Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2004-06-22
.,., ~ ,1,, I~ . II IL: PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. ........................ ............................. ....................... >..~...~....~..~.~~1~:...~ .,~..~ ,~,~ ........ ~:. ...... ~,. ............... ~ ............... ~ .......................... ~ ......... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: AGENDA *Con~ent ANenda.. ]tem¢ li¢ted under the Con~ent Agenda are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by a ¢ingle roll call vote. There will be .o ~eparate discussion of the¢e item~ unle~ a Council Member or Citizen ~o requests. In that event the item will be removed from the Con¢ent Agend¢ and considered in normal ~e~uence. Open meeting - Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve agenda, with any amendments 3. Swearing-in of Patrol Officer Nick Schwalbe *~enda *A. Approve minutes: June 8, 2004 regular meeting *B. Approve payment of claims *C. Approve liquor licenses *D. Approve live music permit *E. *F. *G. *H. Proclaim August 14, 2004 National Marina Day Approve supplemental agreement #3 for Lost Lake Greenway Planning Commission Recommendation(s) 1. Case No. 04-04: Mark Krawiecki 1736 Shorewood Lane Variance(s) - deck replacement Rec: approval with conditions Approve proposed amendments to City Code Chapter 380 setting land use fee schedule 1745-1749 1750-1774 1775 1776-1777 1778-1779 1780-1781 1782-1792 1793-1801 *I. Approve proposed City Code amendment as it pertains to trapping within the City limits 1802-1804 Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. (Limit to three minutes per speaker.) PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELl, PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Public Hearings and Corresponding Action A. Case No. 40-04: Mike Gardner and Ted Metz 1599 and 1601 Bluebird Lane Street vacation: unimproved portion of Woodland Rd B. Case No. 04-12: Joel Reinitz (Church representative) 5218 Bartlett Boulevard CUP/Variance - memorial garden at Mt Olive Church Proposed amendment to City Code Chapter 350:651 (Zoning Ordinance) to modify lakeshore setback requirement in the Pedestrian District from 100 feet to 50 feet for commercial and mixed use structures Update: Orv Burma, Mound representative to LMCD 10. Update: Representatives from Mound Marketplace and Village by the Bay Update: Loren Gordon ofHoisington Koegler Group, on AUAR (environmental Study) for Mound Harbor Renaissance Development project Review of structure located at 2146 Cedar Lane and applicability with zoning and building code requirements per City Code 350':505 (Board of Adjustment and Appeals) 11. Review of proposed amendment to City Code Chapter 330 (Subdivision Ordinance) to regulate dock lot parcels for the purpose of providing lake access for nearby properties and report/recommendation from 6/12 Planning Commission meeting 12. 13. Executive Session regarding Dreamwood case, followed by outcome Miscellaneous/Correspondence A. Report: Finance Department - May 2004 B. Correspondence: Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative C. LMC: Friday Fax D. Harbor Wine & Spirits: July specials E. Minutes: Park and Open Space Commission - June 10, 2004 F. Memo: Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association G. Letter: June 3, 2004 H. Letter: Metropolitan Council I. Calendar: LMCC - June 2004 14. Adjourn This is a prelimina~ agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. agendas may be viewed at Ci~ Hall or at the Ci~ of Mound web site: www. citvofmound, corn 1805-183 7 1838-1865 1866-1874 1875-1909 1910 1911-1914 1915-1925 1926-1935 1936-1938 1939-1942 1943 1944 1945-1946 1947 1948 1949-1950 1951-1952 More current meeting MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES' JUNE 8, 2OO4 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, June 8, 2004, at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members Present: Mayor Pat Meisel (arrived at 7:57 p.m.); Councilmembers Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, David Osmek and Peter Meyer. Others Present: City Attorney John Dean, City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Bonnie Ritter, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Public Works Director Carlton Moore, Finance Director Gino Businaro, State Representative Steve Smith, Bruce Johnson, John Beise, Mike Specht, Phil Bowman, Chuck Champine, Eric Serrano. Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature by the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion on 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 Meetinq and Pledge of Allegiance Acting Mayor Hanus called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ' 2. Approve A.qenda Kandis Hanson requested the removal of Item 3F and Item 6, to be considered at a later meeting. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3. Consent Aqenda MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Brown to approve the consent agenda as presented. Upon roll call vote, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve minutes of May 25, 2004 regular meeting B. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $654,366.26. C. RESOLUTION NO. 04-71: RESOLUTION APPROVING FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 1717 FINCH LANE, LOTS 7 & 8, BLOCK 13, DREAMWOOD. P&Z CASE #04-09. PID #13-117-24-13-0048. D. RESOLUTION NO. 04-72: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A DEVELOPMENT GRANT THROUGH THE LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM 1 - 1745- Mound City Council Minutes - June 8, 2004 Approve Payment Requests 1. Payment Request #6 from Environmental Associates for work on the Lost Lake Greenway, in the amount of $156,261.95. 2. Payment Request #1 from Valley Paving for work on the 2004 Street Reconstruction Project, in the amount of $165,494.32. 3. Final Payment Request from Sunram for the 2002 Retaining Wall Replacement Project, in the amount of $5,817.85. F. (removed) 4. Comments & Su.q.qestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. - None were offered. 5. 2003 Audit Report and Mana.qement Letter~ as presented by Steve McDonald of Abdo, Eick and Meyers. Finance Director Gino Businaro introduced Steve McDonald of Abdo, Eick & Meyers and he reviewed the management letter and annual financial report for the year ending December 31, 2003. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to acknowledge receipt of the Management Letter and Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ending December 31, 2003, as prepared by Abdo, Eick & Meyers. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 6. Orv Burma and Pete Nelson~ representin_cl LMCD, on zebra mussel infestation Pete Nelson gave the Council an informational presentation on the zebra mussel and its potential affect on Lake Minnetonka. Mayor Meisel arrived at 7:57 p.m. She explained that she was late because she was delivering the welcome to the United Firefighters Association meeting at the Public Safety Building. The City will help to pass along informational material regarding the threat of the zebra mussel by i.e., puffing an educational article in the next newsletter, and making informational available at City Hall. 7. Tax forfeit parcels Hanus removed himself from his seat on the Council for this item. Sarah Smith reviewed the events leading to tonight's request for subdivision exemption and re-conveyance of portions of tax forfeited lands to the State of Minnesota by a governmental subdivision. The Council previously adopted Resolution 03-45, authorizing Hennepin County to begin the process to release a portion of a tax forfeit parcel (PI D 19-117-23-24-0047) following submittal of a written request by three 2 -1746- Mound City Council Minutes - June 8, 2004 property owners (Mark and Gail Hanus, Jack and Sandy Cook and Bruce and Sharon Johnson) and review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, Parks Commission and Docks Commission. Following submittal to Hennepin County it was .determined that special legislation would be necessary to complete the release process ~n order to sell the property at an adjacent owner auction. The special legislation was signed by Governor Pawlenty on May 29, 2004, and now the city needs to execute a deed to re-convey the affected portion of the tax forfeited parcel back to the State of Minnesota so that it may be offered for sale to the adjacent owners. Following the sale of the parcel by Hennepin County to the abutting property owners, additional survey work is going to be necessary so as to combine the affected portion(s) of the former tax forfeit parcel with the abutting Hanus/Cook/Johnson properties, which triggers the minor subdivision process. Staff feels that it is reasonable to use the subdivision exemption provision for this portion of the process. Hanus, one of the applicants, gave an overview of the process that this request has gone through. Chuck Champine, 1550 Canary Lane, complimented Hanus on his presentation and received clarification on his question regarding computation of BSUs, appraisal of the subject parcel, and cost reimbursement for this request. Sarah Smith clarified two points. Included in the resolution when the Council authorized the Hennepin County to begin the process to release this parcel was the stipulation that if the property is released, it should be offered for sale and combined with adjacent properties only. Also when the original tax forfeit request came in April of 2003, it was not only routed to members of staff, but all involved commissions and agencies, which included the LMCD. At that time they were given opportunity to comment and if comments were received, they would have been included if provided from them. Representative Steve Smith addressed the Council, stating that he was the author of the bill involved in this parcel. He stated that the subject request has gone through layers of city and state government. It went through the mandatory process and found its way to the separate bill that he introduced in February. He stated no one cooked up or changed any state statute, as suggested by Meyer, and nobody rolled it into an omnibus bill to bury this issue. He quoted sections from a letter he received from the City Attorney which outlined and reviewed the steps that were taken in this request. The meetings of various Commissions and Council were all public and noticed according to law, and all costs involved in the request are borne by the applicants. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Brown to adopt the following resolution. Meyer stated that the portion of House File #2334 included in the packet shows that the total file is 42 pages and the subject is noted on ~ a page out of the 42. Also, that he can't support this resolution mainly because he thinks it's an abuse of political power for Hanus to use his political power to convince Representative Smith and 3 - 1747- Mound City Council Minutes - June 8, 2004 Senator Gen Olson to initiate this legislation. He understands he may have said they changed state statute, and asked what the proper term is to describe that they can do now what they couldn't do last year. John Dean then stated that to engage in conversation with the audience is not appropriate at this time, as there is a motion on the floor. Brown called for the vote, and upon vote taken the following voted in favor: Brown, Meisel and Osmek. The following voted against: Meyer. Hanus abstained from voting as he was still a member of the audience at this time. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 04.73: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION REQUEST TO RELEASE A PORTION OF A TAX FORFEIT PARCEL, PID #19-117-23-24-0047 B. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adopt the following resolution. Meyer stated that again, he would like to give four reasons for voting against this: First, public good is defined as benefiting 9,700 of our citizens and in his view this just benefits Hanus and the two neighbors; second, is that he hears how this action would benefit the docks program but he sees that having less shoreline means less boats; third, is that by releasing the property they lose three dock site holders, each of which pays $250/year into the dock program; and fourth and most importantly, and maybe he doesn't get it, but he thinks it's really an abuse of public trust and abuse of political power for a sitting City Councilmember to acquire public land for personal gain. Brown asked for the vote, and upon vote taken the following voted in favor: Brown, Meisel and Osmek. The following voted against: Meyer. Hanus abstained from voting as he was still a member of the audience at this time. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO, 04-74: RESOLUTION TO RECONVEY A PORTION OF A TAX FORFEIT PARCEL BACK TO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR SALE TO ABUTTING OWNERS. PID #29-117-23-24'0047. Councilmember Hanus returned to his seat on the Council at this time. 8. (removed), 9. Miscellaneous/Correspondence A. Newsletter: Xcel Energy B. Report: Harbor Wine & Spirits - May 2004 C. Notice: Metropolitan Council 2005 Budget Meetings D. Newsletter: Gillespie Center E. Letter: Mediacom F. Letter: Moody's Investors Service G. Letter: Hennepin County Administration 4 - 1748- Mound City Council Minutes - June 8, 2004 H. Inventory of items contained in Public Safety Facility time capsule 10. Adjourn MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Brown to adjourn at 9:55 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel 5 - 1749- JUNE 22, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 052004S U E$18,,045.00MAY 060904SUE $15,660.26 JUNE 061504SU E $137.02 JUNE 061604SUE $5,921.18 JUNE 062204SUE $202,608.68JUNE TOTAL $242,372.14 -1750- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: May 2004 Batch Name Refer 52506 Cash Payment invoice Cash Payment 052004ckr User Dollar Amt $18,045.00 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $18,045.00 $0.00 In Balance SUPERIOR FORD FLEET/GOVERN E 101.45200-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA One Ton Dump Truck-Parks Dept. R 101-39101 Sales of General Fixed Asset Trade on #8931 invoice Transaction Date 5/20/2004 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND Wells Fargo 10100 Wells Fargo $18,045.00 $18,045.00 10100 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $18,045.00 $18,045.00 Total 05/20/04 1:10 PM Page 1 $23,545.00 -$5,500.00 $18,045.00 -1751 - CiTY OF MOUND City of Mound 06/10/04 9:48 AM Page 1 Payments Current Period: June 2004 Batch Name 060904SUE User Dollar Amt $15,660.26 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $15,660.26 $0.00 In Balance Refer 60904 HANSON, KANDIS Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical 2004 REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE $573.20 Invoice 060904 6/9/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $573.20 Refer 60904 HOLIDAY INN Cash Payment E 101-42110-434 Conference & Training PLEAA CONFERENCE $137.02 invoice 060904 6/9/2004 PO 18363 Transact on Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 ~0t,~,l~ ..... ~!,3.7.02 Refer 60904 LEA GUE MN CITIES INSURANCE T Cash Payment E 101-41110-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $85.45 Invoice 060904 6~8~2004 Cash Payment E 101-41310-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $70.10 Invoice 060904 6~8~2004 Cash Payment E 101-41500-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $192.81 Invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42110-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $2,248.00 Invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $227.87 invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $843.55 Invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 101-45200-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $195.00 invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $5,584.94 Invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $806.30 invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $1,161.25 invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $1,715.58 Invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 281-45210-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP $245.40 Invoice 060904 6/8/2004 Transaction Date 613/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $13,376.25 Refer 60904 SPEEDWA'Y SUPERAMERICA (POL Cash Payment E 101-42110-212 Motor Fuels THRU 05-26-04 GASOLINE CHARGES $1,573.79 invoice 060904 6/9/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,573.79 -1752- CITY OF MOUND Fund Summan/ 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 10100 Wells Fargo $6,146.79 $5,584.94 $245.40 $1,161.25 $1,715.58 $806.30 $15,660.26 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $15,660.26 $15,660.26 06/10/04 9:48 AM Page2 - 1753- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound 06/15/04 3:45 PM Page 1 Payments Current Period: June 2004 Batch Name 061504CKR User Dollar Amt $137.02 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $137.02 Refer 62207 HOLIDAY INN SOUTH Cash Payment E 101-42110-434 Conference & Training Invoice 060904 PO 18363 $0.00 In Balance PLEAA Conference-Hawks $137.02 Transaction Date 6/15/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $137.02 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $137.02 $137,02 Pre-Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $137.02 Total $137.02 - 1754- .~ ......... ._. City of Mound 06/14/04 1:41 PM ,'~ ~&~,~ Page1 / Payments CITY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 Batch Name 061604SUE User Dollar Amt $5,291.18 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $5,291.18 $0.00 In Balance Refer 61604 FRONTIER/CITIZENS COMMUNICA Cash Payment E 101-41910-321 Telephone & Cells 04-04 472-0600 invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $1,142.60 Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone & Cells 04-04 472-0600 Invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $476.09 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone & Cells 04-04 472-0600 Invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $285.65 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 05-04 472-0635 Invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $351.57 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 05-04 472-0635 Invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $351.57 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells 05-04 472-0635 invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $351.58 Cash Payment E 609-49750-321 Telephone & Cells 05-04 472-0648 Invoice 061604 6/16/2004 $619.72 Cash Payment E 101-41910-321 Telephone & Cells CREDIT 472-0600 Invoice 061604 6/14/2004 -$1.55 Cash Payment E 101-41910-321 Telephone & Cells CREDIT472-0600 ; Invoice 061604 6/14/2004 -$15.88 Cash Payment E 101-41910-321 Telephone & Cells CREDIT 472-0600 Invoice 061604 6/14/2004 -$9,94 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 We s Fargo 10100 Total $3 551 41 Refer 61604 LAKE MINNETONKA MOTOR SPOR ~ ' ' Cash Payment E 101-45200-409 Other Equipment Repair STEERING CABLE Invoice 23344 6/14/2004 $82.77 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Refer 61604 WASH/NGTON COUNTY Cash Payment Invoice 061604 Transaction Date G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow 6/16/2004 6/14/2004 Cash Payment Invoice 061604 Cash Payment Invoice 061604 E 101-42110-381 Electdc Utilities 6/16/2004 E 222-42260-381 Electric Utilities 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $82.77 CASE #04-1691 #104104830 $300.00 10100 Total $300.00 05-04~Y2170-989-449-148 $542.80 05-04 #2170-989-449-148 $814.20 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,357.00 - 1755- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/14/04 1:41 PM Page 2 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 10100 Wells Fargo $2,868.46 $1,099.85 $351.57 $351.58 $619.72 $5,291.18 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0,00 $5,291.18 $5,291.18 -1756- City of Mound 06/17/04 10:24 AM / "~ Page 1 / \ Payments C~TY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 Batch Name 062204SUE User Dollar Amt $202,608.68 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $202,608.68 Refer 62204 AMERICAN RED CROSS MPLS AR Cash Payment G 101-22803 Police Reserves Invoice 68144 5/14/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Refer 62204 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS, INCO Cash Payment E 222-42260-325 Pagers-Fire Dept. Invoice XXXX 3/3/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Refer 62204 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE invoice 438415606 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609.49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 438415715 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 438415910 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 438416305 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 463411818 6/4/2004 $0.00 In Balance EMERGENCY RESPONSE iNSTRUCTIONS $25.00 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $25.00 PAGER CASES $212.47 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $212.47 Transaction Date 6~7~2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 62204 ASSURED SECURITY Cash Payment E 101-41910-401 Repairs/Maint Buildings REPLACE MANAGER'S LOCKSET Invoice 33954 6/9/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 62204 AWD COOLERS oF MINNEsOTA Cash Payment E 101-43100-210 Operating Supplies 05-04 WATER Invoice 062204 612212004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies 05-04 WATER Invoice 062204 6~22~2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies 05-04 WATER Invoice 062204 612212004 Transaction Date 6~4~2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $121.09 Refer 62204 BELLBoY cORPoRATioN MERCHANDISE LIQUOR $40.68 $246.84 $42.98 $35.88 $95.8O Total $462.18 $477.48 $477.48 $4O.36 $40.36 $40.37 Cash Payment E 609.49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 29696200 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R Invoice 38496200 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 29710300 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MERCHANDISE Invoice 38527000 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 29768800 6/4/2004 $2,673.40 $215.62 $1,140.81 $83.4O $2,436.40 - 1757- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:24 AM Page 2 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,549.63 Refer 62204 BFI OF MINNESOTA, INC. Cash Payment E 101-45200-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 05-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $108.78 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 05-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $33.25 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 05-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $33.25 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 05-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $33.24 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42110-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 06-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $70.16 invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 06-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $70.15 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 05-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $19.42 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 05-04 GARBAGE SERVICE $22.15 invoice 062204 6~2212004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $390.40 Refer 62204 BIFFS, INC PORTABLE RESTRO0 Cash Payment E 101-45200-410 Rentals (GENERAL) 05-04 CENTERVIEW BEACH $133.87 invoice W223432 6/9/2004 Cash Payment E 101-45200-410 Rentals (GENERAL) 05-04 MOUND BAY PARK $178.66 invoice W223433 6/9/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $312.53 Refer 62204 BRAND NETWORKING Cash Payment E 222-42260-205 Computer Software BASIC OFFICE 2003 $219.39 Invoice 15788 3/26/2004 Cash Payment E 496-46580-500 Capital Outlay FA PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $719.94 invoice 15788 3/26/2004 Cash Payment E 496-46580-500 Capital Outlay FA PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $706.06 Invoice 15788 3/26/2004 Cash Payment E 496-46580-500 Capital Outlay FA PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $266.25 invoice 15788 3/26/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,911.64 Refer 62204 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREN T Cash Payment E 101-42110-434 Conference & Training 09-14-04 BECK,LEGAL ASPECTS $60.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 PO 18374 Cash Payment E 101-42110-434 Conference & Training 0-9-14-04 BECK, MEDIA RELATIONS $120.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 PO 18374 Transaction Date 6/15/20~4 Wells ~?~ ~,~ T~%ta~ ~,~.00 Refer 62204 BURKE, JAM/ Cash Payment E 101-42110-434 Conference & Training REIMBURSE CONFERENCE $92.14 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $92.14 Refer 62204 CARUFEL, ALTON J. _ -1758- ,, CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:24 AM Page 3 Cash Payment E 401--46377-300 Professional Srvs TONKA (HASBRO) ISSUES $349.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $349.00 Refer 62204 CA T AND FIDDLE BEVERAGE Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $130.00 Invoice 38814 6/7/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo $130.00 Refer 62204 CENTERPOINT ENERGY (MINNEG Cash Payment E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities $90.28 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities $106.22 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101.41910-383 Gas Utilities $394.04 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-383 Gas Utilities $36.85 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-383 Gas Utilities $20.75 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 602.49450-383 Gas Utilities $25.41 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 ,/"""~ Cash Payment E 609-49750-383 Gas Utilities $39.93 iInvoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/15/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $713.48 Refer 62204 CHADWICK AND MERTZ Cash Payment E 101-41600-304 Legal Fees 05-04 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $4,889.40 Invoice 062204 6/4/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,689.40 R~fer 6220~ CHAMPioN AUTO Cash Payment E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery SEA FOAM/CLEANER $53.47 Invoice D263596 6/11/2004 Cash Payment E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery BY-PASS TRANS $38.32 Invoice D263336 6/11/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $91.79 Rei;; ~2204 ~Li~.