There are no changes required to the joint and cooperative agreement for 1999.
There was good cooperation between the two organizations regarding special event
permitting this past summer.
In March of 1999, a Peace Officers' meeting is scheduled to report police activity
with the member cities, especially that involving the lake.
He encouraged Board members to fide with Water Patrol deputies next summer to
help understand their role on the lake.
They believed there has been an increase in the number of designated drivers in boats
in recent years, lie noted that was attributed to recent changes in State laws.
Weft left at 8:55 p.m.
Babcock stated that Hennepin County reported that 68 % of their Water Patrol hours in liennepin
County were dedicated to Lake Minnetonka.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
November 18, 1998
Page 7
Ahems and McMillan left at. 9:O0 p.m.
D. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
3. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
B. 11/13/98 meeting report.
Nybeck provided an update of the 11/13/98 EWM/Exotics Task Force meeting. He reported:
· An update on the maintenance of the EWM equipment was provided. He noted the
hydraulic fluid in two of the harvesters would be converted to an environmental
friendly fluid next spring.
· There was discussion of the draft ordinance relating to the introduction of zebra
mussels. He noted there was significant discussion on the 30-day dry period;
however, there was no recommendation from the Committee.
· There was no update from the Army Corps of Engineers regarding triclopyr research
on Lake Minnetonka this past summer.
· Chip Welling, MN DNR Eurasian Watermilfoil Coordinator, has taken a two or
three year leave of absence to work on a cumulative effects assessment biologist
position with the DNR.
C. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
4. FINANCIAL
A. Audit of vouchers for payment (11/1/98 - 11/15/98).
Nelson reviewed the audit of vouchers for payment as submitted.
MOTION: Foster moved, Gilman seconded to approve the vouchers for payment as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
5. SAVE THE LAKE
B. 11/17/98 meeting report.
The 11/17/98 Save the Lake meeting report was tabled to the 12/9/98 Board of Directors
meeting.
~ Minnetonka Conservation District
Re~d~r Board Meeting
November 18, 1998
C. Additional Business.
Fage 8
There was no additional business.
6. ADMINISTRATION
A. Appointments for 1999.
Babcock reviewed the staff memo that made recommendations for 1999. He noted staff made
the following recommendations:
· Auditor Selection- Abdo, Abdo, Eick, & Meyer
· Legal Counsel- Kennedy & Graven
· Prosecuting Attorney- Tallen & Baertschi
· Official Newspaper- Lakeshore Weekly News
· Bank Depository Resolution for fiscal year 1999- First National Bank of the Lakes
Nybeck stated the District will continue to bank at First National Bank of the Lakes in Navarre
on an interim basis. He added Steve Tallen plans on attending the 12/9/98 meeting to ulxlate
the Board.
MOTION: Foster moved, Gilman seconded to approve the appointments for 1999 as
recommended by staff.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Nybeck reported on the following:
· Ahems was re-appointed by the City of Mound for a three-year term rather than a one-year
term.
· Staff will be forwarding draft copies of the 1998 Lake Minnetonka Boat Density Survey and
the update on Lake Minnetonka car/trailer inventory parking in the near future. He added
staff intends to schedule discussion at the 12/9/98 Board meeting.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
®
NEW BUSINESS
Nelson questioned when the Save the Lake Recognition Dinner is planned in 1999.
Lake ]Vlinnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
November 18, 1998 Page 9
Babcock stated historically, the Dinner is planned on the Thursday of Valentines Day week.
10. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Babcock adjourned the meeting at 9:09 P.M.
Douglas Babcock, Chairman
Eugene A. Partyka, Secretary
RECEIVE
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:00 PM, Wednesday, December 9, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
?
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock
READING OF MINUTES - 11118198 LMCD Regular Board Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.)