~E:rS°L~Tl'°~L~c Cash Payment E 101.43100-305 Medical Services DRUG SCREENING $20.00 Invoice 811538 4~9~2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-305 Medical Services DRUG SCREENING $20.00 Invoice 811538 4~9~2004 Transaction Date 6~8~2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $40.00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $487.00 Invoice 81393066 6/10/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $487 00 ,R;fer 62204 c°LOT2ri, J~H~A, ~Cash Payment E 609~49750-331 Use of persona~ au~to- REIMBURSE MILEAGE Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 $116.63 10100 Total 04-19-04 TH RU 05-19-04 #543-000-053-000 04-19-04 TH RU 05-19-04 #543-001-095-800 04-19-04 THRU 05-19-04 #543-001-853-000 04-19-04 THRU 05-19-04 #543-001-972-603 04-19-04 THRU 05-19-04 #543-001-972-603 04-19-04 THRU 05-19-04 #543-001-972-603 04-19-04 THRU 05-19-04 #543-004-5818-801 - 1759- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments 06/17/04 10:24 AM Page 4 Current Period: June 2004 Transaction Date 6~7~2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 62204 CONCEPT LANDSCAPING Cash Payment E 401-43110-300 Professional Srvs WESTEDGE WALL REPAIRS $661.25 Invoice 1736 6114/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $661.25 Refer 62204 CONSTRUCTION MIDWEST, INCO Cash Payment E 101-41910-401 Repairs/Maint Buildings CEMENT SEALER $59.38 Invoice 312786 6/4/2004 PO 18390 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $59.38 Refer 62204 COPY IMAGES, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 101-41910-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 05-04 COPIER MAINTENANCE $340.80 invoice 48496 6/4/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $~40.80 Refer 62204 COVERALL CLEANING CONCEPTS Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $1,166.18 Invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42110-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $504.38 Invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $756.58 Invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $46.15 Invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $46.15 Invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $46.15 Invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services 06-04 CLEANING SERVICE $199.15 invoice 86098 6/1/2004 Transact on Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,764.74 Refer 62204 CRYSTEEL DISTRIBUTING, INC. Cash Payment E 101-45200-500 CapitaIOutlay FA DUMP BOX $9,444.42 Invoice F18532 5/28/2004 PO 18196 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 -''.!?,~1~ ............ '~"~.4.42 Refer 62204 DAWES WATER EQUIPMENT Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 RepaiflMaint Supply METERS $1,191.39 Invoice 3230646 6/1/2004 PO 18319 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,191.39 Refer 62204 DA Y DISTRIBUTING COMPANY _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,046.45 Invoice 267788 6/8/2004 Transact on Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,046.45 Refer 62204 E-Z RECYCLING Cash Payment E 670-49500-440 Other Contractual Servic 06-04 CURBSIDE RECYCLING $8,326.48 Invoice 6703 6/2/2004 Transaction Date 6~7~2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $8,326.48 Refer 62204 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE -1760- i ~,. . Ii .lli /,i~--~ ..... ~ City of Mound 06/17/0410:24 AM ,/ jk % Payments Page 5 CITY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 Cg~h P~tyment I:: ~0§-4§7~;0-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 223129 6/7/2004 $1,882.55 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 44133 6/7/2004 $746.50 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 44245 6/7/2004 $352.00 Transaction Date 6~8~2004 ....... Wells Fargo 10100 Total Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 04-04 MOUND GENERAL $150.00 invoice 22310 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 04-04 PROJECT MANAGEMENT $1,120.00 Invoice 22311 5/10/2004 Cash Payment G 101-22908 Mound Harbor Renaissance 05-04 MOUND HARBOR RENASSAINCE $1,537.50 Invoice 22310 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 496-46580-500 Capital Outlay FA 05-04 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $637.50 Invoice 22310 5/10/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,445.00 Refer 62204 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS, INC, ~' Cash Payment E 101-42115-329 Sirens/Phone LJnesl 07-01-04 THRU 12-31-04 SIREN $594.00 MAINTENANCE Invoice 30836 5/31/2004 'Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $594.00 Refer 62204 EMERGENCYAPPARATUS MAINT Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair RUB RAIL END CAPS Invoice 18406 6/1/2004 $31.24 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $31.24 F~fe; 62204 ERioKsO~ Ei_~/soNA~/D AssocI ~ Cash Payment E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 05-04 STREETSCAPE LIGHTING $68.00 Invoice 0405052 5/31/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $68.00 Refer 62~0~4 Ex~E~LS;~R C;~ ~ Cash Payment E 101-41310-434 Conference & Training MCFOA REGION IV MEETING,RITTER $27.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-41310-434 Conference & Training MCFOA REGION IV MEETING, RAHN $27.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/17/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 ¢~ Total $54 00 Refer 62204 FIRST STATE TIRE RECYCLING Cash Payment E 670-49500-460 Janitorial Services 05-15-04 CLEAN-UP EVENT $529.00 invoice 38578 612212004 Transaction Date 6/1612004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $529.00 Rare~ 6~204 G & K SERvicEs Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniform; Invoice 6137160 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 6137160 6/1/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 6137160 6/1/2004 06-01-04 UNIFORMS $33.35 06-01-04 UNIFORMS $33.35 06-01-04 UNIFORMS $33,34 -- -1761 - CiTY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:24 AM Page 6 Cash Payment Invoice 6137160 Cash Payment Invoice 6137160 Cash Payment Invoice 6137160 Cash Payment invoice 6143678 Cash Payment invoice 6143679 Cash Payment invoice 6143676 Cash Payment Invoice 6143668 Cash Payment invoice 6143667 Cash Payment invoice 6143677 Cash Payment Invoice 6143677 Cash Payment Invoice 6143677 Cash Payment invoice 6143677 Cash Payment invoice 6143677 Cash Payment Invoice 6143677 E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms 06-01-04 MATS $22.74 6/1/2004 E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 06-01-04 MATS $22.74 6/1/2004 E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 06-01-04 MATS $22.74 6/1/2004 E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies 06-08-04 MATS $88,81 6/1/2004 E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 06-08-04 MATS $75.03 6/1/2004 E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services 06-08-04 MATS $42.69 6/112004 E 101-42110-460 Janitorial Services 06-08-04 MATS $38.55 6/1/2004 E 222-42260-216 Cleaning Supplies 06-08-04 MATS $105.34 6/1/2004 E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms 06-08-04 UNIFORMS $40.43 6/1/2004 E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 06-08-04 UNIFORMS $40.43 6/1/2004 E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 06-08-04 UNIFORMS $40.42 6/1/2004 E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials 06-08-04 MATS $23.46 6/1/2004 E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials 06-08-04 MATS $23,46 6/1/2004 E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 06-08-04 MATS $23,46 6/1/2004 Transaction Date 6/17/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $710.34 Refer 62204 GARRITY, TERRY Cash Payment R 281-34725 Dock Permits REFUND SHARE FEE $100.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment R 281-34705 LMCD Fees REFUND LMCD FEE $15,00 Invoice 062204 6~22~2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 ......... ~!~ .............. ~!~,5'00 Refer 62204 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD _ Cash Payment E 101-41310-210 Operating Supplies 05-04 WATER $6.71 invoice 062204 6~22~2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies 05-04 WATER $6.28 Invoice 062204 6/22J2004 Transact on Date 6/4/2004 Wells Fargo ,?,!~, .................~!~al~ ........... ?~!.2.99 Refer 62204 GRAINGERS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 496-46580-500 Capital Outlay FA VIBRATION PADS $190.88 Invoice 495-050237-9 5/17/2004 PQ 18084 'Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $190.88 Refer 62204 GRAND PERE WINES, INCORPOR Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $892.00 Invoice 13960 6/10/2004 -1762- /..j~__ ..... __..~..~ City of Mound __/ ~,~ ',~_ Payments CiTY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 7 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo Refer 62204 GRIGGS COOPER AND COMPANY E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/2/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale 6/2/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/2/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/2/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/2/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale 6/2/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/2/2004 Cash Payment Invoice 897122 Cash Payment Invoice 897123 Cash Payment Invoice 640110 Cash Payment invoice +50222 Cash Payment Invoice 640769 Cash Payment Invoice 900811 Cash Payment invoice 900810 Transaction Date WINE LIQUOR CREDIT--WINE CREDIT-WINE CREDIT-WINE LIQUOR WINE 10100 Total $892.00 $793.28 $1,605.50 ~$16.25 -$19.18 -$27.62 $5,306.34 $270.27 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7.912.34 Refer 62204 GULLICKSON, LORRiANE Cash Payment G 101-22964 2019 Bellaire Rd House Rem REFUND ESCROW ACCOUNT $1,000.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,000.00 Refer 62204 HAWKINS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 601-49400-227 Chemicals 13 CONTAINERS $65.00 Invoice DM103978 5/28/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $65 00 Cash Payment E 101-42110-418 Other Rentals Invoice 24058024 5/31/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-418 Other Rentals Invoice 24058023 5/31/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Refer 62204 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP, I Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 06-04 RADIO LEASE $1,323.44 06-04 RADIO LEASE $1,002,96 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,326.40 05-04 TIF RELATED WORK 05-04 MOUND HARBOR RENAISSANCE 05-04 LOST LAKE GREENWAY 05-04 CTY RD 15 STREETSCAPE $876.31 $2,628.94 $2,977.50 $3,648.76 $85.00 $85.OO $63.75 $3,750.00 E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 6/22/2004 G 101-22908 Mound Harbor Renaissance 6/22/2004 E 401-46540-300 Professional Srvs 6/22/2004 E 401-46377-300 Professional Srvs 6/22/2004 G 101-22983 1749 Bluebird Ln #04-08 Hen 05-04 #04-08 1749 BLUEBIRD 6/22/2004 G 101-22984 1717 Finch Ln #04-09 Bowm 05-04 #04-09 1717 FINCH LANE 6/22/2004 G 101-22990 Bethel United Methodist #04- 05-04 #04-12 MOUNT OLIVE CUP 6/22/2004 G 101-22994 MHR Altemative Urban Area 05-04 ALTERNATE URBAN AREA REVIEW 6/22/2004 - 1763- CITY OF MOUND Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment invoice 062204 Cash Payment invoice 062204 Cash Payment invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 City of Mound Payments 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 8 Current Period: June 2004 E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 05-04 MOUND VISIONS $33.52 6/22/2004 G 101-22998 5776 Bartlett Blvd 05-04 5776 BARTLETT $42.50 6/22/2004 E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 05-04 PROJECT TEAM TIF $425.00 6/22/2004 G 101-22999 Bill FisldGleason 05-04 BILL FISK/GLEASON $85.00 6/22/2004 G 101-22908 Mound Harbor Renaissance 05-04 MOUND HARBOR RENAISSANCE $42.50 6/22/2004 G 101-22988 Heritage Point Trailer Court 05-04 HALSTEAD POINT $42.50 6/22/2004 E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING $853.50 6/2212004 Transact on Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 TOtal $!5 ?9.78 Refer 62204 IKON OFFICE MA CHINES Cash Payment E 101-42110-202 Duplicating and copying 05-24-04 THRU 06-24-04 COPIER $151.46 MAINTENANCE Invoice 23263648 5/24/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $151.46 Refer 62204 INTERTECHNOLOGIES GROUP . Cash Payment E 496-46580-500 Capital Outlay FA PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $1,850.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,850.00 Refer 62204 ISLAND PARK SKELLY Cash Payment E 101-42400-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery 1999 BLAZER REPAIR SHORT $377.18 Invoice 16124 5/7/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $377.18 Refer 62204 J.R.'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL, INC _ Cash Payment E 670-49500-460 Janitorial Services 05-15-04 RECYCLE DAY $3,160.00 Invoice 40093 6/1/2004 Transact on Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Tota! ~ $3:~167.00 Refer 62204 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR Cash Payment Invoice 1732710 Cash Payment Invoice 1732711 Cash Payment Invoice 1732709 Cash Payment Invoice 1732708 Cash Payment Invoice 1732794 Cash Payment Invoice 1732774 Cash Payment Invoice 1732775 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE 6/3/2004 $228.15 $2,410.97 $1,857.06 $101.40 $48.00 $423,90 $28.95 - 1764- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 9 Cash Payment Invoice 1732776 Cash Payment Invoice 1735236 Cash Payment Invoice 1735237 Cash Payment Invoice 1735238 Transaction Date E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/3/2004 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale 6/3/2004 6/7/2004 Cash Payment Invoice 140 Cash Payment Invoice 131 ~'"'"~"~ Cash Payment , 'Invoice 128 Transaction Date LIQUOR LIQUOR WINE WINE Wells Fargo 10100 06-08-04 COUNCIL COOKIES 05-26-04 COUNCIL COOKIES Refer 62204 JUBILEE FOODS Cash Payment E 101-42110-430 Miscellaneous Invoice 060804 6/8/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42110-430 Miscellaneous invoice 060804 6)8/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Refe; 62204 LAKE;*NEwsP; pER E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 05-22-04 WOODLAND RD 5/22/2004 E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 05-15-04 WOODLAND RD 5/22/2004 E 401-46377-300 Professional Srvs 05-22-04 REALIGNMENT CTY RD 15 5/22/2004 $26,00 $799.97 $480.40 $645.35 Total $7,050,15 $83,69 $25.68 Total $109.37 $19.90 $47.76 $49.21 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $116.87 Refer 62204 LAKER/PIONEER NEWSPAPER Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 05-22-04 DISPLAY Invoice 052204 5/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $286.50 R;fer 62204 I-AWS~NPROD~TS' Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $120.24 Invoice 2085780 6/1/2004 PO 18318 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $120,24 Invoice 2085780 6/1/2004 PO 18318 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $120.25 invoice 2085780 6/1/2004 PO 18318 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $360.73 Refer 62204 MADDEN, FRANK AND ASSOCIA T Cash Payment E 101-49999-300 Professional Srvs 05-04 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $181.20 invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refe; 6~204 MAiNSTRE~OL~TiS~S $181.20 Cash Payment E 222-42260-300 Professional Srvs 06-04 VIRUS FILTERING $17.97 Invoice 1140-12901 61112004 Cash Payment E 101-42110-300 Professional Srvs 06-04 VIRUS FILTERING $11.98 Invoice 1140-12901 6/1/2004 //-' i Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Tota $29.95 $286.50 _. - 1765- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 10 Cash Payment Invoice 675907 Cash Payment Invoice 675908 Cash Payment Invoice 675909 Cash Payment Invoice 675906 Cash Payment Invoice 678813 Cash Payment Invoice 678812 Cash Payment Invoice 678811 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6/8/2004 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6/812004 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6/8/2004 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6/8/2004 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6~8~2004 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6/8/2004 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER 6/8/2004 $55.70 $45.00 $74.60 $2,849.25 $171.00 $16.00 $1,93O.75 Transact on Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 ...... ~t~l ,$57~2.30 Refer 62204 MAYERS, E.J., INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 601-49400-400 Repairs & Maint Contract BEACHWOOD TO GROVE WATER MAIN $5,600.00 Invoice 53108 5/31/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,600.00 Refer 62204 METRO FIRE Cash Payment E 222-42260-219 Safety supplies COMMANDO COAT $5,572.95 Invoice 15963 3/4/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,572.95 Refer 62204 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIR Cash Payment E 602-49450-388 Waste DisposaI-MCIS 07-04 WASTEWATER $32,544.13 Invoice 776434 6~8~2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo ...... ~(~,!~ ~0~! ............. ,~,2~:,~,f4.13 Refer 62204 MINNESOTA CITY/COUNTY MANA Cash Payment E 101-41310-433 Dues and Subscriptions Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Refer 62204 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH _ Cash Payment R 601-37170 State fee - Water Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 05-01-04 THRU 04-30-05 MEMBERSHIP DUES $80.00 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $80.00 04-01-04 THRU 06-30-04 WASTEWATER $4,605.00 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 .......... ,,T,,~!~l~ ~:~5.00 Refer 62204 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTRO Cash Payment G 101-22908 Mound Harbor Renaissance INVESTIGATE SITE $240.00 Invoice R3234300000406 6~22~2004 Transact'on Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 ,~!_ ............... ,.~0.00 Refer 62204 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS COMPA Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials ASPHALT EMULSION $244.42 Invoice 45439 6/1/2004 Transaction Date 6~7~2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $244.42 Refer 62204 MORRELL AND MORRELL, INCOR Cash Payment E 670-49500-460 Janitorial Services 05-15-04 RECYCLE DAY $347.75 Invoice 7356 5/31/2004 - 1766- City of Mound 06/17/0410:25 AM Page 11 Payments CITY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 Transaction Date 6/3/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 62204 MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS, Cash Payment E 101-45200-221 Equipment Parts BUBBLER HEAD REPLACEMENT Invoice 23930 6/7/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 62204 MOUND BUSINESS Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 06-04 ADVERTISTING Invoice 254 6/1/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $90.00 Refer 62204 MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT Cash Payment R 609-37815 Other Merchandise-Off Sale REIMBURSE FISH FRY TICKETS $693.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $693.00 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 05-10~04 BLACKTOP $44.72 Invoice 91205 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 05-10-04 BLACKTOP $410.13 Invoice 91205 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 05-11-04 BLACKTOP $31.64 Invoice 90970 5/10/2004 'Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 05-11-04 BLACKTOP $206.09 Invoice 90970 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 05-13-04 BLACKTOP $31.95 Invoice 91437 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 05-20-04 BLACKTOP $141.90 Invoice 91805 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 05-24-04 BLACKTOP $410.72 Invoice 91947 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 05-24-04 BLACKTOP $236.62 Invoice 91948 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 05-27-04 BLACKTOP $352.59 Invoice 92165 5/10/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 05-28-04 BLACKTOP $121.64 Invoice 92285 5/10/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,988.00 Refer 62204 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION AS Cash Payment E 222-42260-433 Dues and Subscriptions 2004 MEMBERSHIP DUES,PEDERSON $135.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $135 00 Reie; NA -IONAL Total $347.75 $150.00 $150.00 $90.00 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply REPAIR LID/CONNECTOR Invoice 1311246 5/20/2004 PO 18379 Cash Payment E 601-49400-221 Equipment Parts MISCELLANEOUS PARTS Invoice 1310488 5/20/2004 PO 18311 £ransaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 62204 NEOPOST $179.59 $2,228.37 Total $2,407.96 - 1767- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 12 Current Period: June 2004 Cash Payment E 101-41910-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 07-05-04 THRU 07-04-05 METER RENTAL $894.60 invoice 41683946 6/5/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $894.60 Refer 62204 NEWMAN SIGNS Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials PLASTICS BLANKS $41.03 Invoice TI-0124152 6/3/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $41.03 Refer 62204 NORTHERN TOOL AND EQUIPMEN Cash Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies TOW CHAINS,EAR MUFFLERS $627.01 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 PO 18391 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $627.01 Refer 62204 NOTERMAN, GAYLE Cash Payment E 222-42260-430 Miscellaneous REIMBURSE UNITED FIREFIGHTS MEETING $162.58 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $162.58 Refer 62204 PA TCHIN MESSNER AND DODD _ Cash Payment G 101-22908 Mound Harbor Renaissance 2316 COMMERCE APPRAISAL $3,500,00 Invoice 20413-6 5/24/2004 Cash Payment G 101-22908 Mound Harbor Renaissance 2365 COMMERCE APPRAISAL $5,500.00 Invoice 20413-6 5/24/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $9,000.00 Refer 62204 PAUSTIS AND SONS WINE COMPA Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$4483 Invoice 8037882 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$86~00 Invoice 8038039 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $310.50 Invoice 8038130 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $640.42 Invoice 8038774 6/3/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total ~8~0.09 Refer 62204 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $74.40 Invoice 59531748 6/9/2004 Transaction Date 6/15/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total ~74.40 Refer 62204 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS,/NC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $75.75 Invoice 2078218 6/312004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $162,95 Invoice 2078219 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $156.05 Invoice 2080151 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $420.45 Invoice 2080152 6/3/2004 Transact on Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $815.20 Refer 62204 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING - 1768- City of Mound 06/17/0410:25 AM Page13 Payments CITY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES $565.09 Invoice 42032 6/8/2004 Transaction Date 6/15/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $565.09 ~e~e; 6'220~ QUA~i~'wi~ ~ ~pi~iTJS Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $780.58 Invoice 412291-00 6/2/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $545.95 Invoice 412140-00 6/2/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale CREDIT-LIQUOR -$39~90 Invoice 411926-00 6/2/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,009.66 Invoice 414730-00 6/2/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $28.63 Invoice 414731-00 6/2/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $594.29 Invoice 414672-00 6/2/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,919,21 Refer 62204 REYNOLDS WELDING SUPPLY CO Cash Payment E 222-42260-219 Safety supplies AIR AND OXYGEN $22.76 Invoice R05041047 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $22.78 Refer 62204 RIDGEVlEW MEDICAL, WACONIA Cash Payment E 222-42260-305 Medical Services 05-10-04 12 HEALTH SURVEILLANCE $438.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-305 Medical Services 06-10-05 12 HEALTH ASSESSMENTS $460.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-305 Medical Services 05-10-04 3 HEALTH ASSESSMENTS $120.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-305 Medical Services 05-10-04 15 HEALTH ASSESSMENTS $600.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,638.00 Refer 62204 SCHARBER AND SONS Cash Payment E 101-45200-409 Other Equipment Repair LAWNMOWERTOOTH $68.16 Invoice 01 613239 5/5/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $68.16 Cash Payment E 101-45200-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos GARBAGE BAGS $1,136.62 Invoice 51062 5/28/2004 PO 18387 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 ........ Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1 136 62 Ref;; ~2204 SOS PRi~TiNG . Cash Payment E 401-46377-300 Professional Srvs CTY RD 15 MAILERS $80.42 Invoice 65418 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 101.42110-350 Printing - CTY RD 15 MAILERS $131.74 Invoice 65418 6/3/2004 PO 18401 ,~ash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies LAMINATIONS TRUCK SIGNS $14.46 Invoice 65423 6/3/2004 Transaction Date 6~7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Tota $226 64 - 1769- City of Mound 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 14 Payments CITY OF MOUND Refer 62204 STAR TRIBUNE NEWSPAPER Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing CLASSIFIED AD invoice A03274220 5/30/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing CLASSIFIED AD invoice A03274220 5/30/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 06-13-04 CLASSIFIED AD invoice A03274220 5/30/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 $193.42 $357.90 $257.90 Total $809.22 Refer 62204 STERNE ELECTRIC COMPANY E 101-43100-500 Capital Outlay FA TRANSFER SEAL $939.33 5/15/2004 E 101-43100-500 Capital Outlay FA RED BUSH,ETC $769.23 5/15/2004 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,708.56 Refer 62204 SUN NEWSPAPERS Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing CLASSIFIED AD $349.60 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $349.60 Refer 62204 SUPERIOR PLUMBING AND HEAT/ Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies BRASS TEE $90.57 Invoice S1951619.001 6/1/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $90.57 Refer 62204 TASER INTERNATIONAL Cash Payment E 101-42110-434 Conference & Training TASER TRAINING $80.00 Invoice 00940517 6/4/2004 PO 18403 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $80.00 Refer 62204 TGR CONSULTING, INCORPORAT Cash Payment E 101-42400-500 Capital Outlay FA WIRELESS ACCESS POINT $142.50 Invoice MND-MAY2004- 5/31/2004 Transact on Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $142.50 Refer 62204 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $618.00 Invoice 32571 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $223.50 Invoice 32606 6/4/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $4,102.95 Invoice 336805 6/9/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $100.85 Invoice 336804 6/9/2004 Transact on Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,045.30 Refer 62204 THYSSEN-KRUPP ELEVATOR COR . Cash Payment E 101-41910-440 Other Contractual Servic 06-01-04 THRU 08-31-04 $510.68 Invoice 248189 6/1/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 101 O0 Total $510,58 Refer 62204 TOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY Cash Payment Invoice 8272 Cash Payment Invoice 8278 Transaction Date -1770- ..~_ ...... ._ City of Mound 06/17/0410:25 AM I//'// ~'~'~X~____ Page 15 Payments J CiTY OF MOUND Current Period: June 2004 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment (,,,,-~ r Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials CARBON DIOXIDE MATERIALS $63.42 Invoice 305016 5/18/2004 PO 14873 Cash Payment E 101-43100-221 Equipment Parts MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $18.51 Invoice 448249 5/18/2004 Transaction Date 6/7/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $81.93 Reier 62204 TR cOMPUTER SA~Esj LLC Cash Payment E 101-42400-500 Capital Outlay FA PERMIT SOFTWARE $5,319.66 Invoice 10001 5/12/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-500 Capital Outlay FA 04-01-04 THRU 12-3%04 SUPPORT $774.95 Invoice 10004 5/12/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-500 Capital Outlay FA TECHNICAL SERVICES $2,700.00 Invoice 10010 5/12/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,794.63 Refer 62204 TRUE VALUE, MOUND E 101-45200-232 Landscape Material $38.33 6/22/2004 E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply $427.98 6/22/2004 E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies $41.39 6/22/2004 E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials $54.69 6/22/2004 E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials $187.70 6/22/2004 E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials $3.19 6/22/2004 E 602-49450-220 RepaidMaint Supply $28.73 6/22/2004 E 101.45200-223 Building Repair Supplies 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $4.23 6/22/2004 E 101.41910.401 Repairs/Maint Buildings 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $32.97 6/22/2004 E 101-41910-220 RepaidMaint Supply 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $5.31 6/22/2004 E 601.49400-221 Equipment Parts 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $5.71 6/22/2004 E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $37.26 6/22/2004 E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $34.58 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/4/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $902.07 Refer 62204 TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY Cash Payment E 101.41310-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 05-04 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $18.68 $18.68 $18.68 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEous OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES -_!771 - tI''t' ._[__ ~ CiTY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 16 Current Period: June 2004 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429992-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies Invoice 429752-0 6/22/2004 PO 18085 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430106-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430106-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430106-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430565-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies invoice 430616-0 6~22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22~2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430616-0 6/22/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies Invoice 430617-0 6/22/2004 PO 18085 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES POST-IN NOTES TONER CARTRIDGE TONER CARTRIDGE TONER CARTRIDGE LAMINATE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES NAME PLATES,POP UP REFILLS $18.68 $18.68 $6.23 $12.45 $12.45 $16.68 $33.22 $33,22 $33.23 $42.58 $13.22 $13.22 $13,22 $13.22 $13.22 $4.39 $8.81 $8.81 $167.74 Transaction Date 6/17/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $539,31 Refer 62204 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC, INCOR Cash Payment E 401-43104-300 Professional Srvs GROVE LANE WATER ANALYSIS $45.00 Invoice 294 6/4/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $45.00 Refer 62204 UNIFORMS L/M/TED Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies POPLIN SHIRT $29.95 Invoice 225787 6/3/2004 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies POPLIN SHIRT $28.95 Invoice 226131 6/3/2004 Transact on Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total . $58.90 - 1772- CITY OF MOUND City of Mound Payments Current Period: June 2004 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 17 Refer 62204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 Cash Payment Invoice 062204 VERIZON WIRELESS (FIRE~FIN) E 101-41500-321 Telephone & Cells 6/22/2004 E 222-42260-321 Telephone & Cells 6122/2004 E 222-42260-321 Telephone & Ceils 6/22/2004 E 101-41310-321 Telephone & Cells 6/22/2004 06-04-04 THRU 07-03-04 612-269-9058 06-04-04 THRU 07-03-04 612-751-3573 06-04-04 TH RU 07-03-04 612-875-4502 06-04-04 THRU 07-03-04 952-240-5244 $8.74 $0.50 $8.74 $56.41 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $74.39 Refer 62204 WALDRON, PAUL A. AND ASSOClA Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 05-19-04 THRU 06-16-04 BLDG INSPECTIONS $4,370.00 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/17/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,370.00 Refer 62204 WASH DEPOT Cash Payment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery 05-04 SQUAD WASHES $7.99 Invoice 2464 6/1/2004 Transaction Date 6/14/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7 99 Refer 62204 WEIST, KATHY /./'" ~Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies REIMBURSE MAILER EXPENSES $4.41 Invoice 062204 6/22/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4 41 Refe; 62204 WIDMERcONSTRUCTiON,~ Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 05-04-04 FORCE MAIN REPAIR $615.00 Invoice 551 5/28/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 05-17-04 FORCE MAIN $6,200.00 Invoice 542 5/28/2004 Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 05-19-04 FORCE MAIN $852.50 Invoice 543 5/28/2004 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 , Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7 667 50 Reie; 62204 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $162.70 Invoice 29578-00 6/9/2004 Transaction Date 6/15/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $162.70 Refer 62204 WORLD CLASS WINES, INCORPO Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $0.00 Invoice 151489 6/14/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $0.00 Invoice 151518 6/14/2004 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $593.00 Invoice 151488 6/14/2004 Transaction Date 6/16/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $593.00 Refer 62204 XCEL ENERGy Cash Payment E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities 05-04 STREET LIGHTS $51.30 Invoice 062204 Transaction Date 6/8/2004 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $51.30 - 1773- CITY OF MOUND Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 455 TIF 1-2 496 HRA PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 670 RECYCLING FUND City of Mound Payments 06/17/04 10:25 AM Page 18 Current Period: June 2004 10100 Wells Fargo $62,825.87 $10,315.71 $115.00 $7,811.14 $2,672.83 $4,370.63 $16,166.17 $40,740.68 $45,227.42 $12,363.23 $202,608.68 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $202,608.68 $202,608.68 -1774- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com June 17,2004 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bonnie Ritter SUBJECT: Liquor License Renewals The following liquor licenses expire on June 30, 2004, and application has been made for renewal, license period July 1,2004 through June 30, 2005: Club On-Sale: Sunday On-Sale On-Sale Wine On-Sale 3.2 Malt Beverage Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Beverage On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor V.F.W. and American Legion V.F.W. and American Legion House of Moy and Carbone's Pizzeria House of Moy and Carbone's Pizzeria PDQ and SuperAmerica Dailey's Pub The following is a new application: On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor Al & Alma's Supper Club CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com June 17,2004 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bonnie Ritter SUBJECT: Live Music Permit Application Attached is an application for a Live Music Permit from Out on a Limb Massage, LLC, for a open house on Wednesday, July 14, 2004, from 6-8 p.m. This event is to take place, weather permitting, outside the Java Lounge. The fee has been received and the application approved by the Police and Fire Departments. i printed on recycled paper - 1776- $300/yr. Dance / LicenSe Year lkll_ ~, ~ LICENSE :# · , ,-."t'~r' CITY OF MOUND ~ 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 1.~I~i,: ..~c~:/LIV~ ~USlC .~IT ~I'LI~aT~O~ Za'~U EVENT: T ' ' LOCATION OF DANCE/LWE MUSIC: .~.~ TYPE OF DANCE/LIVE MUSIC: ~~~ TIME PEmOD OF DANCE/LIVE MUSIC (HOURS PERMITTED: Mon-Sat: 8pm- 12:30am - ~und~ ~ 8pm- 11: 20pm) CHAIRPERSON O~ ~ ~~ HOME PHONE WORK PHONE #: /"3 /, Applicant's Signature ~"~ Deponent Approval/Denial (Sub~t memo if de, ed) Approved Denied Police Dept. Adm. Fke Dept. - 1777- June 1,2004 MAYOR PAT MEISEL 5501 Bartlett Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mayor Meisel: Enclosed please find my request to proclaim August 14, 2004, National Marina Day in the City of Deephaven. I am requesting the 14 cities of Lake Minnetonka recognize this date, together, as National Marina Day on Lake Minnetonka. National Marina Day recognizes the important recreational, environmental, and social contributions marinas make to thousands of waterfront communities all across America. Nationwide over 150 marinas celebrated National Marina Day in 2003. Our marina's event was a huge success because not only was it a benefit to our community but also it helped put Minnesota boating in the national spotlight. I am excited to announce that our marina was recognized nationally with the 2003 Best Local Political Advocacy Award for our National Marina Day event. It is because of the participation of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol, Mound Volunteer Fire Department, Minnetonka Power Squadron, and visits by our State Representatives, Senator Gen Olson and Representative Steve Smith, in addition to the official State of Minnesota Proclamation, that we were recognized. We feel honored to receive this award but are more excited for bringing a national spotlight to boating on Lake Minnetonka and in Minnesota. Lake Minnetonka's marinas serve as gateways to boating for thousands of people seeking to enjoy our waters. Whether they are cruising, sailing, fishing or participating in water sports, boaters look to marinas to provide the facilities and services they need to get their voyages off to the best possible start. This includes the marina's leadership in safeguarding the environment and serving as boater education centers, which is important not only to today's boaters, but also to future generations. Therefore, the role of the Lake Minnetonka marina is not just a "parking lot for boats", rather it's as a strong, vibrant community of families and friends united by a shared passion for the water. Now, more than ever, Minnesotans need clean, safe and relaxing locations at which to spend their leisure hours. On behalf of the Lake Minnetonka's Marinas, on this National Marina Day, we respectfully request you proclaim August 14, 2004, National Marina Day in the City of Mound. Enclosed please find our proclamation. I understand your schedule is busy, however, if you are in the Spring Park area on August 14, 2004, I would like to invite you and your family to participate in our National Marina Day celebration. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about National Marina Day, or our celebration at Rockvam Boat Yards, I can be reached at 952-471-9515. NMD National Board Member Roxanne Rockvam - P.O. Box 88 - Spring Park, NN 55384 - RRockvam@rbyi. corn- 952-471-9515 -1778- LAKE MINNETONKA NATIONAL MARINA DAY PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, we, the citizens of Lake Minnetonka place a high value on our recreation time and our ability to access one of America's greatest natural resources, its waterways; and WHEREAS, in 1928, the word "marina" was used for the very first time by the National Association of Engine and Boat Manufacturers to define a recreational boating facility; and WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is home to several recreational boating facilities that contribute substantially to their communities by providing a safe, reliable gateway to boating for members of the community and welcomed guests; and WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka's marinas also serve as stewards of the environment, actively seeking to protect the surrounding waterways not only for the enjoyment of this generation, but for generations to come; and WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka's marinas also provide their communities and visitors to the State of Minnesota a place where friends and families, united by a passion for the water, can come together for recreation, rest and relaxation; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: that Lake Minnetonka's marinas will continue to provide an environmentally friendly gateway to boating for the citizens of and the visitors to the State of Minnesota BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that August 14, 2004 be designated the first annual National Marina Day in order to honor Lake Minnetonka's marinas for their contributions to the community and to make citizens, policy makers and employees more aware of the overall contributions to their well-being; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that our city, the City of Mound, joins hands with other Lake Minnetonka cities and thousands of waterfront communities all across the United States in celebrating this day. - 1779- June 17,2004 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 S ubj ect: City of Mound Lost Lake Greenway S.P. 145-090-01 Supplemental Agreement Number 3 MFRA #13566 Dear Kandis, Enclosed is Supplemental Agreement Number 3 for the Lost Lake Greenway Project. This agreement will extend the completion date for one year, until June 30, 2005. Completion of the trail and landscaping on the City's Lost Lake property will be delayed until next spring. This should provide the time necessary for MHR and the City to proceed with the proposed dredging project. The additional cost associated with this time extension should be the Developer's responsibility. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Yours truly, John Cameron, City Engineer JRC:tlm s:/main/Mou 13566/Hanson 6-17 - 1780- Listed below are the items that will be put on hold until spring 2005 ITEM NO. 2521.603 2521.618 2540.602 2571.502 2571.502 2571.502 2571.503 2571.503 2571.505 2571.507 2575.502 2575.502 2575.505 CONTRACT OUANTrrY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE Bituminous Bike Path 562 LF 25.00 4" Concrete Walk 50 SF 6.00 Bench 6' 2 EA 1100.00 Deciduous Tree 12' Ht. B&B 10 TREE 670.00 Deciduous Tree 3" Cal B&B 1 TREE 580.00 Deciduous Tree 8' Ht B&B 8 TREE 500.00 Ornamental Tree 8' Ht B&B 5 TREE 490.00 $ Ornamental Tree 2" Cal B&B 4 TREE 480.00 $ Deciduous Shrub No. 2 Cont 127 SHRUB 50.00 $ Furnish and Plant Perennial 1" Plug 2500 PLANT 3.00 $ Seed Mixture Wildflower No.1 25 LB 552.00 $ Seed Mixture Wildflower No. 2 1 LB 2433.00 $ Sodding 430 SY 4.00 $ TOTAL $ 14,050.00 $ 3OO.OO $ 2,2OO.OO $ 6,700.00 $ 580.00 $ 4,00O.O0 2,450.00 1,920.00 6,350.00 7,500.00 13,800.00 2,433.00 1,720.00 Total $ 49,953.00 The additional cost for mobilization, inflation, materials and wages to complete the project in 2005 are as follows: Additional cost to move these items to spring of 2005 Bituminous Pathway add Seeding cover crop and weed kill (temporary cover) Seeding upcharge Landscaping EAI charge $ 2,200.00 $ 2,150.00 $ 850.00 $ 1,390.00 $ 660.00 Total yontractor Dated: (~' ~ ~"'~ City of Mound Dated: ~ / '7/ ..:~o ~ ~_~ sAmain:kmou 13566\corresXSupplemental aggrement-no3 NO. 3 TOTAL - ADD l~roj e~t Engineer- - Dated: By: Mn/DOT - Assistant District Engineer Funding Purposes Only Dated: $ 7,250.00 $ 7,250.00 -1781 - Page 2 of 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: June 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Variance -lakeside deck replacement OWNER: Mark Krawiecki CASE NUMBER: 04-14 LOCATION: 1736 Shorewood Lane ZONING: R-lA Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential BACKGROUND At its June 7, 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed a request from Mark Krawiecki for variance approval to replace an existing 8' x 30' deck with a new deck approximately 8' x 36' in size on the lakeside at his home located at 1736 Shorewood Lane. The requested variance is described as follows: Required ExistinR/Requested Variance Lakeshore setback Side (north) 50 feet 38.7 / 38.7 feet 11.3 feet 4 feet 2.4 feet 1.6 feet Details regarding the project are contained in Planning Report No. 04-14 which is on file in the Planning and Building Inspections Department and will be provided to members of the City Council upon request. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject property fronts Shorewood Lane on the west side and Lake Minnetonka on the east side and includes a single-family dwelling which is being remodeled. As pair of the remodeling activities, the former deck was removed due to rotting conditions along the east wall. The applicant is proposing to replace the structure in its current location and extend it an additional (6) feet to the south so as to facilitate the alteration of the walkway / bituminous driveway on the south side of the house which is scheduled to be completed next year. -1782- _- PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW In general, the Planning Commission was favorable to the request as the variance is not being increased and no new nonconforming conditions are being created. Discussion also took place that the appropriate side setback for a lakeside deck located behind the rear building line is four (4) feet as opposed to the standard six (6) feet as noted on the application and Planning Report therefore minimizing the amount of the requested variance. The Planning Commission also commented that the lakeshore setback has been historically measured to the closest point of the structure to the 929.4 OHWM whether or not it falls on the subject property or not. RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the variance application as recommended by Staff subject to conditions. A copy of the June 7, 2004 Planning Commission meeting minutes excerpts has been included as an attachment. Additionally, a draft resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has also been provided. - 1 783- WHEREAS, a deck was previously located on the subject property but was removed as part of the remodeling activities due to the deteriorating condition along the east wall; and WHEREAS, the deck is proposed to be replaced in its current location but will be extended an additional (6) feet to the south so as to facilitate the future alteration of the bituminous walkway / driveway; and WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 530:530, Subd. 1 states that a variance may be issued to provide relief to a landowner where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of his/her property if certain circumstances exist; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the variance subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its June 7, 2004 meeting as required by the City Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City does hereby approve the requested variance and makes the following findings of fact: A. A lakeside deck existed previously on the subject property but was removed in part due to its deteriorating condition. B. Hardcover on the subject site exceeds the 40 percent hardcover allowance but predates the 1994 adoption of the shoreland regulations. The proposal, as submitted, does not increase hardcover on the property. C. A lakeside deck is considered to be a standard feature for lakeside lots. D. The criteria for granting a variance as set forth in City Code Chapter 350:530 have been met. 2. This variance is approved subject to the following conditions: A. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use requests. - 1784- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 04- A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SIDE YARD AND LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW REPLACEMENT OF A DECK AT 1736 SHOREWOOD LANE P & Z CASE # 04-14 PID # 13-117-24-11-0136 WHEREAS, the applicant, Mark Krawiecki, has requested variance(s) approval to replace a 8' x 30' deck with a 8' x 36' deck on the lakeside of his home at 1736 Shorewood Lane; WHEREAS, the requested variances are described as follows: Required Existing/Requested Variance Lakeshore setback Side (north) 50 feet 38.7 / 38.7 feet 11.3 feet 6 feet · 2.4 feet 3.6 feet and; WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 350:440, Subd. 3 requires a 50-foot setback for lakeside decks; and WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 350:440, Subd. 3 requires a side setback of four (4) feet for decks which are located behind the rear building line; and WHEREAS, the subject site is zoned R-lA and fronts Shorewood Lane on the west side and Lake Minnetonka on the east side and includes a single-family dwelling which is being remodeled; and - 1785- B. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance(s) _app!!c_at_io~ is appro~, C. Applicant shall be required to sUbmit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. D. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all permits. 3. This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Refer to Exhibit A This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to M.S.S. 462.36, Subd. 1. This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used. o The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying for all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. The variance is valid for one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350:530, Subd. 2 (E). Applicant shall be required to submit a written request at least 30 days preceding 1-year deadline of the original approval date by the City Council. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted ,June 22, 2004 Pat Meisel, Mayor - 1786 - Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk - 1787- MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION ................ JUNE 77 2004 BOARD OF APPEALS CASE #04-14 VARIANCE DECK CONSTRUCTION - 1736 SHOREWOOD LANE MARK KRAWlECKI Applicant requests variance approval to replace an existing 8' x 30' deck with a new deck approximately 8' x 36' in size on the lakeside of his home. The deck is currently 38.7 feet from the Ordinance High Water. The additional 6 feet would not bring the deck closer to the lake. Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use requests. 2. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance application is approved. 3. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all permits. Discussion The applicant clarified future plans. Mueller indicated he would like to see more of the hardcover gone but was pleased that future plans anticipate removal of more hardcover. Smith asked about the measurement to the OHW. The Commission indicated that it should be to the closest point, even if it's on an adjacent property. MOTION by Miller, seconded by Raines, to recommend Council approve the variance with staff recommendations. MOTION carried unanimously. -1788- ~.oo~ ,~.~ (1 ~,, ~P T' ~ Y ' ~ ', ', ~ ',~ DECK WIIH BIT. UNDER 219 SQ. FL 0 I GARAGE FLOOR 944.7 ~934.5~ BIIU 207 ~r~ ,..? ~ Y z z 06/05/04 TttU 14:57 FAX 763 582 6479 ALLIANZ LIFE uo/u~/guu4 u~:~l ~A~ $5~4T206Z0 CI'~0F MOUND A ~. g~¢,7 Note 7'671 ~002 o01 - 1790- Ir -1791 - ,Id, ~ ,,Bill I, 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Mlq 55364 (952) 472-0604 MEMORANDUM To: F rom: Date: Subject: Honorable Mayor and City Council Comm. Dev. Director Sarah Smith and Public Works Director Carlton Moore June 16, 2004 Proposed New Land Use Fees - City Code Chapter 380 The following list includes a number of proposed amendments to City Code Chapter 380 to cover costs which are associated with various land use and/or building permit applications. As the City Council may recall, land use and other related fees are now required by state statute to be adopted by ordinance. The most notable of the proposed fees is an escrow deposit and site inspection fee associated with erosion control monitoring activities (ie. silt fence, sedimentation, ground cover, etc.) following transfer of stormwater and erosion control permitting from the MCWD in August 2002. The escrow deposit would be required at the time of permit issuance for all applications which involve land disturbing activities (ie. new construction, grading permits, floodplain alteration, wetland mitigation, etc.) Additionally, a new fee to cover costs associated with pre-construction building inspections is being proposed to ensure that a site has been adequately prepared in advance for construction (silt fence installation, exposure of iron monuments, etc.). Other proposed changes include an application and escrow deposit for subdivision exemption requests and a revision for the CDD/PW Hourly Charge (in excess of 3 hours) to reflect actual costs. - 1 793- 2004 Proposed New Fees Erosion Control Construction Escrow Deposit Pre-Construction Site Check Inspection Fee Subdivision Exemption Application Fee Subdivision Exemption Escrow Deposit Staff Hourly Charge (in excess of 3 hours) (Public Works / Community Development Director) $500.00 $ 70.00 ~er inspection) $200.00 $500.00 $ 60,00 C:~Documents and Settings\Sarah SmithWIy Documents~lemorandums~2004Xmemofeeincreases2004.DOC - 1794- CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. __-2004 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 380 TO THE MOUND CITY CODE AS IT RELATES TO ESTABLISHING LAND USE FEES FOR THE CITY OF MOUND The City of Mound does ordain: ISection 380 ESTABLISHMENT OF LAND USE FEES, is hereby-adde~ amended tein__-the City Code to read as follows: SECTION 380 ESTABLISHMENT OF LAND USE FEES 380.05 ..Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to comply with Minnesota State Statutes, 426.353, Subd. 4, which states that a municipality may prescribe fees sufficient to defray the costs incurred by it in reviewing, investigating, and administering an application for an amendment to an official control established pursuant to Sections 462.351 to 462.364 or an application for a permit or other approval required under an official control established pursuant to those sections. Fees as prescribed must be by ordinance: 380.10 Buildinq and Construction Fees 300.20 Wrecking Permit Minor building $50 Minor building to be replaced on same site $50 Single family wood frame $150 Duplex $200 Multiple dwelling: 1st two units $200 Each add'.l unit $250 Industrial, commercial, institutional: Total cost of wrecking at $6 for each $500 or fraction thereof of the market value of such work. Gas burners: Not exceeding 99,000 BTU 100,000 - 199,999 BTU 200,000 - 399,999 BTU 400,000 - 599,999 BTU 600,000 - 999,999 BTU $10 $15 $3O $44 $6O - 1795- 311.0 Install/remove flammable & combustible liquids and Tank not buried enclosed 500 gallons or less $10 Over 500 gallons $15 Tank buried or enclosed $25 Removal of combustible/flammable liquid tank $15 Removal of storage tanks of above/below ground liquor gas $15 LP tanks Heating, air conditioning & ventilation Contract prices $20 min. or 1% of contract price, whichever is greater Gas piping $5 for up to 3 openings $1 for each additional opening 380.15 315.20 315.35 320.00 330.20 Trailers Occupancy permit Mobile home set-up inspection fee $100 $75 Appeal to applicant $50 Public Lands Permit - major (value +$1000) *fee applies only if public benefit is derived* $20O Contractor License Verification $5 Building Permits - See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge Fire suppression - See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge Inspection fees - See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge Plan check fees - See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge Plumbing Permits: 310.00 16B665 Permit Fee for major improvement ($500+) $25 Per fixture fee for major improvement $10 Permit Fee for minor improvement <$300 $15 Permit Fee for minor improvement $300-$500 5% of improvement cost (Minor Impr. must be done by owner or (excluding fixture costs) -1796- 380.20 380.25 380.30 310.40 licensed contractor) Per rough-in only Per 100 feet of pipe or fraction thereof Per 100 feet of repair or fraction Outside sewer and/or water inspection Private water well inspection Additional inspections $10 $8 $5 $25 $25 $10 Wells: 305.00 Wells - per drilling or deepening $65 Building Relocation: Moving permit fee: not on State or County Highway: (requires Conditional Use) $350 Moving permit fee: On State or County Highways: No fee, but required evidence of insurance and refundable $250 cash. Excavation & Land Reclamation 460.15 Grading plan review fees *50 cu. yards or less '51-100 cu. yards '101-1,000 cu. yards '1,001-10,000 cu. yards '10,001-100,000 cu yards First 10,000 cu. yards Additional for ea 10,000 cu. yards or fraction thereof '100,001-200,000 cu. yards First 100,000 cu. yards Additional for ea 10,000 cu. yards or fraction thereof '200,001 or more First 200,000 cu. yards Additional for ea 10,00 cu. yards or fraction thereof Additional plan review, due to changes, additions, or revisions to approve plans: Per Hour (Min. % hour) $0 $15 $22 $3O $3O $15 $165 $9 $255 $4.50 $30 GRADING PERMIT FEES: *50 cu. yards or less '51-100 cu. yards '101-1,000 cu. yards First 1,000 cu. yards $15 $22 $22.50 3 - 1797- 380.35 Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: $10.50 '1,001-10,000 cu. yards First 1,000 cu. yards Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: '10,001-100,000 cu. yards First 1.,000 cu. yards Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: '101,000 cu. yards or more Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: After hours inspection:Minimum charge (2 hrs) Re-inspection fees assessed under Provision of chapter 305 (g) (UBC) $117 $9 $198 $40.50 $562.50 $22.50 $30/hr. $30/hr. Inspection for which no fee is specified: (Minimum chg. ~ hr.) Fee for authorizing additional grading under valid permit: Difference between original and entire project. Land Use Administration Fees (staff reports, meetings, etc.) Property File Research Admin. Fee (non-owners) $15.00 Building Permit Deposit (to cover staff review time/non-pickup) Minor Projects (Value less than $1,000) $100.00 Major Projects (Value more than $1,000) $500.00 Land Use Application Fee - City Staff 1 to 3 hours More than 3 hours Unauthorized Construction/No Permit Issued No Charge Double Bldg Permit Fee 380.40 Subdivision & Zonin_~ Fees 330.10_2 Waiver of Platting Fee Waiver of Platting Escrow 330.10 Subdivision Exemption Application Fee 330.10 Subdivision Exemption Escrow $200 $500 $200 $500.00 350.475 Fence Permit $55 350.530 350.525 350.755 Zoning Variance Variance escrow Conditional Use Permit CUP escrow Vacation $200 $500 $350 $500 $350 - 1798- 375:10 300.15 350.1100 350.520 Stormwater Permit Stormwater escrow Floodplain Alteration Permit Floodplain Alteration escrow Wetlands Permit Zoning Amendment Rezoning escrow Planned Unit Development Site Plan Review Commercial Site Plan Review Escrow Preliminary Plat Final Plat Minor Subdivision: Lot split Per lot over 2 lots Park Dedication Fee - minor Park Dedication Fee - major 350.1400 365.05 375.00 Escrow deposit - small proj. app. Escrow deposit - large proj. app. Adult Establishment License Fee Police Dept. background check Sign Permit: Sign alteration fee: Structural alteration, up to the 1st $1,000 Erosion Control Const. Escrow Deposit 375.00 Erosion Control Site Inspection Fee (per 492.00 493.00 Temporary Sign Permit Containers in Right-of-Way Portable Storage Container $300 $500 $300 $5OO $350 $350 $5OO $1,700 $350 $50O $350+$15/Iot $350+$15/Iot $250 $15 $1,100/Iot $1,100/lot or 10 percent of land market value, whichever is greater $1,000 $5,000 $2,000 $65/hr. $1oo $5O $5oo.oo $70.00 inspection) $25 $50 $50 Passed by the City Council this day of 20043. Mayor Pat Meisel 5 - 1799- Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Published in the Laker on Effective on ,2004_,9=. ,2004_~. - 1800- Building Permit #: DATE: ADDRESS: PROJECT: 1. [] Grading/drainage swales established away from neighbors structures: 2. [] Locate and show property stakes and building pad stakes: 3. i-'-IAddress posted on site: 4. [] Erosion control fencing established, if necessary: 5. [] Verify elevation of sanitary sewer services to Iow floor elevations: 6. [] Conditions of water shut-off/service (mark with contractors stake): 7. [] Conditions of curb and gutter abutting property to be built: ,/""'", 8. [] Curbs properly abridged for construction traffic: 9. [] Conditions of storm sewer gate abutting the property (if applicable): 10. [] Conditions of light fixtures or any other utility fixtures abutting the property (if applicable): 11. [] Setback requirements: Front: Lakeshore: Other (corner/front): ~ 12. [] Culvert inspection: 13. [] Permit visible on site. [] Initials of City Official ~ [] Initials of Site Contractor [] Checklist Complete Rear: ~ Side: Side: Page 1 of 1 C:\Documents and Settings\Sarah Smith~Vly Documents\Forms\Building Perm Applic Checklist April 2004,doc - 1801 - MEMORANDUM To: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk From: Jim Kurtz, Chief of Police Date: June 9, 2004 Subject: Beaver Trapping This memo is a follow-up to your request for information regarding beaver trapping. Population: Beaver populate all of North America except for extreme northern regions of Canada, the deserts of southwest United States, and Florida. Habitat: The habitat of the Beaver is almost entirely aquatic. Because they are slow moving animals they typically will only travel on land to nearby trees for food, shelter, or damming materials. They live in small ponds, or pools in "family groups" that consist of a mother, father, and up to six siblings. Beavers mate for life and their children move out at about two years of age. Beavers live in lodges, or burrows that they build to protect themselves from predators. The lodges are constructed of mud, trees, grass, and branches and have sub-surface access. The lodges are usually between 8 and 12 feet in diameter and have heights of around 3 feet. To assure that there is adequate water depth in the burrows, Beavers build dams in creeks and stream using trees, mud, stones, and branches. Food: Beavers are herbivores whose primary food source is plants and bark off of hardwoods. Threats to Survival: Pollution and deforestation is the greatest threat to the Beaver. Their natural predators are bears, wolves, wolverines, lynx, and otters. Beavers are trapped and hunted for their pelts throughout the country, but that only accounts for approximately 175,000 harvested Beavers annually. - 1802- §~atus: The Beaver is a mammal and is the largest rodent in North America. There is no danger of extinction and in some areas the Beaver has established itself as a nuisance. Mound City Ordinance 905.30 "Hunting and Trapping Prohibited" states, No person shall, within the City, take, capture, shoot, or trap any animals or birds except as follows: (a) Persons duly authorized to act as law enforcement officers in the discharge of their duties. (b) For destruction of diseased, injured, or dangerous birds, animals, or reptiles by persons specifically authorized to do so by the Chief of Police or the City Council. (c) Persons authorized by the City Council for the purpose of protecting the health, safety, or general welfare. The Council may limit the type of animal or bird to be trapped, captured, or shot and the manner and means of accomplishing the task. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) also regulates the hunting and trapping of Beavers under their "2003 Hunting and Trapping Regulations" - small game/furbearers regulations. Every resident age 16 and over must have both a Small Game and a Trapping License in possession to take small game (including furbearers) with traps, except that persons may trap without a Small Game License on their own land if they occupy it as their primary residence. That person must still have a trapping license. Residence age 13 through 17 must have a Jr. Trapping License and residents 18 or over must have a regular trapping license to trap. Residents under age 13 do not need a trapping license. · Non-residents may not trap in Minnesota. · No person shall be issued more than one Trapping License. Research would suggest that since the Beaver population in Mound is not threatened by natural predators, pollution, or deforestation they could create a nuisance problem resulting in flooding and property damage. Trapping is a practical approach to controlling the Beaver population. According to the DNR, there are three basis methods for trapping and catching Beaver: 1) Kill traps - these types of traps squeeze the target animal tightly and quickly resulting in instant death, 2) Leg Traps, or Snares - These type of traps are metal jaws, or looped cables that when activated closed down on the animal's leg, neck, or other body parts. In - 1803- some instances, the animal dies instantly, and 3) Live cage - this trap is set on a run, or pathway of the animal. The animal is funneled into the cage and caught alive and uninjured. In my opinion, the hunting and trapping of Beaver is adequately controlled by the DNR. Further, I believe we could safely alter our ordinance on trapping to include: "(d) Persons who have obtained a Trapping License from the Department of Natural Resources and who trap using a live trap. (e) Commercial trappers who have obtained proper Trapping Licensing from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources" I don't believe these changes would negatively affect any unforeseen violations involving this ordinance. I think the proposed ordinance changes provide a safe and practical mechanism for homeowners to trap Beaver. In other words, the untrained person could safely live-trap beaver (much like many residents currently trap raccoon and squirrel) and the commercial trapper would be licensed, bonded, and insured to protect themselves in the tragic event they should inadvertently trap a domestic animal. - 1804- CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. _-2004 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTION 905 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE AS IT RELATES TO WEAPONS, FIREARMS, HUNTING AND TRAPPING The City of Mound does ordain: That Subsection 905.30, Hunting and Trapping Prohibited, be is hereby amended to read as follows: 905.30 Huntinq and Trapping Prohibited. No person shall, within the City, take, capture, shoot, or trap any animals or birds except as follows: (a) Persons duly authorized to act as law enforcement officers in the discharge of their duties. (b) For the destruction of diseased, injured, or dangerous birds, animals, or reptiles by persons specifically authorized to do so by the Chief of Police or the City Council. (c) Persons authorized by the City Council for the purpose of protecting the health, safety, or general welfare. (d) Persons who have obtained a Trapping License from the Department of Natural Resources and who trap using a live trap. (e) Commercial trappers who have obtained proper Trapping Licensing from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The Council may limit the type of animal or bird to be trapped, captured, or shot and the manner and means of accomplishing the task. Passed by the City Council this 22nd day of June, 2004. Mayor Pat Meisel Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Published in The Laker the 3rd day of July, 2004. Effective the 4th day of July, 2004. 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-0604 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Mound City Council, Planning Commission, Docks and Commons Advisory Commission and Parks and Open Space Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: June 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Street Vacation Request- Woodland Road (unimproved) OWNER / APPLICANT: Mike Gardner and Ted Metz PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 04-04 LOCATION: 1599 Bluebird Lane and 1601 Bluebird Lane PID: 13-117-24-12-0128 / 13-117-24-12-0129 ZONING: Residential District R-lA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential REQUEST Pursuant to Minnesota State Section 462.358, the City Council will hold a public hearing to review the street vacation application, from Mike Gardner and Ted Metz to vacate an unimproved portion of Woodland Road adjacent to their property located at 1599 Bluebird Lane and 1601 Bluebird Lane between the street:'~and the east edge of the former commons. Members of the City Council are ad,vised that the public hearing for the application was originally scheduled for May 25, 2004 but was cancelled due to lack of a quorum at the May 13, 2004 POSAC meeting. PROCEDURE Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358 states that a statutory city may abandon ownership or control over all or any part of the land they have set aside, dedicated or used as streets or alleys and further states that a City Council may initiate the action by resolution or by the submission of a petition by a majority of the landowners and the owners of at least 50 percent of the land area. Procedurally, state statute requires that the City Council must hold a public hearing on the proposal following two weeks of published notice and posted notice in (3) public locations no later than (14) days prior to the hearing. The City must also provide written notice to each affected owner at least (10) days before the public hearing. Members of the City Council are advised that all publication / posting / mailing requirements were satisfied. - 1805- VACATION ACTION When a city vacates a street, the involved portion of the public right-of-way is split 50-50, (presumably to the centerline) and is usually free of easements either in favor of the public or owners of other property abutting the street. However, state statute allows that a City may specify the extent to which a proposed vacation affects existing utility easements, including the right to maintain and continue existing utility easements. CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and all, supporting materials were forwarded to all City departments for review and comment. City Engineer John Cameron No comments. Public Works Director Skinner The City has sanitary sewer in this portion of Woodland Road. This line is approximately 100 feet west of Bluebird Road on Woodland. There are (2) services on the dead end of the manhole that would serve Lot 24, Block 7 and Lot 18, Block 6. Utility easements to be preserved and/or dedicated if vacation is to be approved. Applicants shall be responsible for preparation of document(s) required. Parks Supt. Fackler Vacation request to be reviewed by DCAC and POSAC. Woodland Point Settlement Agreement needs to be reviewed with regard to vacation request and should be included as an attachment to the Staff Report. Fire Chief Pederson No comments. Police Chief Kurtz No police issues. Former Building Official Simoneau No comments. - 1806- ,a, ,mm ,,m~ m 4 I~ H, City Attorney Dean Notice of public hearing to be sent to all property owners of record in the Woodland Point subdivision according to Hennepin County. If approved, it is advised that the vacation should be recorded against all properties in the Woodland Point subdivision. Vacation requests are not subject to the timeline provisions as set forth in M.S.S. 15.99. UTILITY COMPANY REVIEW Copies of the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to all involved utility companies for review and comment. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasgo has indicated that they have no utilities within the proposed vacation area and also that they have no objections to the vacation. Excel Energy has indicated that they have overhead distribution facilities located within the proposed vacation area and therefore would need to retain easement rights over and under and across the southerly 5.00 feet of that portion of Woodland Road subject to the vacation, if approved. PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW DNR.. M.S.S. 412.851 requires that all vacation petitions that abut public water must be forwarded to the Department of Natural Resources by certified mail no less than (30) days before the scheduled public hearing. A copy of the vacation request was mailed to the DNR Area Hydrologist Julie Ekman on March 29, 2004 and was also forwarded by certified mail on April 7, 2004 prior to the original scheduled public hearing date of May 25, 2004 which was subsequently cancelled. Members of the City Council are advised that DNR Trails and Waterways Trails Manager Martha Reger waived further notification pursuant to M.S.S. 412.851 as the application materials were provided previously to the DNR and because the involved portion of Woodland Road proposed to be vacated does not abut public water. LMCD. A copy of the vacation application and supporting materials was also forwarded to LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck for review due to the multiple- dock which is located immediately west of the street end. Application may be subject to review by LMCD legal counsel. As of June 16, 2004, no comments have been received. - 1807- GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Woodland Road is a dedicated, unimproved public right-of-way and includes a pedestrian footpath. 2. The properties are subject to corner yard setback requirements for lots of record due to frontage on both Bluebird Lane and Woodland Road. That portion of Wawonaissa Common that abuts the subject properties is now owned by the applicant(s) following settlement of the Woodland Point case. In considering a vacation request, the City Council must make a finding that there is no public benefit to retaining ownership of this particular section of unimproved right-of-way If the proposed vacation request is approved, any and/or all existing private utility easements should be retained and/or reserved. Presently, there are municipal utilities in the subject area. Refer to comments from the Public Works Superintendent. If the vacation request is approved, the front / side setback of the Gardner house on the south side would become conforming. It is Staffs understanding that they are considering modifications to their existing home which would require a variance due to the non-conforming setback. It is Staffs understanding that the applicants are agreeable to providing an access easement for the multiple-dock located immediately west of the street end of Woodland Road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommended that the proposed vacation request be approved as there appears to be no public benefit to retaining this portion of Woodland Road as it is unimproved and does provide public access to the lake with the exception of the users of the multiple dock and Woodland Point residents on the condition that the following list of minimum conditions be included in any recommendation for approval: 1. The applicants shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the vacation request including recording of the vacation resolution. 2. Easements shall be retained for pedestrian users of the multiple dock with all - 1808- related costs to be paid by the appticants. 3. Any and/or all drainage and/or utility easements shall be retained and/or reserved with all related costs to be paid by the applicants. 4. All private utility easements shall be retained and/or preserved. 5. All obligations under the Woodland Point Settlement Agreement remain in effect and are binding upon all involved parties. Members of the City Council are advised that the City Attorney has also recommended that the vacation be recorded against all properties in the Woodland Point subdivision if it approved. DOCKS AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION (DCAC) REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION The street vacation application was reviewed by the DCAC at its April 15, 2004 meeting who recommended that it be approved. A copy of the April 15, 2004 DCAC meeting minute excerpts has been included. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION The street vacation application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 19, 2004 meeting who unanimously voted to recommend denial of the vacation request. In its recommendation for denial, the Planning Commission stated that it wouldn't be in the public's best interest because of the existing utilities and because of the difficulty in maintaining unencumbered lake access. A copy of the April 19, 2004 Planning Commission meeting minute excerpts has been included. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION REVIEW (POSAC) AND RECOMMENDATION The street vacation application was reviewed by the POSAC at its June 10, 2004 meeting who recommended that it be denied. Commissioner Motyka recused himself from the discussion as he was one of the litigants in the Woodland Point case. A copy of the June 10, 2004 POSAC meeting minute excerpts has been included. - 1 809- ADDITIONAL COMMENT Due to conflicting recommendations from Staff and the City's Commissions, a resolution has not been prepared in advance of the City Council public hearing. -1810- DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTE EXCERPS April 15, 2004 Present: Commissioners Jim Funk, Greg Eurich, Gerald Jones, Michelle Olson, Frank A.hrens, Council Representative Mark Hanus, Park Superintendent Jim Fackler, Dock Administrator Katie Hoff, Secretary Denice Widmer Citizens Present: Mike Gardner 1599 Bluebird Lane Chair Funk called the meeting to order at 7:32pm 1. Approval of March 18, 2004 Minutes MOTION by Funk to approve the March 18, 2004 Minutes. SECOND by Eurich. Motion Carried. 2. Agenda Changes: None 3. Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present. None Discuss: Street Vacation Request - Woodland Road (Unimproved) Applicants: Mike Gardner and Ted Metz 1599 Bluebird Lane and 1601 Bluebird Lane Fackler gave a brief background on the request, stating that staff supports the vacation request subject to the five conditions listed. Discussion with applicant Mike Gardner followed regarding landscaping and parking. Ahrens asked for wording clarification in the first paragraph of the Recommendation where it states," does provide public access to the lake with the exception, etc." Ahrens feels it should state," does not provide public access to the lake with the exception, etc." Fackler will check w/Sarah regarding this. MOTION by Funk to approve the Street Vacation Request subject to the conditions outlined in the recommendation. SECOND by Eurich. Motion Carried. -1811- MINUTE EXCERPT MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 19, 2004 BOARD OF APPEALS CASE #04-04 STREET VACATION t599 AND 1601 BLUEBIRD LANE MIKE GARDNER AND TED METZ The applicants have submitted a vacation request to vacate a portion of Woodland Road adjacent to their properties. As there appears to be no public benefit to retaining this portion of Woodland Road as it is unimproved and does not provide public access to the lake with the exception of the users of the multiple dock and Woodland Point residents. Staff supports the vacation request on the condition that the following list of minimum conditions be included in any recommendation for approval: 1. The applicants shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the vacation request including recording of the vacation resolution. 2. Easements shall be retained for pedestrian users of the multiple docks with all related costs to be paid by the applicants. 3. Any and/or all drainage and/or utility easements shall be retained and/or reserved with all related costs to be paid by the applicants. 4. All private utility easements shall be retained and/or preserved. 5. All obligations under the Woodland Point Settlement Agreement remain in effect and are binding upon all involved parties. Mueller asked if there were any other vacations granted recently where there are utilities in the property being vacated. Smith said she wasn't aware of any. Miller felt it would be difficult to insure unencumbered access over private property. Ayaz inquired if the owner could landscape in such a way that it appears to be private property. Smith said they could. Mueller asked what other vacation we have granted requiring a multitude of easement, walkway and non-landscaping requests like this one. Smith knew of none. Osmek added that, as private property, the owners could make access increasingly difficult. However, it would not happen if the city retains ownership. -1812- Public Comments Chuck Champine (1550 Canary Lane) -Went through the settlement. Wants to know why staff has changed their position. Passions ran very high on both sides. Recommend the strongest possible language to guarantee the unobstructed travel through the area. Cathy Bailey (1554 Bluebird Lane) - There have been many changes over the years that have contributed to the hindrance of the use by the public. She hopes that the 350 property owners in Woodland Point count for something. Mike Gardner (1599 Bluebird Lane) - He's not trying to stop anyone from accessing the lake. We are trying to change the area from a read to a walkway. Hennepin County encouraged them to pursue the vacation. He wants to get his property into conformance. Mr. Metz wants to put up some trees for some privacy. Gardner was to remove a portion of the house and remodel. The rights are there according to the courts. Michael asked if Gardner didn't think this was a poor time to pursue this just to get your house into conformance. Gardner indicated that the north side isn't conforming either. Mueller said the screening issue for Mr. Metz could be done with a Public Lands permit. Osmek doesn't question his desire to make his property more conforming. He does question the accessibility issue for the area's residents. Mueller reminded the applicant that the property was in this condition when he made the decision to purchase it. Miller indicated that if there weren't another 300+ people to consider it would be a different matter. Michael confirmed with Gardner that, if the city doesn't grant the vacation, he would pursue legal means. Discussion Mueller cited many examples from the settlement agreement that cast doubt on the City's right to administer the dock program because of the lack of a street end on Woodland Road. He also made the point that the LMCD would, in effect, take control of the issues because the City of Mound would no longer have ownership. He also thought it called into question the ownership of all of the streets in the Woodland Point subdivision and the City's responsibility for maintenance. Finally, he state that this vacation cannot be granted because: 1) The City may not technically own the street; 2) It wouldn't be in the public's best interest because of the utility locations; 3) it wouldn't be in the public's best interest because of the difficulty in maintaining unencumbered -1813- lake access. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Miller, to recommend Council not vacate this portion of Woodland Road. Ayaz asked if there is a way to turn the streets back over to the City if current ownership is in question. Mueller indicated the owners could, as a whole, decide to turn them back to the City. Gardner was under the impression that, after a certain length of time of maintaining the streets, they become public. Mr. Champine - At one time the area was unincorporated and had county maintaining the roads. Questions may be addressed in the annexation documents. MOTION carried unanimously. -1814- PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTE EXCERPTS June 10, 2004 Present: Commissioners Derrick Hentz, John Beise, Ron Motyka, Norman Domholt, Mike Mason, City Council Representative Bob Brown, Park Superintendent Jim Fackler, Commissioner Susan Taylor arrived late. Absent or Excused: Secretary Denice Widmer Citizens Present: Vicki Besler 4609 Tuxedo Blvd Cathy Bailey (No Address Given) Mary Ellen Storlien 1595 Dove Lane Ted Metz 1601 Bluebird Lane. Se Discuss: Request for Street Vacation Applicants: Mike Gardner and Ted Metz 1699 and 1601 Bluebird Lane Mound, MN 55364 Fackler gave a brief background on this request. Applicant Ted Metz was present. Applicant Mike Gardner was not. (It should be noted that the DCAC approved this request and the Planning Commission did not approve this request. Minutes from both meetings were included in this packet.) Discussion followed. Motyka excused himself from the discussion because he was one of the major litigants in the Woodland Point case. Brown and Beise expressed their disapproval of this request. Domholt stated that he could not approve this request unless there was a legal and equal division of the property that would allow for continued public access. Applicant Ted Metz also gave a brief background on this request. Citizen Cathy Bailey (no address given) stated her opposition to this request. MOTION by Brown to deny the request for street yacation. SECOND by Beise. MOTION CARRIED. (It should be noted that Motyka did not vote as he had excused himself from this discussion.) -1815- CITY OF MOUND NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-16~'~ PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound,com TO CONSIDER A PETITION TO VACATE AN UNIMPROVED PORTION OF CENT TO THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT '! 