LAKE USE & RECREATION
A) Schoell & Madson, Inc., Discussion of draft 1998 Lake Minnetonka Boat Density
Survey (previously mailed out);
B)
Additional Business;
WATER STRUCTURES
A) Hennepin County Environmental Management, discussion of approved 1998
Multiple Dock License/Streaters Park Addition;
B)
Additional Business;
EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE
A) Ordinance Amendment, Third reading of an ordinance relating to launching of
watercraft infested with zebra mussels;
B) Additional Business;
FINANCIAL
A) Audit of vouchers for payment (11/16/98 - 11/30198);
(12/1198 - 12/15198)
B) October financial summary and balance sheet;
C) Additional Business;
SAVE THE LAKE
A) Minutes from the 11117198 "STL" Advisory Committee meeting;
B) 11117/98 meeting report;
C) Additional Business;
ADMINISTRATION
A) Tallen and Baertschi, update from prosecuting attorney;
B) Fames v. LMCD, Report from District Attomey;
C) Discussion of District Personnel Policy;
D) Additional Business;
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
10.
OLD BUSINESS
· Discussion on direction for outlot licensing
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
ABDO
jEICK &
f~d ~lic Accountants & Cor~mn~s
7241 Ohms l~.e
Suite
Minneapolis. MN 55439
March 26, 1998
Members of the City Council
City of Mound, Minnesota
Professional standards require that we provide you with the following information related to our audit
Our Res onsibili Under Generall Acce ted Auditin Standards and Government Auditin Standards
As stated in our engagement letter, our responsibility, as described by professional standards, is to plan and perform our audit
to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement and are fairly
presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Our audit is designed to provide reasonable
rofessional judgment, would have a material effect on the financial
assurance of detecting m~sstatements that, m our p . . · · than this materiality level
statements taken as a whole. Consequently, our au&t will not necessarily detect m~sstatement less
that might exist due to error, fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets.
As part of our audit, we considered the internal control of the City. Such considerations were solely for the purpose of
determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance concerning such internal control. As part of obtaining
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of
compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. However, the objective of our tests was not to
provide an opinion on compliance with such provisions.
Accounting Estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the combined financial statements prepared by management and are based on
management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain and
accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the general purpose financial statements
because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive
estimates affecting the financial statements was depreciation on fixed assets.
Management's estimate of depreciation is based on estimated useful lives of the assets. We evaluated the key factors and
assumptions used to develop this estimate in determining that it is reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a
whole.
Significant Audit Adiustments_ .
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a significant audit adjustment as a proposed correction of the general
purpose financial statements that, in our judgment, may not have been detected except through our auditing procedures. We
proposed no material audit adjustments.
612.835.9090 ® F~ 612.835.3261
March 26, 1998
Page Two
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a matter, whether or not
resolved to our satisfaction, concerning a financial accounting, reporting or auditing matter that could be significant to the
general purpose financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose
during the course of our audit.
Issues Discussed Prior to Retention of Independent Auditors
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with
management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of
our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing our audit.
~Reportable Conditions_
In planning and performing our audit of the general purpose financial statements of the City of Mound for the year ended
December 31, 1997, we considered its internal control in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of
expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on internal control. However, we noted
certain matters involving internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our
attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control that, in our judgment, could
adversely affect the City's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data consistent with the assertions of
management in the financial statements.
A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control
components does ni>t reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in
relation to the f'mancial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the
normal course of performing their assigned functions.
Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily disclose all matters in internal control that might be reportable
conditions and, accordingly, would not necessarily disclose all reportable conditions that are also considered to be a material
weakness, as defined above. However, we noted the following reportable condition that we believe to be a material
weakness.
Segregation of Duties
Our study and evaluation disclosed that because of the limited size of your office staff, your organization has limited
segregation of duties. A good internal control structure contemplates an adequate segregation of duties so that no one
individual handles a transaction from inception to completion. While we recognize that your organization is not large
enough to permit an adequate segregation of duties in all respects, it is important, however, that you be aware of this
condition.