599 WOODLAND ROAD ADJA _. EEN THE STREET AND . ANE AND 1601 BLUEBIRD LANE BETW ~_ BLUEBIRD L THE EAST EDGE OF THE FORMER COMMONS CASE if 04-04 PID No. 13.,1'17-24-'12-0"128 PID No. 13..1'17-24-12-0'129 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mound, will meet on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 7:30 PM to hold a public hearing to consider a request from Mike Gardner and Ted Metz to vacate an unimproved portion of Woodland Road adjacent to their property located at 1599 Bluebird Lane and 1601 Bluebird Lane between the streetand the east edge of the former commons. The ro osed area to be vacated is le all described as follows: That part of the Northerly half of Woodland Road (platted as Minnetrista Road in the plat of Woodland Point) which lies westerly ora line drawn from the Southeast corner of Lot '19, Block 6, to the Northeasterly corner of Lot '1, Block 7, and which lies easterly of a line drawn from the Southwest corner of Lot 'i8, Block 6, to the Northwest corner of Lot 24, Block 7, all in WOODLAND POINT. Copies of all reports and application materials are available for public viewing in the Planning and Building Inspections Department d~ring regular office hours at Mound City Hall. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference tothe above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. ~1 l~o{iander - Planning and Inspections Secretary Published in the Laker on June 1~,004 and June 19, 2004 poSted on June 8, 2004 l ~rin,edon recycled paper -1816- AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING HEARING NOTICE Case No. STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Jill Norlander, being duly sworn, deposes and says; I am a United States Citizen, over twenty-one (21) years of age, and the Secretary_ for Planning and Inspections Department of the City of Mound, Minnesota. On ~ /'~ ,20 ~)/'/L, acting on behalf of the City I deposited in the United States Post Office at Mound, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice of a hearing on proposed improvement, enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses appearing opposite their respective names. NAME ADDRESS *See attached list. There is delivery service by the United States mail between the place of mailing and the places so addressed. Subscribed and sworn to before me this J~ Norlander l{~ day fo~"J"O~ 20 _(~.. Notary<~blic~,~ ¢-~'. ~~ -1817- AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING HEARING NOTICE Case No. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ~'~ day,of ~ the attached notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road,... Mound, Minnesota. , being duly sworn, on oath Says that on the '? Subscribed and sworn to before me, this I(~) day of,.jTL)~-' Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minm My Commission -1818- ,ii ,J , ,ill HN¥~I (I~fI~[HFI Ii '~ ......... 00'0'~ /2- 11"7- "WOODLAND POINT" !- 1820 534l Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952-472-0600 Fax 952-472-0620 CATION APPLICATION Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. Planning Commission Date qll~Jl/.~ Case No. City Council Date S!.~. ~1~ ~ S I~ /~ ? .~ Y. I~ - 0(2 ~ Please ~pe or print clearly Address [~ ~0~1~0 ~M~' /~01 ~ Adjacent Address ADJACENT PROPER~ Name of Business (APPLICANTS Lot Block PROPER~ Subdivision, PI~ ZONING DISTRICT Cimle: R-1 R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 TO BE VACATED FOR ' _ REQUEST p ~0- ~ ~&&~ IS THERE A ~¢ ~ ~AC~ ~ ~q~ O~ '~ PUBLIC ' FOR THIS ~ ~ ¢ ~ - ~ND? I certify that all of the. Statements above and statements contained in any required papers or plans to be. submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the information provided and that ! am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application~ .~~ /Z Print Applicant's Name APplicant's Signature. 'bate Print Applicant's Name ~(~plicant's Signature / / Date,/ Revised 11/20/03 - 1821 - Feb 10 04 08:S4a p.2 Mike & Judy Gardner 1599 Bluebird Lane Mound, MN 55364 TO: Sarah Smith City of Mound SUBJECT: Woodland Road Extension Woodland Road extension was platted a road to access a road that was to run along the shores of Lake Minnetonka. At some point a decision was made not to build this road along the shores thus there was no use for Woodland Road extension. Woodland Road is now green space. Trees, bushes and grass have grown in this area. Their is also dead trees and old tree stumps on this space. The Metz's family and ourselves have taken care of the land of the platted road since 1985. We would like to have the road vacated to remove the set backs of a corner lot so that we can clean up this area. We would like to do some landscaping and land fill to improve the use and appearance. We would also like to put an second floor addition and a south facing sidewalk on to our present house The Metzs would like to plant some trees ,bushes and flowers which would improve the appearance and help with water drainage. Thank you A . ,., ~_ Mike and Jd~lyG~dner - ~ -1822- January 13, 2004 Proposed road vacation descriptions In the plat of WOODLAND Point LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PART OF WOODLAND ROAD TO BE VACATED That part of Woodland Road (platted as Minnetrista Road in the plat of WOODLAND POINT) which lies westerly of a line drawn from the Southeast corner of Lot 19, Block 6, to the Northeast comer of Lot 1, Block 7, and which lies easterly of a line drawn from the Southwest corner of Lot 18, Block 6, to the Northwest corner of Lot 24, Block 7, all in WOODLAND POINT. PART TO BE ADDED TO LOTS 18 & 19, BLOCK That part of the North half of vacated Woodland Road (platted as Minnetrista Road in the plat of WOODLAND POINT) which lies westerly of a line drawn from the Southeast corner of Lot 19, Block 6, to the Northeast comer of Lot 1, Block 7, and which lies easterly of a line drawn from the Southwest corner of Lot 18, Block 6, to the Northwest corner of Lot 24, Block 7, all in WOODLAND POINT. PART TO BE ADDED TO LOTS 1 & 24, BLOCK 7 That part of the South half of vacated Woodland Road (platted as Minnetrista Road in the plat of WOODLAND POINT) which lies westerly of a line drawn from the Southeast corner of Lot 19, Block 6, to the Northeast comer of Lot 1, Block 7, and which lies easterly of a line drawn from the Southwest corner of Lot 18, Block 6, to the Northwest corner of Lot 24, Block 7, all in WOODLAND POINT. - 1823- Mar- 02 04 10:22a Mound Planning Rnd Insp 5524'7206?9 I5:57 Hom-~NNEDY & GRAIN +6]Z337~3]0 t:. 14/Z? p.14 SETTLEMENT AGI EMENT As Modified by Court Order Bailey et al. v. Lien et al. Hennepin County Court File No. MC97-I 5540 The parties to th/s litigation agree as follows: ?ropeny interests 1. Owners of the adjoining p~rcels have lee simple title m segments of Wav~onaissa and Wam'ika commons. The boundaries of each are lines That extend from the s~de lines of the adjoining parcel.. owned'.. ~ml~ in '1 Canary Beach is th~ portion of Waurika Common that was delineated by the Cour~ in ks p~rtial summary judgment ruling dated March 3, 1999. Canary Beach has b~en dedicated xo the public ffzough common law dedication and is s,,bjecT to control by the City for parkland purposes- The public holds a perpetual exclusive easement for be~ch, park and dockage purposes in Canary Beach. All property owners in the Woodland Point subdivision have an easement as to Wa-*onai.,~a Commons and Wau.qka Commons as Those Commons a~e delineated on the 1906 Plat of Woodland Point. This Agreement descn'bes the casement rights of The City and of all property owners in the Woodlm'~l Point subdivision over she Commons. The City has an easement in the segments of the Commons at streex ends for purposes of ~he multiple slip docks described in this Agreement; The boundaries of each such segmem are lines shat extend fi.om The outer boundaries of the au'eel to the lakeshore. Excep~ for Cmm~ry Beach (where the public's easement is exclusive), the easements to use the Commons set ~brr. h in ~his Seulemen~ Agreement are perpetual, non-exclusive easements appunenam m all parcels in Woodland Point - abuning parcels and inland parcels as the ease may be. These easements supenede the easemems in the Corvanons for private sweets and avenues dedicated in she 1906 PI~; of WoodI~l Point. Thc Cit7 may retain, utilize, maintain and replace militi~ pr~s~mly located in Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons, including ~orm and sanitary sewer pipe, manholes, water liras and hydrants. Multiple slip docks m be provided by the City 4. The Cky will, through its dock fund, pay 100% of the co~ of' new multiple slip docks at street ends in Woodland Point. This will consist of: one 2 - boat dock at Cull Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Finch Lane; - 1824- Map OE 04 10:2~a Mound Planning 04-1~-01 1~:~8 From-KENNEDY A GI~AVEN Rnd P, 15/Z? . II h, p.15 ~"891 10. one 4 - on= 4 - one 4 - boat one 2 - boat on= 2 - boa dock at Eagle Lane; dock at Dove Lane; dock at Bluebird Lane Norffi; dock at Woodland P,.oad; and dock al Bluebird Lar~ Souuh. No more slips may be provided at any one location than are specified above, nor may fewer slips than specified be provided unless there is insufficient demand tbr slips by Woodland Point r~sidents 'l']:lese docks will be ¢oniigured as straight docks. A cliagram of the dock at Gull Lane is attached as E.xitibi~ 2; a ali, gram of the docks al; Finch Lane, Eagle Lane and Bluebird Lane North is at-~ached as Exhibit 3; a diagram of'the dock a~ Dove Lane is anach~d as Exhibit 4; and a diagram of the dock a Woodland Road is armehed as Exhibit 5. In the ~wm that any slip becomes unusable because of climi~ic or ,,valor level chan§es, ~he City is not obligated m provide additional dockage or provide al'ccmaTivc sites. Thc City will provid~ a maximum of 22 Boat t~oraae Units ("BSUs"), but no~ less than 22 BSUs unless r.h~ is insufficient demand, for the non-abunin~ residents in the funa-¢ as outlined herein under tM City's blank~ Lake Mi.nr~to~a Con.~rva~ion District ("LMCD") license. 2'he pani~ agree that they will use their bes~ eftbns and will cooperate to obtain any approvals tha~ may be needed from LMCD for consmicdon oi'the multiple slip docks. The City will install and remove its docks each year, The Cky will be responsible for all maintenance or replacement of'its docks in the future, at its discretion. T~ City will administer a dock program for the multiple slip docks referred ro in paragraph 4. This will include, but will no~ be limited ~o collecting fees, sending mailings and notice~, and maintaining records and waiting lists. Docks for the year 2001 boating season will be assigned first to Woodland Poin~ residents who paid a dock fee in 1999. Woodland Point residents ~ho applied in 1999 but were not awarded a dock will get second priority ibr the year 2001 boating season. The City will assign the remaining multiple dock slips in the year 2001 and in following years with the following priorities: 2nd 3rd Woodland Point non-abur~rs Woodland Point non-abuuers who ~am a second slip Non-Woodland Point Mound r~sid~n~s. Per~ons who have been assigned slips will have priority in following years. BE2g$=~ 2 - 1825- M~r O~ 04 lO:~a Mound Pl~nnin~ Rnd Insp 95247~0678 p. 1~ 0~-1:'-01 1~:6g From-,KENN;i~Y & GP, A~ld +;1~1'~11]D T-1~8 P. 16/~? F-8~1 11. 12. 13. ]4. 15. 16. 1"7. 18. 19. 20. Any Woodland Point residents using The multiple docks who are assigned a second slip will pay a second full dock fee. Notwithstanding paragraph 10, Woc>dlartcT Point residents with a second slip will not b~ reassigned a second slip Ibr any season ia which demand can not otherwise be met for primary slips. All multiple dock slip holders will be assigned shps at The location closest to Their homes to The extent possible. (This co=Id reset in slip holcl~rs being moved from ),ear to year as applicants change.} Multiple dock slip fees will be th~ same as fees for multiple dock slips Throughout The rest of The City. ~ fees are ctm'enTly $150 per slip, picas the LMCD boat fee. In The event That a Woodlamd Point resident applies for a slip on a m~Tiple slip dock in Woodland Point and That do=k has a slip assigned m a non-Woodland PoSh: resident, The non-Woodland Poin~ resident will be assigned a slip outside Woodland Poin~ at The first oppommit¥ but lha~ resident will not be moved tm~il a ne~v loc~Tion become~ a~ailable. There will be no accesi to The Commons ~ia Gull Lar~ due :o topo~r'4ptlic conditions. All such acc=ss will be only from Pinch Lane or f-urger wes~ t~ The Commons leading up to ~he Gull La.ne dock, except for those property owners between Gull Lane and Finch Lan= who may acce-~s The Coramons clirectly from Their property. Any non-Woodland Point residents who are assi~ried slips on The mukiple docks mus~ access Them through The stree~ eM m-id no~ across The Commons. Because Thee is no a~cess via Cntll Lane, slips on the Gull Lane dock may no~ be assigned m an~ non- Woodland Point resides. I: is re~ommend=xi Thai the non-abtlTling slip liolders walk to ~heir tires. II ~ further recommmdecl Tl'a~ their guests pek at The slip holder's homes. The abuuing properties will no longer be included in the City of Mound's shoreline count. T_he Cir~ v~ill only, cos'it Canary l~-_ch -~ r_he street ends in its lo:al coual: The abtrtters will no longer be part of the City's dock program in any way and will u,,t pay any fee to ~e Cit~, Abusers arc permitted to m~inTairi docks on ~eir resp~ctiv~ sep~neuTs as dellned in paragraph t, consistent with the Ci:y's riF:,hT-s under paragraph 27 and consistent with reciuir:mcn~s imposed by The LMCD as a condifio~ for The ~n~ of variancet for consTrt~crion of the m~l~iple slip docks. All non-abutters will remove Their existing do~ks, lifts, and other dock Telal~d hard',~are from the water and easement (Commons and ST. TeeT tmds) b~ December 1, 1999, or They will £orfeh their slips for th~ £ollowin§ year. r,.RC'-i~412$v3 - 1826- Map 02 04 10:23& Mound Plannin~ 04-12-01 ~ 16:59 From-kENNEDY i GI~A~EN Rnd Insp 9524?206?9 +61Z3371~310 %17.8 P.1T/IT F-BO1 p.l? 2l. During winter monr.hs, ~he multiple slip docks will be stored on uh: Commons a~ ~ s~et e~ or, if neces~ because oftopo~phy or snow removil n~ds, as clo~ m ~c street ends ~ possible. Th~ dock a~ Bluebi~ L~e Sou~ ~11 r~ ~s~l~d ye~ ro~d ~ess coMi~io~, ~ deTe~ined by ~e City, requke ~mo~al ~or per~o~ safe~, pro~mon of~e dock kself, or o~r mam~ not r~Ei~ at ~s ~e. It is undarsTood that thc Ciw will not be doing any dredging in the vicinity of Bluebird L~nc South. 23. O~,~ers &the Hillier prop:ny (I551 Canary Lane) ~mt abuts Caaary Beach are assured a dock location o~ r. he frontage of That prop:ny at thc wes[ ~nd of Ihe Canary Beach proper~y, provided the the boarJdock complex docs not encroach b~ond the B~ch's west propers7 line. 24. The City will conslrua stairs at BlucbiTd Lane North, Dov~ Lane. Eagle Lane and Woodland Rna& Abutters will p~y a one-rime f~e of $300 per hotmc-hold for stairs cons~'uction. The multiple slip users will pay a $50 per year per slip surcharge for five years only. Thc City will pay The remaining costs from the dock fund. ^ricer ~,c years, the surcharge will end and thc City will bc responsible for future maintenance. 25. Dock fees paid by my abuTTin~ property owner in Woodland Point for The 1999 season ~,ill b~ credited ~oward the or~ ~ime stair charge. The balmc~ du~ will be billed. 26. ,Mi rules and re~ulmior~ as revised over time and published each year by ~e City r_hat apply to other Mound muhipl~ slip docks will apply to the multiple slip docks in Woodland Point except as sta~d abo,~e. Rights to regulate and use Commons 27. The CSt7 will retain regulatory control o~er Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons only the extent it has :ur. holily aver other private lak~hore in the City. Any disputes bet's:eh nei§hbors on access, trespassing, or other helOtS:md ~reements bet'ween the parries are r~ be explored and resolved in civil proceedings or mediation rather than through the City. 28. i, .Y n°: vehicles will be alloy, ed. and there will b~ foot rs:rfc only. Guests should be accompanied by a Woodl~d Poi~ ~e City will no: exercise ~uThofi~ in ~ese ci~ ~UerS. ~y dispu~s betwe~ naighbors on ~c~ss, ~sp~s~g, or o~ ne~o~ated a~e~ems between to be explored and resolved ~ civil pr~ee~ngs or mediation ra~er th~ ~ough Ciw. KRC-19412$v3 BF--"9$ -.~ 4 - 1827- Mar' 02 04 10:23a Mound Planning Rnd Insp 9524?206?8 p.18 04-~2-0i 15:S[I Fr~,-I~HI~DY & GP, AVEH +~1~3Tg310 T-)Z8 P. 1:/21 F-Sgl Claims Giv=n Up 29. In exchange for benefits trader fl~is Agreement, the p~ies e~ee ~ ~ve up ~e~ d~ m br~g clams set ou~ ~ o~ ~l~ng m ~e compl~ ~fl ~sw~ in ~s c~e, ~ ~e ~o give up ~1 ci~s ~Mch co~d have been ~sed rela~ Co~o~. lnterpretafi/m, enforcement and notice of this Agrcemem 30. This Agreement is the complete agreemem of the par~ies relating to this a/:tiom This means that no pan~ may rely on prior conversations or statements in inx~npreting this Agreement. 31. This Agreement v, ill run with ~he land. This mea~s that the agreemem ~vill bind all persons with an interest in the Commons in the future. 32. This Agreement is contint~cmt on receiving an), appro~al~ r. ha~ rnsy be needed from LMCD or othex government bodies for installation of the multiple slip docks. This Agreemen~ may be execu~d in ¢ounx. crparts. This means ~a~ iT is not necessary for each party to sign the same copy of the AgreemenL but ~ha~ partie~ may sign separate copies of rahe Agreement, A copy of this Agrecmem and Order will be mailed to the owners of all parcels i~ Woodland Poia~ using ~e addresses that are maintained b~ ~ city or cotmty assessor. Certified copies of this Agreement and Order will be iiled with the Hennel:,in County Recorder and P, egisuar ofTirles ag~i_n~ all parcels in Woodland Point 35. 36. It is undexsmod fl'lax the prior ruling of the Court is of no legal effect., and that this Agreement All disputes arising out of this Scxflement Agreement, unless privately medialed, shall be brought before the Court under the caption for MC97-15540. The parties to this AgreemenI have Ihe fight to enforce this Agreement notwithstanding the rights of the LMCD under paragraph 37(e). Condkions imposed by the Lake Minncmnka Conservation Disuict (LMCD). 37. The 5erflemem Agreement i~ modifiect in ~he following ~y ~ ord~ to comply ~qui~s imposed by ~ L~e Mi~o~ Co~va~on Dis~ct (LMCD) con~fion for the ~ of~~s ~e~d for ~he co--action of Ihe muhipte slip ~ a~ s~e~ ~: The $enlement agreemeat, a~ modified herein by the Court, is binding on ',ill parties, ~eir successors, heirs and assigns, mci the Property, and rani with the Property, and Pr°rides l:~i~ment rcsuicfions on ufilizatio.n cfr. he Property as follows; ' 5 - 1 828- Mar' 02 04 10:23a Mound PlanninC 16:00 From-KENNEDY.& GRAVEN Rnd Insp 9524T~0679 +61Z33?g310 T-IZ8 P, 1g/Z? F-g61 p.19 Non-abuvmrs shall not place or mainT~n a clock, no: store or moor an~,, boats at thc commons, other than as provided in thc -qcnlemem A~rcernc~t ~t the '~ared docks a: r,h¢ Street Ends. Prop=hies adjacem to the s~reeT ends at l:inch Lane, Eagle Lane, Bluebird Lane North and Gu/]. Lane (Lot 1, Block 2; Lot 4, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 3; Lot 4, Block 2; Lot 1, Block 6; Lot 4, Block 5; and Lot 1, Block 1), shall not plac~ or maintain an)' smuc~ure, Lncluding, without limitation, a doch or store boats or any othc-r watercraft closer than twenty (!0) f~t To ~e exte~ion of the s:rec: ~rxl boundary nearest their Properq', and hereby ~am a navigadonai easemen~ o~,er Thc same area for Thc purpos~ of ~llowin_~ inojcss and egress :o Th: shared docks adjacent m The Property described in this subparagraph. Properties ad3m:enl to the street end of Dove Lane CLot 1, Block 4; Lot 4, Block 3), ~all not pl~:e or ~n~n ~y storm, incl~ing, ~o~ Iimim~ion, a dock or .xo~ boam or ~ other ~atercr~ closer ~ ~ (10) feet to ~he exr~ion of Thc s~ ~d bo~d~ nc~s~ ~ck Property, ~d hereby ~t a ~vigadonal ~emem over the sm ~ea for ~c pu¢osc of ~lo~ng ingress and egress to the ~d docks ~j~ent m ~e Prop~y des~ibca in ~is subpm~ph. Lake Minn~mnka Conservation is considered a bcnefi:ed putty may enforce subparagraphs 37Cb) - (d) of ibis Order. For purposes ofpar~raph 37, ~h¢ following deiin~iions al>ply: ^but~ers Owners of parcels in The Woodland Point subdivision that arc listed in Exhibi~ 6 a~ached ~o This Agreement ii. Commons Property Property includcd in Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons as show:~ on plat for Woodland Poin~ sabdivision. Non-abraders P~rsons owning privat~ property in Woodland Point subdivision other Than Abu:ters, 6 -1829- Mar 02 04 10:23a Mound PianninC Rnd Insp 8524?208?9 p.20 04-12-01 16:00 From-KEFIHEDY & GR~VEFI +61Z3376310 ?-128 P. 2D/T/' ~:-891 The po~on~ street bounclari~s of Finch Lane, Eagl~ Lane, Bluebird Lane North, Gull Lane, Dove Lane and Woodland Road extended, To Lake Minnetonka. This documem drs~d by: I~nnecly & Graven, Chartered 4/0 Pillsbury Cemer Minneapolis, MN 55402 KKC K1~C-19~1~15~, ~ - 1830- Mar- 04-I 04 10:23m Mound Planning I~:UI Fram-~NNEDY I {:.RAVEN Rnd P. 21/Z7 F-$gl E~IT i TO SE/q'LENIENT SEGMENT OF W.~WONAIS$.~ COM.MON .aDJACENT So~ 1~ of Woodi~d No~ !72 of Woo~d S~G~T OF %%'A~~ CO~ON ADTACENT TO: ~V~s: i~ of BluebL~d ~e 5~[ 1~ of Bluebird We$~ !12 of C~ L~e B~: 1/2 cf C~ L=e W~s% 1/2 of Dove ~ E~ 1/2 of Dove ~e ¥~es% 1~ of Ez~e ~e ~e~ I/Z cf ~n~h L=e E~: ll2'of F~ch ~e ~ 30' cf O&l ~ LOT ~ WOODL.aMD POL~T Lo~ 2~, BloCk Lo~ ~ S. ~tOck LOT 5N WOODL.~-ND POk~T 70 W~CH.IT IS Lot 4. Block S Lo~ I. Block ~ Lot 4, Block q Lot I, Block 4 Lot ~, Block 3 Lot i, Block 3 Lot ~, Block 2 L=t I. Block Loc ~, Black Mmr' 02 04 10:24a Mound Plannin: Rmd Insp S524720B?9 p.22 04-1Z-~1 IG:01 From-KENNEDY A r. RAVEN +61233?g310 T-1Z8 P. ZZ/Z? F-Egl E.~tT 2 TO S£TTLEM~ENT AGP~EM. ENT - 1832- II ,,ii, ,J ,,J, Mar 02 04 10:24a Mound Planning Rnd Insp 9524720B79 p.23 [14-1Z-01 lS:l:ll Fro~.-KENNEDY J IJRAVEN +BIZ~:Tffil11~ T-IZS P. l~t/l? F-JIll1 ., ELICIT 3 TO S~%~'i_E.~fElxrf AGILEENEENT L J Z I ~s' L lo'x Zq' - 1833- Mawr 02 04 10:24a Mound PlanninC Rnd Insp 9524720G79 p.24 D4-1~'-01' 16:01 Dom-KENNEDY A GRAVEN +61Z3~?~$10 T-IZ8 P.Z4/Zl' F-8~1 F_X. tt~IT '4 TO SETTLF_ME.~T AGtLEEMENT - 1834- ., .m .m, S ~ . Ii. . l& . h. Hat 02 04 10:24a Mound Planning Rnd Insp 9524720679 p.25 04-lZ-Oi' 16;02 Fro~-I(EFINEI~Y ,t Gt~VEfl +61Z3379310 T-1Z8 r. ZS/~? F-891 £XMIMIT 5 TO SETTLE.M~NT AGRKEIvIEMT il ~ I ~ 1 I 1 I i J '[ i'~ I~I i ~,IL~ 1 I I 1 I 1 I - 1835- Mar- 02 04 10:25a Mound Planning Rnd Insp 9524?206?9 p.26 04-lZ-O1 1;:O~ ~rom-KEN~EDY & r. RAVE~I +~1Z;37S~'10 T-I~8 P. Z;/Z? F-~gl EXHI'BIT 6 TO SETTLE~F-..~I' AGREEMElh~T Abut~rs for purpos~ of paragraph B of thc Court's Order and paragraph 37 of tl~ Modified Settle'?'nt A.~t~em~'nt are owller~ ofth~ following parcels inthe Woodland Point Subdivision, CiW of Mound, Minnesota: Lot 1, Block 1 Lo1: 2, Block i Lot 3, Block 1 Lot 4, Block 1 Lot 1, Block 2 Lot 2, Block 2 Lo~ 3, Block 2 Lo~: 4, Block 2 Lo'~ 1, Block 3 Loz 2, Block 3 Lot 3, Block 3 Lot 4, Block 3 Lo[ I, Block Lot 2, Block Lot 3, Block Lox 4, Block Lot 1, Block Lot 2, Block Lot 3, Block Lot 4, Block Lot 1, Block 6 Lot 2, Block 6 Lot 3, Block 6 Lot 4, Block 6 Lot 5, Block 6 Lot 6, Block 6 Lot 7, Block 6 Lot 8, Block 6 Lot 9, Block 6 Lot 10, Block 6 Lot I I, Block 6 Lo~ 12, Block 6 Lo~ 13, Block 6 - 1836- M~r O~ 04-1Z-gl 04 10:25a Mound Planning 16:0Z From-~NNEDY & GRAVEN Rnd & ,1,, I, Insp S5247206?S +;1Z3379310 T-1Z8 P. Il Ii, p.27 Lot ] 4, IBloei 6 LoT 15, Block 6 LoT ] 6, Block 6 Lm ][7, B]ock 6 Lot l g, Bloak 6 Lot 15, Blo~ 7 LoT 16, Block 7 LoT i 7, Block 7 LoT IS, Block 7 LoT 19. Block 7 LoT 20, B~ock 7 Lo~ 21, Block 7 Lot 22. Block 7 Loz ~, Block 7 LoT 24, Block 7 - 1837- MEMORANDUM Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: June 15, 2004 SUBJECT: Public Heating for PC Case #04-12 - 5218 Bartlett Road - Mount Olive Lutheran Church CUP The City Council will hold a public hearing for review of a CUP amendment and variance request from Mount Olive Lutheran Church. Churches are conditional uses in residential districts and proposed modifications to the building or site require review and approval of a CUP The case involves the incorporation of a memorial garden for the interment of created human remains on the church property. The memorial garden would provide spaces for 376 plots. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the CUP per Staff recommendation with the condition that the issue of responsibility for the memorial garden be addressed. I spoke with the City Attorney John Dean earlier this week. My question was this, "If the church were to dissolve, what requirements, legal or others, are there for the church or other parties to maintain or take responsibility over the memorial garden?" The attorney noted that there are not protections provided in State Statute or other places that provide protection of areas that contain cremated human remains unlike those protections afforded to cemeteries containing human bodies. The City would assume no responsibility for the memorial garden. Council will notice a Rules and Regulations document for the memorial garden that addresses use, relocation and termination issues among others. This is a private party agreement that the City is not a party to and conveys no responsibility. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 - 1838- RESOLUTION # 04- RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR THE PURPOSE OF A MEMORIAL GARDEN AT MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH LOCATED AT 5218 BARTLETT BOULEVARD, TRACT A & PART OF BLOCK 2, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT "D", PID # 24-117-24 21 0036 P&Z CASES # 04-12 WHEREAS, Mount Olive Lutheran Church is requesting a conditional use permit and variances associated with a memorial garden. The church is located at the comer of Bartlett and Wilshire Blvd. Zoning of the property is R-1 which allows the church as a conditional use; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project would add an additional 1383 square feet of hardsurface through sidewalks and stonework requiring the following variance; Impervious surface Proposed Required Variance 54,683 sf 47,153 sf 7530 sf WHEREAS the project involves construction of a memorial garden for the interment of created human remains on the church property. The garden would be located in the northwestern portion of the property. The memorial garden would be constructed of natural materials - slate, flagstone, turf, and various plant materials. The plans indicate the circular design of the memorial garden is 75 feet in diameter and would accommodate 376 plots measuring 18" by 18"; and, WHEREAS, adjacent to the property is a residential neighborhood to the north and a DNR wetland to the west. The garden is 17 feet from the western property line and about 150 feet from the north property line; and, - 1839- WHEREAS, inumed cremated human remains are not subject to the same State Statute requirements for burial of human bodies which can only occur in cemeteries. Land use regulations for cemeteries as found in Section 350:1225 Subd. 3(A)(2) are therefore not applicable to the memorial garden as proposed; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommend approval of the Conditional Use permit and Variances as recommended by staff; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant a conditional use permit with the following conditions: a. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all costs associated with the variance request. b. The applicant request a review of the project for and necessary building permits that may be need prior to commencement of construction activities. c. The applicant be responsible for securing any use and operation approvals from the State as may be required. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and variances are granted for the following new legally described property: Tract A & part of Block 2, Shirley Hills Unit "D", Hennepin County, Minnesota. 3. The City does hereby grant a variance for hardcover as requested by the applicant based on the following findings of fact: a. The church property functions more similarly to commercial property than it does residential property. b. Hardcover restrictions for commercial property are 75% as compared to the maximum residential district allowance of 40%. c. The proposed hardsurface increases occur in the form of small width sidewalks and stone areas that would allow some degree of groundwater filteration. d. The proposed hardsurface would not negatively impact surface water runoff from the site. - 1840- ,i, ,ii ,,& I, ,i, , II, The variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to M.S.S. 462.36, Subd. 1. This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolmion with Hennepin County and paying for all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. o The variance is valid for one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350:530, Subd. 2 (E). Applicant shall be required to submit a written request at least 30 days preceding 1-year deadline of the original approval date by the City Council. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember seconded by Councilmember and The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted June 22, 2004 Pat Meisel, Mayor Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk - 1841 - MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 77 2004 BOARD OF APPEALS CASE #04-12 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH MEMORIAL GARDEN 5218 BARTLETT BOULEVARD JOEL REINITZ (CHURCH REPRESENTATIVE) The applicant is proposing to construct a memorial garden for the internment of cremated human remains on the church property. The garden would be located in the northwestern portion of the property. It would be constructed of natural materials - slate, flagstone, turf and various plant materials. Staff understands that the turf area would accommodate burial spaces. The hardcover calculations indicate an additional 1,383 SF of hardcover would be added with the sidewalks and pavers. This would increase the current total hardcover coverage of 6,147 SF. A variance would be required. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all costs associated with the conditional use request. 2. The applicant shall request a review of the project for and necessary building permits that may be needed prior to commencement of construction activities. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for securing any use and operation approvals from the State as may be required. Staff also recommends approval of the associated hardcover variance. Discussion Mueller recalled that the church reduced hardcover in conjunction with a previous project. He inquired if it were a building would there be buffering/screening required? Gordon indicated that there probably would. Mueller asked if the church would be willing to plant trees on the north side to screen and to provide wind protection. Mr. Reinitz, 2610 Halstead Lane (member of the church board of elders) said they would be willing to consider it; however, there is almost 200 feet from any neighbor on the north. Miller asked who would be responsible to move the remains if the church disbanded. - 1842- Mr. Reinitz read from the internment agreement, however it was not specific. It was suggested that the City Attorney review the issue and respond before the Council acts on the application. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Schwingler, to recommend Council approve the conditional use permit. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Raines, to recommend Council approve the hardcover variance. MOTION carried unanimously. - 1843- PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE # 04-12 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FROM MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHUCH FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MEMORIAL GARDEN AT 5218 BARTLETT BOULEVARD 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 PM on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 to hold a public hearing to consider an Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application from Mount Olive Lutheran Church to allow construction of a memorial garden for the interment of cremated human remains at 5218 Bartlett Boulevard. The property is generally identified as follows: PID No. 24-117-24-21-0036 Copies of the application materials are available to the public upon request at City Hall. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Published in The Laker on June 12, 2004 Jill Norlander, Planning and Inspections Secretary - 1844- Memorandum Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. II1[] TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: June 3, 2004 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit OWNER: Mount Olivet Lutheran Church CASE NUMBER: 04-12 HKG FILE NUMBER: 04-05 LOCATION: 5218 Bartlett Blvd. ZONING: Residential District R- 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing to construct a memorial garden for the interment of created human remains on the church property. The garden would be located in the northwestern portion of the property as indicated on the survey. The memorial garden would be constructed of natural materials - slate, flagstone, turf, and various plant materials. It is Staff's understanding that the turf area would accommodate burial spaces. The plans indicate the memorial garden is 75 feet in diameter accommodating 376 plots measuring 18" by 18." The hardcover calculations indicate an additional 1383 sq. ft. of hardcover would be added with associated sidewalks and pavers. This would increase the total hardcover overage of 6147 square feet. An additional variance would be required. The project requires a review by conditional use permit (CUP) as churches are identified as a conditional use in R-1 Districts. The most recent CUP approval for the church occurred in August of 2000 through Resolution//00-27 for the building expansion and related site work. In addition to the CUP approval, variances were granted for impervious surface and parking related issues. Adjacent to the property is a residential neighborhood to the north and a DNR wetland to the west. The garden is 17 feet from the western property line and about 150 feet from the north property line. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 - 1845- p. 2 Mount Olive CUP June 3, 2004 No additional parking spaces or modifications to the existing lot are proposed. REVIEW PROCEDURE Section 350:525 Subd. 1 addresses the criteria for granting Conditional Use Permits. This section outlines the criteria by which effects of the proposed use have on the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the occupants of surrounding lands. Subdivisions 1 and 2 in this section offers findings the City Council may make in determining if the CUP is appropriate. Subdivision 3 of this section outlines the procedural process for processing CUP applications. As prescribed, the City Council holds the public hearing on the proposal after review and recommendation fi.om the Planning Commission. Approval of a CUP by City Council Resolution would subject the property those conditions in perpetuity unless removed by formal action of the City if other uses for the property were contemplated at some point in the future. 60-DAY PROCESS Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. The variance application was deemed to be complete on May 3, 2004 and the 60-day timeline expires on or around July 1, 2004. Within the 60-day period, an automatic extension of no more than 60 days can be obtained by providing the applicant written notice containing the reason for the extension and specifying how much additional time is needed. NOTIFICATION The applicant provided mailing labels to the City for notification of abutting property owners within 350 feet of the property. These property owners will be notified of the public hearing at the City Council. DISCUSSION A similar case was reviewed by the City in 1999 for St. John's Lutheran Church. Staff requested a legal review of specific criteria for cemeteries/columbaria which was provided in a letter dated June 25, 1999 from City Attorney John Dean. The letter concludes that inurned cremated human remains are not subject to the same state law restrictions as for the burial of human bodies which can only occur in cemeteries. This fact has ramifications on land use regulations for cemeteries found in section 350:1225 Subd. 3(A)(2). Staff has no comments to offer regarding the design or location of the memorial garden. The garden appears to be an innocuous use of the property having no negative impact to adjacent properties or contributing to the intensification of the property's use as a church. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit to the City Council with the following conditions: 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 - 1846- p. 3 Mount Olive CUP June 3, 2004 1. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all costs associated with the variance request. 2. The applicant request a review of the project for and necessary building permits that may be need prior to commencement of construction activities. 3. The applicant be responsible for securing any use and operation approvals from the State as may be required. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of a hardcover variance to the City Council. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 - 1847- ~ ~CXONDITIO'NAL USE PERMIT ---c,a;llai~l~z-- . APPLICATION' ~' 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952-472-0600 FAX 952-472-0620 Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. Pi,ANNING COMM. DATE cITY COUNCIL DATE: :)j.~trihufinn: 3ity Planner.' ' PubJic Works: ~. Fire Dept. City Engineer:. Parks: "; Other. Name of Business LEGAL Lot Block ~ , Plat DESCRIPTION APPLICANT The applicant is: Owner .~ Othe~ E-Mall Add~s ,~;: Fax OWNER ' . phone (H) . SURV~O~ Address OR ZONING Oircle: R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 DI8~ICT Conditional Use Permit Application page 1 Of 2 - 1848- Description of Proposed Use: EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts. If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable guarantees for the ~-'o~n-of~he proposed~l~-~lSpm--m~-E~timated Development Cost of the Project: $ .~)'~[--~)~) ~ Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ~ yes, ~o. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. ' ° ~/ Application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. Print Owner's Name Owner's Signature Date Print Owner's Name Owner's Signature Date City Code Section 350:525 relating to Conditional Use Permits must be reviewed by the applicant. · · If applying for a two family dWelling, City Code Section 350:630, Subd. 4. must be reviewed by the applicant. Conditional Use Permit Application Page 2 of 2 - 1849- HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAG E) LOT AREA SO.. FT. X 30% - (for all lots) ....................................... LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record) ............................. * Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225, Subd. 6.B.1 (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Bullding Official. LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT HOUSE X DETACHED BUILDINGS (GARAGE/SHED) TOTAL-H©tJSE-: ................................................... X = DRIVEWA_~,_ PARKING TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS ............................... DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. Opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover. TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ........................................ X X = X = TOTAL DECK ....................................................... X = TOTAL OTHER ... TOTAL HARDCOVER I IMPERVIOUS sURFACE ................................................... UNDER / OVER (indicate difference) .................................................................... PREPARED BY DATE Revised 01/22/04 - - 1850- -- ._ - 1851 - .5' - 1852- 24-117-24- RI. NO 125 (~4) - 1853- .CERTIFICATE City of Mound STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPnq) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota, hereby attest and certify that: As such officer, I have the legal custody of the original record from which the attached and foregoing extract was transcribed. 2. I have carefully compared said extract with said original record. 3. I find said extract to be a tree, correct and complete transcript from the original minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City held on the date indicated in said extract, ................. iacluding-aay-r-esolufionadotZed_at-suchaneetiag,...iasofar-~_rehte-to: RESOLUTION # 00-27 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES TO ALLOW BUILDING EXPANSION AND SITE WORK TO MOUNT OLIVE LUTWERAN CHURCH LOCATED AT 5218 BARTI~TT BOULEVARD, TRACT A & PART OF BLOCK 2, SRIRLEY ~.LS UNIT "D", FID # 24-117-24 21 0036, P&Z CASES # 99-45 AND 99-46 Said meeting was duly held, pursuant to call and notice thereof as required by law on February 22, 2000 WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk, and the seal of said City, this 19th day of September, 2000. CITY CL~RK SEAL - 1854- RESOLUTION # 00-27 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDmONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES TO ALLOW BUILDING EXPANSION AND SITE WORK TO MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH LOCATED AT 5218 BARTLE~BOULEVARD, TRACT A & PART OF BLOCK 2, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT "D", PID # 24-117-24 21 0036 P&Z CASES # 9945 AND 99-46 WHEREAS, Mount Olive Lutheran Church is requesting a conditional use permit and variances assOCiated with building expansion, renovation and site work. The church is located at the comer of Bartlett and Wiishire Blvd. Zoning of the property is R-1 which allows the ~humh as a conditiOnal use; and, WHEREAS, the following are associated variances; im.Dervi_ous_s:udace Parking stall width (existing and proposed) Driveway entrance width (Bartlett entrance) Parking Jot setback (west lot) Parking lot screening Existinfl/Proposed Re<3uired : " .Variance_ 53300 sf- 47,-16,3-sf St4-7-sf 9 feet 10 feet 1 foot 42 feet 24 feet 18 feet 0 feet 5 feet 5 feet and, WHEREAS the scope of the project involves renovation of existing internal space and the addition of a new north and west entrances. The north education wing of the building, which currently has a second story walkway connection, will be provided with an enclosed first floor access. Existing lobby and narthex spaces on both levels will be increased. A number of interior facelift improvements will also occur. All building improvements would meet building setback · requirements; and, WHEREAS, site improvements consist of a new parking and garden area at the front entrance as well as entrance improvements. In terms of code requirements for parking, the proposal is for 105 spaces, 5 of which encroach on the adjacent City property. The existing 86 stalls located in the north and west parking areas woUld remain unchanged at a 9 feet stall width. The 19 proposed spaces in the new Wiishire parking area are also requested at a 9 feet width. The code bases parking requirements for churches on sanctuary seating Capacity. The plans show the church, has a 316 seat Capacity requiring 105 parking spaces; and, WHEREAS. access to the site is currently provided by 4 driveways, 2 on Wiishire and 2 on Bartlett. The proposal is to remove the existing ICcp ddve. On Bartlett, leaving three access points; and, WHEREAS, total site hardcover Will be reduced from approximately 59,946 sq. ft Or 38.1% to 53,300 sq. ft. or 33.9%; and, new front parking area and the south and west. entrances. The proposal exceeds the 2G trees oode requirements and also. satisfies the minimum of 25% plantings of conifer and deciduous varieties; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommends.approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Variances as recommended by staff; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant a conditional use permit and variances with the following conditions: a. Storm water plans be reviewed and approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). b. New curbing and gutter in the cimular drive and parking area be constructed of concrete and indicated as such on a revised plan with details and paving sections. c. Submit a revised grading plan to show the City's. existing storm sewer system in Whllshire Boulevard. d. Erosion control measures such as a slit fence and silt buffer at the City's storm sewer inlet be added to the revised grading Plans. e. Submit a revised utility plan to show all City water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer f. Secure necessary permits from Hennepin County for right-of-way work. g. Prepare an easement for the parking area that encroaohes on the adjacent City property for review and approval by the CItY Attorney. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and variances are granted for the following new legallY desoribed property: Tract .A & part of Block 2, Shirley Hills Unit "D", Hennepin County, Minnesota. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing'this resolution with Hennepin County and paying ali costs for such recording, A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued Until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. 'The foregoing resolution-was moved by Councilmember Brown and seconded by Councilmember Hanus. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, BroWn, Hanus, Meisel and Weycker. The f011ow!ng Courmilmembers voted' in the negative: none. Attest: City Clerk · sS/PAT MEISEL · Mayor - 1856- MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH 5218 Bartlett Boulevard Mound, Minnesota 55364 MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH MEMORIAL GARDEN RULES AND REGULATIONS SECTION I: ESTABLISHMENT The name of this ministry (activity) is The Mount Olive Memorial Garden ("Memorial Garden), a place for the interment of ashes of a cremated human body (Cremains). This is a subordinate activity of Mount Olive Lutheran Church, 5218 Bartlett Blvd., Mound, MN 55364. The Memorial Gardens are owned and operated by Mount Olive Lutheran Church and will be operated and maintained subject to the approval of the Church Council. The Church Council has prescribed these Rules and Regulations for the purchase, maintenance and administration of the Memorial Garden as set forth herein. These "Rules and Regulations", as they now exist or may here in after be amended, along with the "purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right of Use" contain the terms and conditions of the agreement between the Church Council of Mount Olive Lutheran Church and the purchaser of a right to use space in the Memorial Garden. SECTION II: MEMORIAL GARDEN COMMITTEE A. GENERAL POWERS: Custody and control of the memorial Garden, the interment sites therein and all matters relating thereof, are vested in all respects in the Church Council as fully constituted from time to time. A Memorial Garden Committee as appointed by the Church Council shall manage, subject to the direction and control of the Church Council, the use and maintenance of the Memorial Garden and its interment sites. B. MEMBERSHIP: The Memorial Garden Committee will consist of no more than five (5) and no less than three (3) members as follows: Three (3) to Five (5) members including Chairman, appointed by the Church Council. The Pastor shall serve as an ex-official member of the committee. The appointees shall serve for three (3) years and must be active members of the congregation. They may be reappointed for an additional three (3) year term, after which a year must elapse before reappointment. The initial committee appointments will be made for terms of one (1) to three (3) years which will provide for an orderly succession and remover. There shall be the following officers on the Memorial Garden Committee: Chairperson and secretary. The chairperson shall be a member of the Board of Elders of the church. The secretary will be elected by committee members. Vacancies on the Memorial garden committee will be filled by appointment of the Church Council. C. MEETINGS: The Memorial Garden Committee shall meet at least bi-annually and at other such times as maybe required to carry out the functions of the committee. Three (3) members shall constitute a quorum and actions shall be taken by a majority vote of those present. The Pastor as an ex-official member does not have voting privileges. - 1857- D. DUTIES OF MEMORIAL GARDEN COMMITTEE OFFICERS 1. The chair shall: a. Preside at all Memorial Garden Committee meetings. b. Be responsible for and manage the affairs of the Memorial Garden on a day to day basis between the meetings of the Memorial Garden Committee, subject to the control and approval of the Memorial Garden as a whole. c. Oversee the receipt and acknowledgment of the Memorial Funds, given specifically for the Memorial Garden. d. Receive statements from the Church Treasurer regarding the Memorial Garden funds and keep the Memorial Garden Committee advised of the status of these funds. 2. The secretary shall: a. Record minutes of all meetings of the Memorial Garden Committee. b. Maintain files, records, and receipt of funds of all Purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right to Use forms. c. Record and maintain data on the identity and specific location of ashes interred in or removed from the Memorial Garden. E. COMPENSATION Members of the Memorial Garden Committee are not entitled to any compensation, direct or indirect, for matters relating to the use or operation of the Memorial Garden. F. ANNUAL REPORT The Chair, with the assistance and approval of the Memorial Garden Committee as a whole, shall prepare and present an annual report at the annual Voters' meeting. The report will contain a summary of the significant activity and financial status of the Memorial Garden. G. CONTRACTS The chairman of the Memorial Garden Committee and the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Mount Olive Lutheran Church are authorized to sign the Purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right of Use Form on behalf of the church. H. MAINTENANCE The Memorial Garden Committee to oversee the mowing, gardening, lawn services and tree care of the Memorial Garden. I. INTERMENT The Memorial Garden Committee is responsible for the location of, opening of, and closing of the interment site. SECTION III: TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PURCHASE A. APPLICATIONS: 1. It is the intention of the Church Council that the right to purchase the use of a site in the Memorial Garden be available to current active members of Mount Olive and their families; provided, however, on an exception basis others may purchase and - 1858- use Memorial Garden sites when specifically authorized by a joint agreement of all of the following: the Pastor, the Church Council and the Memorial Garden Committee. Persons desiring to purchase the use of a site in the Memorial Garden will submit a written application, entitled "Purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right of Use", to the Memorial Garden Committee. The form will require information necessary for the Memorial Garden Committee to act on the request. In addition, the applicant will be given a copy of these Rules and Regulations. Purchasers must be natural persons or the personal representative of deceased or incompetent persons. Two individuals may qualify as a Purchaser, taking title as joint tenants with the right of survivorship and not as tenants in common; their rights are exercised jointly while both are living, or by the survivor. The person whose ashes are to be interred in the Memorial Garden ["Designated Person"] must be a person authorized to purchase as a site. At the time of purchase, the Purchaser may name up to two (2) living family members (including purchaser) whose cremains maybe interred in the site. The term "Family" as used herein includes parish members, their spouse, and children and others who are family members as that term is commonly used. At the time of the interment the family of the deceased shall provide a copy of the obituary to be kept on file in the Mount Olive Lutheran Church Office. B. PURCHASE OF THE USE OF SITES: Reserving a future site for interment is effective upon receipt of the full cost of the site and a completed Purchase Agreement and the Right of Use Form which has approval of the Memorial Garden Committee and the Church Council. The Purchase Agreement and the Right of Use Form shall be signed by the Chairman of the Board of Trustees and the Chairman of the Memorial Garden Committee. The Purchase Agreement and the reservation of the Right of Use shall be executed in duplicate, the duplicate copy to be delivered to the purchaser and the original to the church. The purchase price is for the fight of use ofa 18" x 18" interment site in the ground of the Memorial Gardens, which will accommodate the cremains of up to two (2) persons, and the cost of the interment of the cremains for one person. A change in rates in effect at the time of the re-opening will be made for opening the site for additional interments and for the cost of an additional name plate. The purchase price also includes maintenance of the site and the Memorial Garden in general, the cost of establishing and maintaining records of use, administration and the preparation and installation of one name plate. Purchaser' s right may not be assigned, transferred or inherited without the written consent of the Church Council and shall not be subject to the claims of creditors. No real property is created or transferred by the Purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right of Use, these Rules and Regulations or payments for a site. Payment relates only to the use of a site for cremains as provided for herein. At the time of application and agreement, the Purchaser Will indicate the specific ground site desired. The Memorial Garden Committee will use its best efforts to - 1859- C. PAYMENT grant the requested ground site at the time of interment. Payment for the use of a site in the Memorial Garden for the cremains of a designated person shall be in such amount and in such a manner as maybe determined fi.om time to time by the Church Council. The purchase price for the Purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right of Use includes: (a) use of a site 18 inches square in the ground; (b) marker prepared in accordance with specifications approved by the Church Council; (c) opening and closing of the ground for the cremains of one person; (d) administration and maintenance of the Memorial Garden. Opening, closing, and nameplate costs for any additional interment at a site will be assessed at rates then in effect. D. USE OF INTERMENT SITES 1. Cremated human remains only may be interred in sites within the Memorial Gardens plotted and designated as interment sites. Ashes shall be deposited directly into the ground at least three (3) inches under ground level. No containers or urns shall be used. 2. A religious service shall be held in connection with each interment. A member of the clergy of Mt. Olive shall be present and shall conduct the service, except that, at the discretion of the Pastor of Mt. Olive, supervision of the service may be designated to another member of the clergy, but a representative of Mt. Olive shall in any ease be present. 3. Identification of each person interred in a site will be placed on a nameplate designated for this purpose in the Memorial garden. The cost of the nameplate for one person is included in the purchase price. There will be an additional charge for nameplates for subsequent persons interred in a site. Inscriptions on the nameplate are limited to the name of the deceased. The use of fraternal seals, professional designations or similar inscriptions is expressly prohibited. 4. There will be no scattering of ashes permitted. 5. Potted plants are not permitted. The use of glass vases, chive jars, tin cans are not permitted and are subject to immediate removal. Artificial flower plant or wreaths are not permitted. Absolutely no man-made or natural decorations are permitted other than the identification markers. The Memorial Garden Committee reserves the right to determine any marker placed on the lot. The Memorial Garden Committee will have jurisdiction over the landscape design embodied in the Memorial Garden. E. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: The Purchaser's payment for use of a site in the Memorial Garden is made without any reservation, conditions or restrictions and the monies may be use for any lawful purpose deemed proper by te Church Council. It is the intention of the Church to exercise reasonable and ongoing care to maintain the Memorial Garden. However, neither the Church nor any person acting for the Church assumes or shall have any liability or respOnsibility for the preservation or loss of, or damage to the eremains of any person interred in the Memorial Garden, or for any loss -1860- or damage relating to the Memorial garden from acts of God, vandalism, theft, or other causes or contingencies. F. MODIFICATION OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The terms and conditions, these roles and Regulations and all amendments, alterations, changes or modifications thereof shall apply to and be binding on the Purchaser, designated Persons and any person succeeding in interest thereto who may be recognized and accepted by the Church Council as succeeding to any right under the Purchase Agreement and Reservation of Right to Use. G. REQUESTS: Any request relating to the Memorial Garden shall be made in writing to the Church Council of Mount Olive Lutheran Church. H. RELOCATION: If, in the judgment of the Church Council, it shall be deemed necessary at any time to change location of the interment sites in the Memorial Gardens or to discontinue its use or any part thereof, the Church Council shall use its best reasonable efforts to preserve the cremalns fi'om any sites affected by such changes or discontinuance and place such cremains in another site in the Memorial Gardens or to another appropriate location as in its sole discretion the Church Council may select. I. TERMINATION OF RIGHT TO USE 1. Repurchase of Site: If there has been no interment in a site and the Purchaser determines that the site is no longer needed, the Church may, in its sole discretion, agree to repurchase the Purchaser's rights. Mount Olive shall pay no more than 80% of the sum paid by the Purchaser at the time of purchase, there being no right in the Purchaser to any interest accrued. Sale of Site By Purchaser: Sites may not be sold. transferred or assigned by Purchaser without the prior written consent of the Church. Any attempted transfer or assignment without such consent shall be null and void and of no effect. If a Purchaser desires to transfer a Site, the name, address, telephone number and parish member status of the proposed transferee shall be forwarded to Mount Olive for review. Termination of Right to Use: The right of the Purchaser to use a site shall cease if the present church property is no longer owned by the Church or the present church edifice is demolished or if in the opinion of the Church Council because of significantly changed circumstances it is no longer feasible to maintain the Interment Garden. In the event of the termination of such fight, all interred remains may be removed. If, at, er reasonable notice, such remains are not removed by representatives of the person or persons interred, the Church shall have the fight to remove and dispose of them in an appropriate manner, and thereafter no right of use of an interment sites in the memorial Garden shall exist in the Purchaser or any other person. -1861 - SECTION IV=MEMORIAL GARDEN FUND A. ESTABLISHMENT OF FUND: There is established a special fund called the Memorial garden Fund. The Fund is so named to reflect present dedication to the Memorial Garden and possible future dedication to other intermem sites at the Church. This Fund will be administered as a restricted fund under the direction of the Church Council. B. ADMINISTRATION OF THE FUND: All monies received on account of the Memorial Garden shall be deposited in a special restricted account designated by the Mt. Olive Lutheran Church's Treasurer. The Church shall maintain an account for the Memorial Garden Fund as a restricted account which shall be subject to audit and review in the same manner as other financial records of Mt. Olive's. The Treasurer shall submit financial reports to the Church Council as requested with respect to the Memorial Garden Fund. C. PURPOSE OF FUND: The purpose ofthe Fund is to improve and beautify the Memorial Garden and provide for ongoing maintenance, care and administration of the Memorial Garden and any sites which may be established in the future. It is intended that all monies received in payment for the right to use sites in the Memorial Garden be deposited in the Memorial Garden Fund where they will be invested in a manner directed by the Church Council. It is intended that the income from the Fund be used for the purposes defined above, or for future expansion of the Memorial Garden. - 1862- PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO USE OF THE MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH MEMORIAL GARDEN MOUNT OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH 5218 Bartlett Boulevard Mound, Minnesota 55;364 1. of (name) (address) hereby purchase the right to use a site in the Mount Olive Lutheran Church Memorial Garden, owned by Mount Olive Lutheran Church for the sole purpose of interment of ashes of the person designated below for the sum of $500.00, paid on Receipt of payment acknowledged by The cremains of the following Designated Persons will be interred: 1. 2. As consideration for the right to use a site, on behalf of myself, my heirs, assigns and Designated Person, I acknowledge and agree to the following: 1. I will be bound by the Mount Olive Memorial Garden Rules and Regulations as they now exist or which may be hereafter adopted or amended. 2. The cremains shall be placed directly in the ground and not in a burial urn or other containers. 3. This agreement creates only a right of use in a site within the Memorial Garden. 4. Prior to and as a condition to interment, the next of kin must provide to the Church the name, age, sex, date and place of death. It is also requested that an obituary of the deceased be given to the Church Office to be kept on file, and a Disposition Certificate from the Crematorium. This Agreement has been executed by the Purchaser on the day of 20 The Agreement will become effective when accepted by the Church Council and signed by the Chairman of the Memorial Garden Committee and the Chairman of the Board of Trustees. Purchaser Signature Accepted by the Church Council on the day of ,20 Chairman, Board of Trustees Chairman, Memorial Garden Committee - 1863- Jo~ B. D~.~ Attorney at La' Direct Dial (612) 337-921. email: jdean~kenncdy-graven,corn June 25, 1999 Mr. Loren Gordon Hoisington Koegler Group 123 North 3ra Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55101 Re: Regulation of Columbaria. Dear Loren: You have recently inquired whether the City's land use provisions covering cemeteries applies to the final placement of inurned cremated human remains. It appears, based upon my review of the state statutes relating to those topics, and a review of the city code, that a distinction exists between cemeteries and columbaria, and that Mound may chose to regulate them in the same manner or not. The state law on the subject generally treats cemeteries as places for the burial or entombment of dead human bodies. In fact, absent special circumstances, dead human bodies must be buried only at cemeteries. Inurned cremated human remains are not subject to that restriction nor are they subject to any state law restriction as to their final disposition (as long as they remain inumed). It does not appear that the City Code contains any provision which would make the connection between cemeteries and columbaria that is absent in state law. Consequently, It would be my opinion that the City's land use regulations do not require that columbaria comply with the provisions applicable to cemeteries. Instead, the use should be evaluated from a structure and district standpoint to determine its appropriateness. The City is, of course, always able to consider specific regulations for columbaria. That regulation might be to link it to the regulations applicable to cemeteries. However, it should be kept in mind that just because both pertain to human remains, that similarity may be entirely irrelevant from a land use standpoint. Thank you for the unusual and interesting question. Respectfully yours, John B Dean - 1864- City of Mound: Please be advised that I am extremely opposed to Mount Olive Lutheran Church's planned disposal of haman remains right next to my property. Under no circumstances, should this be allowed. 5300 Bartlett Blvd. Dear City of Mound: This is to express our strong objection to the plans of Mount Olive Lutheran Church to construct a memorial garden for the interment of cremated human remains. This land is immediately adjacent to our property, and we have absolutely no desire to have basieally a cemetery next door. This is a residential area. The land is heavily soaked whenever it rains. Additionally, there would be increased in traffic with families and friends visiting. We keep our place nice and wish to enjoy our yard without such usage of adjacent property. Who pays rexes here? Sincerely, G~rald and Page 1 of 1 Sarah Smith From: TO: Sent: Subject: "Jill Norlander" <jillnorlander(~cityofmound.com> "Sarah Smith" <SarahSmith@cityofmound.com> Wednesday, May 12, 2004 2:58 PM Fw: Regulation & Plan Review ..... Original Message ..... From: "David Benke" <David.Benke~state.mn.us> To: <.iillnorlander~cityofmound.com>; <Ka_thryn. Danielson~state.mn.u_s> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 3:03 PM Subject: Re: Regulation & Plan Review > > > > Jill: If the city and/or county do not have any restrictions on the > creation of new cemeteries or columbarium (I would believe that a place > dedicated to the disposition of cremated remained would be classified > similar to a place use for burial) then all that would be needed is > requirements and policies pertaining to the dispositions. They may want to > check with some larger cemeteries to see what they have already. It may > also be a good idea to check with legal counsel to determine and address > liability issues. What happens if the church closes or relocates??? Hope > this helps, let me know if you have more questions, david > David J. Benke Mortuary Standard Supervisor 651.282.3828 >>> "Jill Norlander" <jillnorlander~ci~yofmound.com> 5/5/2004 8:57:55 AM >>> > Good morning. A church in the City of Mound has plans to create a > memorial garden including burial sites for ashes only. What kind of > approvals do they need before proceeding? Are there any special internment > requirements? - 1865- 5/13/2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: June 16, 2004 SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Review of Proposed Zoning Amendment- Lakeshore Setback Requirement in Pedestrian District for Commercial and Mixed-Use Structures APPLICANT: City of Mound SUMMARY The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider a proposed zoning amendment to City Code 350:651, Subd. 5 to modify the 100-foot lakeshore setback requirement in the Pedestrian District for commercial and mixed uses to 50-feet for consistency with the standard lakeshore setback in the City of Mound. REVIEW PROCEDURE Minnesota State Statutes 462.357 Subd. 3 states that no zoning ordinance or amendment can be adopted until a public hearing is held by the planning agency or by the governing body. Additionally, the notice of the public hearing must also be published at least (10) days prior to the hearing date. According to the City Code, the City Council is responsible for holding the public hearing for review of all text amendments and rezoning. Members are advised that the notice of public hearing was published in the Laker on June 12, 2004. Therefore, all notification requirements have been satisfied. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF CITY CODE AMENDMENT City Code Section 350:520 requires that any proposed text amendment which is not initiated by the Planning Commission must be referred to the Planning Commission for review and must not be acted upon until it has received the Planning Commission's recommendation. Members of the City Council are advised that the proposed amendment to the City Code was preliminarily discussed by the Planning Commission at its March 15, 2004 meeting. Additionally, the item was discussed at the recent joint Planning Commission and City Council workshop held on April 26, 2004 and was identified as a priority project for the Planning Commission. Formal review of the proposed amendment by the Planning Commission occurred at the May 17, 2004 meeting. Copies of the meeting minute excerpts have been included as attachments. - 1866- DISCUSSION City Code Section 350:1215 states that copies of all notices of any public hearing to consider variances, amendments or conditional uses under local shoreland management controls must be sent to the DNR Commissioner or designated representative and must be postmarked at least (10) days before the hearing. A copy of the public hearing notice and Planning Report was mailed to DNR Area Hydrologist Julie Ekman on June 8, 2004. Ms. Ekman contacted Staff on June 14, 2004 and requested a copy of the Pedestrian District regulations be provided in written form. As of June 16, 2004, no comments have been received. The statute also requires that a copy of any approved amendment, plat, variance or conditional use must be also be sent to the DNR within (10) days of final action. City Code 350:1225 states that the lot area and width standards for all residential, commercial and industrial lots within the designated shoreland area shall be as found in the applicable sections of the Mound Zoning Code. As stated in City Code 350:1225, Subd. 3, the standard structure setback from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWM) for a Natural/Recreational / General Development Lake is 50 feet. 4. The lakeshore setback requirement in the Pedestrian District for residential structures is 50 feet. 5. The lakeshore setback requirement in the Destination and Linear Districts is 50- feet for commercial uses. 6. The shoreland regulations were adopted in August 1994. The zoning provisions for the Destination / Pedestrian / Linear PUD Districts were added to the City Code in 2000 in anticipation of the downtown redevelopment project. RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to City Code Chapter 350:651, Subd. 5 to modify the lakeshore setback requirement in the Pedestrian District for commercial and mixed-use structures from 100 feet to 50 feet from the OHWM for consistency with other zoning districts within the City of Mound. - 1867- CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. -200m AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 350:651,SUBD. 5 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) TO MODIFY THE LAKESHORE SETBACK REQUIREMENT IN THE PEDESTRIAN DISTRICT FOR COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE FROM t00 FEET TO 50 FEET The City of Mound does ordain: Subsection 350:651of the Mound City Code is hereby amended as follows: Subdivision 5. Bulk Standards. Ordinary High Water (OHW) Setback min.) ! 00 50 Feet for Commercial and Mixed Uses 50 feet for Residential Uses Height (max.) 50 feet for Commercial and Mixed Uses 35 feet for Residential Impervious Surface 75 percent or as (max.) approved by PUD. All other bulk requirements as approved by PUD. There is not a minimum lot size requirement for PED-PUD District. Passed by the City Council this Published in The Laker the day of 200_. day of ,200_. 1 -1868- Effective on ,200 . Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel 2 - 1 869- MINUTE EXCERPT MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 17, 2004 OLD / NEW BUSINESS Review of proposed zoning amendment- lakeshore setback requirement in the Pedestrian District for commercial and mixed-use structures. MOTION by Mueller, second by Miller, to recommend acceptance of the change as proposed. MOTION carried unanimously. - 1870- MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 26, 2004 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECTS LIST DISCUSSION Mayor Meisel stated that Planning Commissioner Chair Geoff Michael would lead the joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting. Michael commented that Planning Commisisoner Ayaz contacted him in advance to advise that he would be attending the workshop but would be late. Members of the City Council and Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project list dated March 29, 2004 as prepared by Staff and prioritized the list as follows: o Review of front setback for undeveloped streets and review of the definition of "front setback" in the City Code. Amendment to Pedestrian Distdct lakeshore setback requirement for consistency with other zoning districts. Review of City Code 350.420 (Nonconforming regulations). Review of floodplain ordinance and map for consistency with 2004 Hennepin County Floodplain Study Review of City Code 350.440 (Required yards and open space regulations). Review of 350.435 (Accessory buildings regulations). Fence regulations. Driveway regulations. Staff will also work on the following items for upcoming Planning Commission and City Council review: 1. Lakeshore access for adjacent properties which are physically separated by a physical feature (ie. County Road). 2. Review of wetland regulations. 3. Bluff regulations. 4. Review of grading activities in shoreland areas 5. MCWD notification requirements ' Discussion regarding Planning Commission review of stormwater, floodplain alteration, erosion control permits also took place as the present City Code requires City Council review and approval. Staff was directed to contact the Planning Commission Chair in advance for direction regarding whether the application should also be considered for review by the Planning Commission. 1 - 1871 - MEETING MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 15~ 2004 OLD/NEW BUSINESS City Code DiScuSsion Issues lO0 feet OHW Setback in Pedestrian District CDD Smith identified that the Pedestrian District has a 100 foot setback to the OHWM. All other districts have a 50-foot setback. Smith would like to request the item come back for consideration at a future meeting to bring it in line with other districts. - 1872- 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-168'7 CITY OF MOUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FA.X: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www, cityofmound.com June 8, 2004 Julie Ekman Area Hydrologist DNR Waters 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 RE: Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Pursuant to City Code Chapter 350:1215, a copy of the public heating notice regarding the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to modify the minimum lakeshore setback in the Pedestrian District from 100-feet from the OHW to 50-feet is being forwarded to you for public comment. Be advised that the official public heating for review of the application is tentatively scheduled to be held by the City Council on Tuesday, June 22, 2004. If you have any questions regarding any of this information, please contact me at 952- 472-3190. Community Development ~ector l printed on recycled paper - 1873- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA FYI TO CONSIDER AMENDING MOUND CITY CODE SECTION 3,50: 651, SUBD. 5 (ZONING ORDINANCE) TO MODIFY THE LAKESHORE SETBACK REQUIREMENT IN THE PEDESTRIAN DISTRICT FROM 100 FEET FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) TO 50 FEET FOR COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE STRUCTURES 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 PM on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 to hold a public hearing to consider amending Section 350:651, Subd. 5 of the Mound City Code (Zoning Ordinance) to modify the 100-foot lakeshore setback requirement in the Pedestrian District to 50-feet for commercial and mixed uses for consistency with the standard lakeshore setback in the City of Mound. Copies of the proposed amendments are available to the public upon request at City Hall. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Published in The Laker on June 12, 2004 Jill Norlander, Planning and Inspections Secretary - 1874- DEEPHAVEN May 6, 2004 Dear Mayor Metsel, I'm sorry that I was unable to attend the April 20th Mayor's Breakfast. I understand that there was some lively discussion on a variety of issues. The reason for my letter is to follow-up on a couple of these issues that were discussed pertaining to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation Distdct that are of' partiCUlar interest to my City, and I hope, to your city as well. The first issue concerns the adoption of policies by the LMCD that could potentially have a significant impact on one or more of the member cities. Although each City has an appointed representative which serves on the LMCD Board, we are concerned that the representative may not be in attendance during the discussion or adoption of a particular policy or the representative may not be aware of the specific impact that a proposed policy might have on any one of our member cities. For this reason, our City Council has adopted the enclosed resolution that requests that the City of Deephaven be given a thirty-day period in which to review and comment on any LMCD Policy that could have an impact on our City prior to their adoption. The second issue concerns the management of Eurasian Watermilfoil by the LMCD. Our concern is not that the LMCD is not~ doing an effective job with the harvesting of Eurasion Watermilfoil, we believe they are. Rather, we are concerned that a significant portion of the cost of managing Eurasion Watermilfoil 'is borne solely by LMCD member cities when we believe it would be more equitable 'to :have the: costs shared equally by the larger population that actually uses Lake Minnetonka: For this reason, our City Council has adopted the enclosed resolution with the request-that the LMCD and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District work cooperatively to determine whether there would be any benefit to transferring the management of the Eurasian Watermilfoil to the Watershed District. It is our hope that your community also shares these same concerns and would be willing to adopt a resolution similar to the two that we have adopted. It is our intention to try to obtain support from a majority of the 14::LMCD communities and, if successful, bring these two issues before the LMCD Board of DireCtors for their support of these requests. I thank you in advance for your conSideration of our request. City Administrator Dana Young, if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~' ..... _ Tom L. Anderson " Mayor of Deephaven Please feel free to call me or City offices: 20225 CottagewoodRoad, Deephaver~ :I ~75-~ta 55331 (952) 474-4755 Fax(952) 474-1274 RESOLUTION NO. 12-04 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING NOTICE FROM THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGARDING POLICY DECISIONS WHEREAS, the City of Deephaven is a member in long-standing of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD); and, WFIFREAS, a major responsibility of the Deephaven City Council is to carefully consider issues of consequence that have an effect on the health, safety and welfare of the residents they represent; and, WHEREAS, the LMCD Code, dated March 2 i, 2000, declares that one of its main goals and policies is to "Assist in coordinating the planning and development activities of municipalities and special districts in the immediate vicinity of the Lake"; and, WHEREAS, policy decisions of the LMCD Board of Directors have a significant impact on both the planning activities of the City of Deephaven and on the citizens of Deephaven that are users of the Lake; and, WHEREAS, the Deephaven City Council has determined that it could make more effective decisions and coordinate planning efforts more efficiently with the LMCD tithe Deephaven City Council had the opportunity to review and comment on all LMCD policies and policy amendments that might have an potential impact on the City prior to their adoption. NOW, TI-IEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA, THAT: The Deephaven City Council hereby respectfully requests that the LMCD Board of Directors allow the City of Deephaven a thirty-day period in which to review and comment on all LMCD future policies and policy amendments that could potentially have an impact on the City of Deephaven prior to adoption by the LMCD Board of Directors .......... Passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Deephaven this 3rd day of May, 2004. Sandra Langley~-(~it~ Cl~k 67 - 1876- RESOLUTION NO. 13-04 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING COOPERATIVE EFFORTS BETWEEN THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED iDISTR1CT ON THE MANAGE~NT OF EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) has determined that managing Eurasian Watermilfoil is a high priority for the LMCD and is a critical process towards enhancing the recreational enjoyment on Lake Minnetonka; and, WHEREAS, in 2004 the LMCD established a levy in the amount of $93,000 to be paid by the fourteen member cities to partially fund the Weed Harvesting budget of$116,000; and WHEREAS, studies have shown that usage on Lake Minnetonka comes not only from residents of the fourteen Lake Minnetonka communities but from the entire metropolitan area; and, WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Deephaven City Council that the financial burden of providing the management of Eurasian Watermilfoil has fallen disproportionately on the fourteen member cities of the LMCD and have reasoned that it would be more equitable to share these costs with the broader population base that actually uses Lake Minnetonka; and, WI-~REAS, the Deephaven City Council has determined that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - which includes Lake Minnetonka - has both the authority granted by the Minnesota Watershed District Act to manage Eurasian Watermilfoil on a regionwide basis as well as the broad geographical representation that is desirable to more equitably distribute the cost of this program among all or part of 27 cities, three townships and two counties. NOW, TI-IEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA, THAT: The Deephaven City Council hereby respectfully requests that both the managing boards of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District work cooperatively to determine the costs and benefits of shifting the management of Eurasian Watermilfoil to the Minnehaha Watershed Creek Watershed District. Passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Deephaven this 3'~ day of May, 2004. Tom L. Anderson, Mayor Sandra Langley,-Cit~ Cl~k / - 1877- BOARD MEMBERS Tom Skramstad Chair, Shorewood Katy Van Hercke Vice Chair, Minnetonka Jose Valdesuso Secretary. Exceisior Paul Knudsen Treasurer, Minnetrista Bob Arnbrose Wayzata Doug Babcock Tonka 'Bay Orv Burma Mound Miles Canning Greenwood Bert Foster .Deephaven Debbie Halvorson Orono Pete Nelson 'Victoria Tom Scanlon Spring Park Tom Seuntjens Minnetonka Beach Herb Suerth Woodland 50% Recycled Content 20% Post Consumer Waste LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRI-CT 18338 MINNETONKA'BLVD. · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 952/745-0789 · FAX 952/745~9085 Gregory S,Nybeck EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR June 2, 2004 Honorable'Pat Meisel City of MoM nd 5341 Mayw0Od Rd. 'Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mayor Meisel:- As you are no doubt aware, Zebra Mussels pose a real threat to.Lake Minnetonka. 