Other Matters
The following are items that came to our attention during the audit that we feel should be reviewed.
General Fund
The fund balance of the General Fund is divided into three components:
City of Mound
March 26, 1998
Page Three
· Designated for severance pay
· Designated for park dedication fee, and
· Undesignated
The designated portion of fund balance is determined as follows:
The City's liability for compensated absences and vested severance pay is computed at year end and the amount required
to fully fund the computed liability totaled $183,135 at year end.
Park Dedication Fee_
The amount designated from park dedication fees was $89,948 at year end. This will be used for park projects in the
future.
The fund balance which remains after designated amounts are determined is the undesignated component of the fund
balance.
The unreserved and undesignated fund balance compared with expenditures follows:
Year Ended
December 31
Fund Balance
Undesignated as a Percent
Fund Balance E~xpenditures ~
1997 $ 1,230,858
998,106
1996 770,649
1995 684,508
1994 484,569
1993 471,469
1992 478,612
1991 542,766
1990 538,186
1989 671,022
1988
$ 2,628,633 46.83%
2,467,410 40.45
2,374,443 32.46
2,274,310 30.09
2,282,341 21.23
2,234,444 21.10
2,198,925 21.76
2,287,446 23.73
2,298,765 23.41
2,126,971 31.55
Undesignated Fund Balance and Expenditures
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$-
1988
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
I· Fund Balance~
· Expenditures
1997
i City of Mound
March 26, 1998
Page Four
The unreserved and undesignated fund balance increased $232,752 during 1997· Actual revenue exceeded budgeted
revenue by $269,640 and expenditures were in excess of budget by $46,873· The favorable variances in all revenue
categories helped produce the large increase in fund balance·
The City must have a fund balance at year end sufficient to finance the following year's expenditures until the major
· . lance designated for severance pay and for park dedication fee, while
revenue sources become_avada, b~. The fund ba A ~ Y.o~,,~.~ cl~'~ and undesi hated combined represents
· . ~-~ ~, . .........l~nated g
designated, is available t-or casl~ tlow purposes. ~ n~ ,u,,~ o
57·2% of 1997 expenditures and transfers· The current General Fund fund balance is adequate to provide the working
capital requirements. Some reasons for maintaining a fund balance are listed below:
A summary of the 1997 operations is as follows:
Purposes and Benefits of a Fund Balance
Expenditures are incurred somewhat evenly throughout the year. However, property tax and state aid revenues are
not received until the second half of the year. An adequate fund balance will provide the cash flow required to
finance the General Fund expenditures.
The City is vulnerable to legislative actions at the State and Federal level. The State has continually adjusted the
local government aid and property tax credit formulas along with implementing levy limits. An adequate fund
balance will provide a temporary buffer against those aid adjustments and levy limits.
Expenditures not anticipated at the time the annual budget was adopted may need immediate Council action. These
would include capital outlay replacement, lawsuits and other items. An adequate fund balance will provide the
financing needed for such expenditures.
A strong fund balance will assist the City in maintaining or improving its bond rating.
Revenue
Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue
Over Expenditures
Other Financing Sources (Uses)
Operating transfers in
Operating transfers out
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Actual
Budget
$ 2,522,120 $ 2,791,760
2,420,370_ 2,467,243.
101,750 324,517
Variance -
Favorable
$ 269,640
(46,873)
222~76~
43,500 43,500
(161,39~0) (161,390_)
(117,890) _ (117,890)
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue and
Other Financing Sources Over
Expenditures and Other Financing
Uses
Fund Balance, January 1
Fund Balance, December 31
~)
206,627
1,297,31~
$ 1 503 941
$ 222.767
A further detailed comparison of revenue and expenditures are as follows:
Revenue Source
1997
Property Taxes $1,300,817
Intergovernmental Revenue 1,022,608
10,453
Charges for Services 155,399
Licenses and Permits 116,236
Fines 59,694
Interest 126,553
Other Revenue
Transfers from Other Funds 43.50_0
Total Revenue and Transfers $2 835 260
Percent
of
Total--
45.88%
36.07
.37
5.48
4.10
2.11
4.46
1.5~
100.00%
1996 _
$1,298,717
948,728
9,725
132,553
95,854
36,704
105,965
43,50Q
$2,671,744
Increase
From1996
$ 2,100
73,880
728
22,846
20,382
22,990
20,588
$163,514
City of Mound
March 26, 1998
Page Five
1997 Revenue
Licenses
and permits
5.48%
Fines
4.10%
Other
6.94%
Transfers in
1.53%
Propertytaxes
45.88%
Intergovernmental
36.07%
Programs
General Government
Public Safety Police
Planning and Inspection
Civil Defense
Public Works
Streets
Culture and Recreation
Miscellaneous
Capital Outlay
Transfers to Other Funds
Total Expenditures
1997
$ 673,784
868,736
190,785
3,273
435,731
162,583
55,271
77,080
161,39~
$2 628 633
Percent
of
Total_
25.63%
33.05
7.26
.12
16.58
6.19
2.10
2.93
6.1~
100.0_0%
1996
631,498
830,829
170,238
3,749
441,673
156,914
15,042
62,157
155,31~
$2,467,41Q
Increase
(Decrease)
From 1996
$ 42,286
37,907
20,547
(476)
(5,942)
5,669
40,229
14,923
6,080
$161,223
City ofMound
March 26,1998
Page Six
1997 Expenditures
Transfers out
6.14%
Capital outlay
2.93%
Miscellaneous
2.10%
General Government
25.63%
Public Safety
40.43%
Culture and recreation
6.19%
Public Works
16.58%
City of Mound
March 26, 1998
Page Seven
Special Revenue Funds.
Special revenue funds are used to account for revenue derived from specific taxes or other earmarked revenue sources.
They are usually required by statute or local ordinance to f'mance particular functions or activities of government. A
comparison of 1997 and 1996 fund balances follows:
Fund Balance Increase
Fund 1997 1996 (Decrease)
Cemetery $ 3,034 $ 7,355 $ (4,321)
Community Development Block Grant 44,330 (15,549) 59,879
Area Fire Service 213,573 173,647. 39,926
Dock
Total $ 260,93~7 $ 165,453. $ 95,484
_Debt Service Funds
Governmental accounting does not match the assets of each debt service fund with the outstanding debt to be retired by
each fund. The following is intended to provide that information.
Debt Service Fund
Commerce Place Tax Increment
County Road 15 (1988)
Public Works Facility
Total
Cash and Total
Investments Assets
$ 190,605 $ 190,605
28,465 47,257
108,592 110,04~
$ 327 662 $ 347 911
Bonds
Out~
$ 1,250,000
35,000
420,000
$ 1 705 000
The bond issues will be paid with tax increment collections, property taxes or special assessments or a combination of
those sources.
Capital Proiects Funds.
The Capital Projects Funds are used to account for the acquisition and construction of major capital facilities other than
those financed by enterprise funds. Included in this group of funds and the fund balance of each at December 31 for
1997 and 1996 is as follows:
Increase
1997 1996 (Decrease).
$ 1,097,918 $ 645,842 $ 452,076
Capital Improvements 38,496 36,449 2,047
Sealcoat 73,711 72,851 860
Municipal State Aid (3,790.) (6,565) 2,77_5
Central Business District
Total
$ 1 206 335 $ 748,577 $ 457,758
The remaining funds of the 1980 Improvement Debt Service fund were transferred to the Capital Improvements after the
final payment was made. This accounted for the large increase in fund balance.
City of Mound
March 26, 1998
Page Eight
Enterprise Funds_
Sewer and Water Utility Funds
A comparison of the past four years sewer and water utility operations is as follows:
1997 _ 1996
1995 1994
WaterFund $ 440,308 $ 424,085 $ 393,528 $ 363,010
Charges for services 62,674 39,706 24,183 44,935
Operating income 68,344
Net income before transfers 68,957 39,128 18,749
Sewer Fund 959,110 826,308 706,545 671,997
Charges f or services (54,177) (112,247) (159,294) (119,127)
Operatingloss (61,979) (118,332) (157,829) (73,449)
Net loss before transfers
The Sewer Fund cash was $440,002 at year end and this was a decrease of $52,466 from 1996. Total operating expenses and debt
service for 1997 were $1,083,436. Cash at year end was 40% of expenses and debt service. This is about five months reserve.
Cash balances have declined for the last four years. We set the current cash balance as a minimum and should not be any lower.
The Water Fund cash totaled $664,345 at year end. This was an increase of $13,736 from 1996. The ending balance represents
144% of 1997 expenses and debt service. We feel this is adequate to maintain operations and to pay the bonds.
A comparison of the past two years liquor fund operations is as follows:
1997 1996
Percent Percent
Amount_ o~f Sales. Amount of Sales_
Sales $ 1 533 378 100.00__% $ 1 523 897 100.00%
Gross profit $ 369,633 24.11% $ 377,923 24.80%
Operating expenses 214,320_ 13.9.___.~8 213,867. 14.03.
Operating income $ 155 313 10.13..% $ 164 056 10.77:%
Transfers to other funds $ 7~~5500) (4.92..)% ~) (11'4[)°/°
Gross profit and operating income have remained consistent for several years. Both percentages are very good and have resulted
in significant transfers from the Liquor Fund.
Year 2000 Issue
The Year 2000 Issue results from a computer's inability to process year-date data accurately beyond the year 1999.
Except in recently introduced year 2000 compliant programs, computer programmers consistently have abbreviated dates
by eliminating the first two digits of the year, with the assumption that these two digits would always be 19. Thus
January 1, 1965 became 01/01/65. Unless corrected, this shortcut is expected to create widespread problems when the
clock strikes 12:00:01 a.m. on January 1, 2000. On that date, some computer programs may recognize the date as
January 1, 1900, and process data inaccurately or stop processing altogether.
City of Mound
March 26, 1998
Page Nine
The Year 2000 Issue is likely to affect computer applications before January 1, 2000, when systems currently attempt to
perform calculations into the year 2000. Furthermore, some software programs use several dates in the year 1999 to
mean something other than the date. Examples of such dates are 01/01/99, 09/09/99 and 12/31/99. As systems process
information using these dates, they may produce erratic results or stop functioning.
The Year 2000 Issue presents another challenge, the algorithm used in some computers for calculating leap years is
unable to detect that the year 2000 is a leap year. Therefore, systems that are not year 2000 compliant may not register
the additional day and date calculations may be incorrect.
Most of the City's finance software should already be year 2000 compliant but it is important to review all areas where
date-dependent computer information is needed and correct any deficiencies.
We recommend the City implement verification procedures to test the accuracy of information received from its vendors,
service providers, bankers, customers and other third-party organizations with whom it exchanges date-dependent
information, because these organizations also must become year 2000 compliant. The Board also should satisfy itself that
vendors, service providers, bankers, customers and other third-party organizations will not experience problems relating
to the Year 2000 Issue that could affect the City's operations or cash flow.
This report is intended solely for the use of management and council. The comments and recommendations in the report are
purely constructive in nature, and should be read in this context. We found the City's records to be in good order requiring
only one adjustment at year end.
Our audit would not necessarily disclose all weaknesses in the system because it was based on selected tests of the
accounting records and related data.
If you have any questions or wish to discuss any of the items contained in this letter, please feel free to contact us at your
convenience. We wish to thank you for the opportunity to be of service and for the courtesy and cooperation extended to us
by your staff.
ABDO, ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP
Certified Public Accountants
March 26, 1998
Minneapolis, Minnesota