'They can cause irreversible.environmental damage ~ such as killing native species of mussels, .altering fish habitat, promoting the growth of harmful aquatic vegetation, contaminating beaches, and even increasing the PCB levels in waterfowl. They cling to almost any hard surface, including boats, docks, and boat cooling systems. They can cause boat. engines to overheat and make doCk removal difficult. As:you can imagine, the environmental and economic ~mpact to our member cities could.be substantial if Lake-Minnetonka beCOmes infested. To make matters worse, there is no practical way to rid the Lake of zebra mussels once it becomes infested. Prevention is our only option. The LMCD is mounting a ca. mpaign to prevent the introduction of Zebra-MUssels into Lake Uinnetonka. While lakeside` inspections are one important part of the game plan, the only real 'solution rests' with educating the Users of the Lake regarding the natu re of the problem and what actions they can take. Here'show you, as a LMCD member city, can help. · Familiarize yourselves with the problem. ! have taken the liberty of including two copies of a Power Point presentation. (hardcoPies and a CD)'foryour review. Please provide a copy to'your city Counci/and to your City Administrator. · Provide a Single point of contact that we can call upon for help in your city, This contact will become the focal, point for the implementation of'remedial actions.. · Include information about Zebra Mussel containment teChniques in mailings to your citizens. I have attached a one-Page flyer suitable for that purpose, or feel free to 'compose your ownmessage using the contents of the PowerPoint presentation and the'flyer. Encourage citizens, businesses and civic organizations to donate to the Save the-Lake Fund so .that additional stePs (covered in-the Power Point presentation) can be taken. Checks should be made outto the Save the Lake Fund and .mailed tothe LMCD office in Deephaven. · Ask your local newspapers to include Zebra Mussel information in'their papers, · 'Boat inSPections rareimportant,~butthey are also expensive.' If you, membersof your staff, council members o[ citizens have.ideas for raising.the funds to help accomplish boat inspections, please'Pass them along to your LMCD representative. Web Page Address: http://vvvvw.lmcd.org E-mail Address: Imcd@ Imcd.org - 1878- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Last but not least, this problem is not going to go away. We can win the battle but we will need more help in the future. Because Lake Minnetonka is key to the statewide battle, we may request your support to get needed changes through the legislature (examples - increased penalties for violations, more funding for state inspections, the reintroduction of roadside vehicle inspections, new educational materials). We will coordinate these requests with the DNR and other agencies, and hope that you will pledge your city's support. One last point: we have learned through our study of this subject that communication and education, when done effectively, can be successful in preventing the introduction of Zebra Mussels into an area. Our methods for dealing with this potentially huge problem for Lake Minnetonka start with the action items that are the quickest, most effective, and lowest cost. I hope your city can "get the word out" in the ways suggested above. If you have any questions, please call the LMCD office at 952-745-0789. We will keep you informed regarding the progress we make and as to how you might be able to help in the future. Thank you for your support! Sincerely, Tom Skramstad, Chair Lake Minnetonka Conservation District - 1 879 - LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7:00 PM, Wednesday, May 12, 2004 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER Skramstad called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Members present: Tom Skramstad, Shorewood; Katy Van Hercke, Minnetonka; Jose Valdesuso, Excelsior; Paul Knudsen, Minnetrista; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Orv Burma, Mound; Miles Canning, Greenwood; Bert Foster, Deephaven; Debbie Halvorson, Orono; Pete Nelson, Victoria; Tom Scanlon, Spring Park; Tom Seuntjens, Uinnetonka Beach; Herb Suerth, Woodland. Also present: Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Greg Nybeck, Executive Director; Judd Harper, Administrative Technician. Members absent: None CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Skramstad There were no Chair announcements. READING OF MINUTES- 4/28/04 LMCD Regular Board Meeting MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Nelson seconded to approve the minutes from the 4/28/04 Regular LMCD Board Meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes (10), Abstained (3; Foster, Knudsen, and Van Hemke); motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.) There were no comments from the public on subjects not on the agenda. · Abdo, Eick, & Meyers, review of draft 2003 LMCD Audit. Skramstad stated that the draft 2003 had recently been conducted by Abdo, Eick and Meyers. Mr. Steve McDonald was in attendance to provide a brief over of the audit and Skramstad welcomed him on behalf of the Board. McDonald made the following comments: · GASB 34 has been discussed with the Board in recent years and the 2003 LMCD Audit was the first year that it has been implemented. He pointed out that GASB 34 is an accounting standard that changes how financial statements are set up. Because GASB 34 was implemented in the 2003 audit, there are some changes from audits prepared for prior years. - 1 880- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 2 · One change in 2003 was that a management letter authored by the LMCD is included in the bound copy of the audit. Information in this management letter includes financial highlights, overview of financial highlights, and an analysis of the upcoming year activities. In the table that outlines condensed statement of assets of the LMCD, there is approximately $765,000 of current and other assets and approximately an additional $337,000 of capital assets. · In 2003, revenues exceeded expenses incurred by approximately $45,000. Adding in interest, there was approximately an additional $15,000 of additional revenues, which totals approximately $60,000. He suggested that there would be the need for a year or two of additional audits to take any meaning out of this figure. · The General Fund balance as of 12/31/03 was $190,553, an increase of $49,483 from 2002. This fund balance represents 55 percent of the 2004 Administration Budget. However, $22,000 of these funds have been designated for management plan projects, which would reduce the undesignated fund balance to 49 percent of the 2004 Administration Budget. The target reserve level of the LMCD for the General Fund balance is 50 percent. · The Special Revenues Fund balance as of 12/31/03 was $515,658. These funds consist of"Save the Lake", New Equipment Acquisition, Eurasian Milfoil, and Equipment Replacement. He pointed out that the New Equipment Acquisition fund had a deficit balance of $9,579 and that he believed Nybeck had a resolution for the Board to approve a transfer from the Equipment Replacement fund to address the deficit balance. · the Eurasian Milfoil balance as of 12/31/03 was $91,166,.which represents a 96 percent of the 2004 Eurasian Milfoil Budget. The target level of the LMCD for the Eurasian Milfoil Fund balance is 100 percent. · Financially, he stated that the LMCD was in good shape to meet its financial obligations and had sufficient working capital. He pointed out that the audit revealed nothing that was out of the ordinary. · He entertained questions or comments from the Board. The Board discussed the reserve levels for the General and Eurasian Milfoil fund accounts that were agreed to by the member cities and how to possibly budget for depreciated harvesting capital equipment in the future. Nybeck stated that he had prepared a draft resolution for consideration by the Board to address the negative balance in the New Equipment Acquisition fund. He read the following draft resolution to the Board: LMCD RESOLUTION 109 A RESOULTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUNDS WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) has five major governmental fund accounts established; and WHEREAS, the "New Equipment Acquisition" fund account is established for new capital equipment purchases for the Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) Harvesting Program that is derived through donations and interest income, and - 1 881 - Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 3 WHEREAS, the "Equipment Replacement" fund account is established for expenditures for depreciated EWM Harvesting Program capital equipment that is derived through levies to the 14 member cities, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 103B.635, and interest income; and WHEREAS, balances for the "New Equipment Acquisition' and "Equipment Replacement' fund accounts as of December 31, 2003 were ($9,579) and $187,696 respectively, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of the LMCD authorizes a transfer of $9,579 from the "Equipment Replacement' fund account to the "New Equipment Acquisition" fund account for the negative balance as of December 31, 2003. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of the LMCD eliminates the "New Equipment Acquisition fund account. ADOPTED by the Board of the LMCD this 12th day of May, 2004. Thomas B. Skramstad, Chair ATTEST Gregory S. Nybeck, Executive Director Seuntjens proposed a change to the draft resolution. In the third to the last paragraph, he suggested that the words "a negative" should be inserted in front of"$9,579" and the words '~for the negative balance as of December 31, 2003" at the end of the same paragraph should be deleted. MOTION: Foster moved, Seuntjens seconded to adopt LMCD Resolution 109 with the changes recommended by Seuntjens. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. Skramstad thanked McDonald on behalf of the Board. Babcock arrived at 7:20 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING · Howards Point Marina, reconfiguration of non-conforming multiple dock license application. Skramstad opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. and asked for background from Nybeck. Nybeck made the following comments: · At the 3/10/04 Regular Meeting, the Board considered the 2004 Howards Point Marina renewal without change commercial dock and launching ramp application. A number of discrepancies were -1882- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting, May 12, 2004 Page4 pointed out from inspections conducted in 2003. These included: 1) there was unauthorized dock structure on the south side of Boat Storage Unit (BSU) 1, 2) there were a number of unauthorized pilings or dolphin poles installed throughout the facility, and 3) there was an unauthorized temporary structure near the gas dock that was being used for fueling purposes. · The Board approved the 2004 renewal application with three conditions. These included: 1) subject to removal of all unauthorized structure and pilings until approved by the LMCD Board, 2) subject all watercraft being stored in authorized locations on the approved site plan, dated 11/2/94, and 3) the "off-lake" storage being conducted in the lot on the east side of Howards Point Road must be discontinued. The Board agreed to hold off enforcement relating to the unauthorized structure and pilings, provided the applicants submit a new application for consideration by the Board within 30 days. · To comply with Board direction, David Albrecht submitted an amended reconfiguration of non- conforming dock licenSe application on 3/30/04 for Howards Point Marina. Nybeck pointed out that the application was not an additional application requested by the LMCD to correct LMCD erroneous records. The application form was. further amended in a way that required it to be deemed incomplete because they were only going to allow staff to the enter the premises at reasonable times with prior written approval. This was not acceptable to him or LeFevere and it was communicated to Howards Point Marina that the application was deemed incomplete because it was not consistent with Code Section 2.03, subd. 4. The applicant has subsequently amended their application to allow staff to conduct inspections as outlined in Code Section 2.03, subd. 4. · Howards Point Marina has made two requests. First, they have requested Board approval of the three deficiencies observed during the 2003 inspections. Second, they have requested the Board to waive the fees submitted with the application. · Code Section 2.015 allows legal non-conforming facilities to reconfigure, provided a number of requirements are met. These include: 1)the application may not result in an increase in BSU's, 2) the application may not result in an increase in the total square footage of slips associated with BSU's as determined in accordance with subd. 4 of this Code Section, 3) the application may not result in a lakeward extension of the dock further beyond 100' from the 929.4' shoreline than the existing dock, 4) the application may not result in any further extension into non-conforming side setback areas than the existing dock, and 5) in the case of docks not in conformance with Section 2.01, subd. 2b)2) applicable to new facilities: i') no new BSU's shall be located in the setback area without first securing a variance pursuant to Section 1.07, and ii) the application may not result in an increase in slip length opening toward non-conforming side setback areas. · The application complies with four of the five requirements, with the third requirement being the exception. Nybeck believed that the intent of this ordinance wOuld be met although the applicants have proposed adding pilings and a personal watercraft lift outside the 100' length restriction for conforming authorized dock use areas. Pictorial evidence from the mid 1990's document that the dock structure on the south side of BSU 1 and the proposed pilings have historically existed, although they have not been documented on the approved site plan. Although some of the pilings are out beyond 100' from the 929.4' shoreline, he stated that the pictorial evidence supports them and they are primarily within double wide slips. The personal watercraft lift near the gas dock is out beyond 100' from the 929.4' shoreline; however, he was not too concerned about it as long as it was used for fueling purposes and transient parking only is allowed with no overnight storage. · He expressed concern about the Board waiving the $1,167.50 of fees submitted with the application. When a meeting was conducted with Chair Skramstad and Howards Point Marina - 1 883- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Beefing May 12, 2004 Page 5 officials in late February, Nybeck stated that he recommended that Howards Point Marina either withdraw or sign a consent form for their 2004 renewal without change application because of fee concerns that he had. He pointed out that representatJves of Howards Point Marina communicated to him atthat time that they wanted to proceed with the 2004 renewal without change application and that they were not concerned about fees associated with subsequent applications. · In compliance with MN DNR General Permit 97-6098, the MN DNR and the City of Shorewood were provided a copy of the application on 4128104, with comments due in the LMCD office by 5/10/04. No comments have been received by either governmental agency. · Nybeck made two recommendalJons for the Board. First, he recommended that the Board approve the Howards Point Marina application to reconfigure the non-conforming structure for the 2004 season, subject to the submittal of a new as-built survey and restricting use of the personal watercraft ramp for fueling purposes with no overnight storage. Second, he recommended the Board deny the request to waive the $1,167.50 of fees submitted with the application. · He entertained questions or comments from the Board. Canning expressed concern about the recommendation not to waive the fees submitted with the application, especially since the fees collected are duplicate because they have already been paid. Babcock stated that he would have problems reconciling waiving fees when the option to either withdraw or sign a consent form for the 2004 renewal application was offered by staff and the applicant decided not to take advantage of that. Nybeck stated that the 2004 renewal without change application for Howards Point Marina needed to be acted upon by the Board in March because of the 60-day rule. The decision on whether to waive the fees submitted as requested by the applicant is a Board decision. Foster stated he believed the applicant wanted the Board to act on the 2004 renewal application in March to ensure their business for the 2004 season. Steps are being taken to resolve the other issues at this facility and he questioned whether it would be right to charge the applicants duplicate fees. Harper clarified for the Board the fees collected from Howards Point Marina in 2004. For their 2004 renewal without change application, a $50 base fee and a $667.50 in Watercraft Storage Unit (WSU) fee were collected, for a total of $717.50. For the new application currently being considered by the Board, a $500 base fee and a $667.50 WSU fee were collected from Howards Point Marina, for a total of $1,167.50. He pointed out that the primary difference of the fee structure between a new application, with public hearing, and a renewal without change application was $450. The Board briefly discussed the fees collected for the two applications by Howards Point Marina in 2004 and whether them was an interest to refund all or part of the fees collected for the current application being considered. The general consensus of the Board was to consider waiving the duplicate WSU fees collected in both applications, $667.50. Mr. David Albrecht, President of Howards Point Marina, stated that the staff memo was relatively self- explanatory and that he would address questions or comments from the Board. - 1884- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 6 There being no further comments, Skramstad closed the public hearing at 7:39 p.m. Scanlon stated that if the Board was inclined to issue a refund to Howards Point Marina, it should be done based on existing policy and should be logical. MOTION: Canning moved, Foster seconded to approve the 2004 Howards Point Marina application to reconfigure the non-conforming facility application, subject to: 1) waiving $667.50 of duplicate WSU fees collected in this application, 2) submittal of a new as-built survey reflecting the changes approved, 3) restricting use of the personal watercraft ramp near the gas dock for fuel purposes with no overnight storage, and 4) carrying over conditions from previously approved multiple dock licenses for this facility. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Nybeck stated that the existing policy for refund of application fees would likely be reviewed this summer when the Board reviews the fee resolutions for LMCD applications. WATER STRUCTURES A. Shorewood Yacht Club (Site 2), consideration of proposal to amend public amenities for the 2004 renewal without change multiple dock license application that was approved at the 4/28/04 Regular Board Meeting. Skramstad asked for background on this agenda item from Nybeck. Nybeck made the following comments: · At the 4/26/04 Regular Meeting, the Board approved the 2004 renewal, without change, multiple dock license application for Shorewood Yacht Club (Site 2). This approval was subject to the applicants meeting with LMCD staff to prioritize how they would like to amend their approved public amenities for review by the Board at this meeting. · Staff met with Judy Cross on 5/5/04 to discuss approved public amenities for this facility and prioritize them. Based on this meeting, the applicants have proposed to amend their approved public amenities in the letter, dated 516104. He pointed out that he included the approved special density license order, dated 1124101, and a staff memo, dated 6/22J00, that summarizes the approved public amenities with staff analysis of proposed amenities at that time. · In order for a special density license to be approved, public amenities need to be approved by the Board. For special density license applications, the applicant is required to provide .5 amenity points for each slip over the 1:50' General Rule, with a minimum of 20 points, and at least one from the "Public Access" group. For the special density license at this site, the applicants are required to provide a minimum of 20 public amenity points. · The applicants have proposed "Continued public rental of five or more boats with outboard motors" as their "Public Access" amenity for 10 points. Nybeck stated that this public amenity was included in the approved special density license and made sense, provided two conditions are being met. First, all rental boats on Lake Uinnetonka need to be inspected annually by the Sheriff's Water Patrol. Based on staff discussion with the Sheriff's Water Patrol, this has not - 1885- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 7 been done in 2004 and in recent years. He stated that he believed the applicants had recently scheduled an appointment with the Sheriff's Water Patrol to have these rental boats inspected. Second, if a pilot is provided for any of these or other rental boats, this qualifies as a watercraft for hire and would need a charter boat license, possibly some form of a liquor license, and authorization from the City of Shorewood for this site to be a port of call. Canning stated that the five rental boats proposed by the applicants appear to be sailboats with small motors on them. It is not uncommon to have a captain on board to assist those that rent the boat for sailing purposes. He asked Nybeck if it was his interpretation that this would qualify as a watercraft for hire similar to other more commonly recognized charter boats on the lake. Nybeck stated that he would conclude that a sailboat with a pilot provided would qualify as a charter boat based on existing Code. The current definition of watercraft for hire could be changed if that was the desire of the Board. The Board discussed the current definition of watercraft for hire and whether there was an interest in maintaining the existing definition or possibly amending it. There was also discussion about how sailing schools commonly provide instructors on sailboats less than a certain length and whether this should qualify as a watercraft for hire, There was some general consensus that there was a distinction between situations where an instructor is provided compared to the hiring of a pilot. Babcock stated that he believed the Board should take a step back from the motion it approved at the 4/26/04 Regular Meeting. Multiple dock licenses are issued annually and special density licenses are issued once rather than annually. If the applicants would like to amend their public amenities, this should require a new special density license application and a public hearing. A new special density license application has not been submitted and he questioned whether amending public amenities as proposed was procedurally correct. He concluded that he was troubled that the applicants were not agreeing to provide the public amenities that they agreed to provide when the applications were originally submitted and subsequently approved by the Board. Seuntjens stated that he believed the approved public amenities were extremely broad and that the applicants did not fully understand that they needed to provide all of them annually. Because of this, he believed that there was a need to amend the approved public amenities so that there was a level of compliance annually. Foster stated that he believed other facilities around the lake had amended their approved public amenities without submitting a new special density license application in the past. Babcock stated that he would be more comfortable amending public amenities, as recognized by Foster, if the applicants were proposing to maintain similar points for public amenities to be provided. In this case, he expressed concern that the applicants were proposing to reduce public amenity points significantly and that a new application, with public headng, had not been submitted. Nybeck continued his comments: - 1886- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 8 · The applicants have proposed "Continued maintenance of the holding pond on the south side of the property along County Road 19" as an "Environmental Protection" amenity for five points. Nybeck stated that this public amenity was included in the approved special density license order and the Board might want to continue it in the proposal to amend these amenities. However, he expressed concern relating to how this public amenity provides public benefit for density above the 1:50' General Rule. · The applicants have proposed three "Public Service" amenities for three points each. First, they have proposed to "Continued distribution of boat safety and environmental literature~. This amenity was included in the approved special density license order and the Board might want to continue it in the proposal to amend these amenities. However, he expressed concern about how this public amenity provides benefit for density above the 1:50' General Rule because the vast majority of the commercial facilities on the lake that do not have a special density license already provide this. Second, the applicants have proposed to "Continued proviSion of meeting rooms for neighbor homeowners association meetings, etc.". This amenity was included in the approved special density license order and the Board might want to continue it. He questioned how providing this public amenity justified density up and above the 1:50' General Rule. If the Board is inclined to continue to grant this, the meeting room should be made available to the public as a whole, not just the neighbor homeowners association meetings, and the room should be either free of charge or at a nominal rate. Third, the applicants have proposed "Continued availability of their ramp for emergencies". This amenity was included in the approved special density license and should be continued. · He stated that he was not prepared to make a recommendation because the proposal to amend approved public amenities should be agreed to by both the Board and the applicants. However, the Board should ensure that approval of public amenities provide the public benefit and the applicants will provide them annually. · He entertained questions or comments from the public. Nelson asked the applicants what type of environmental literature they distribute. Ms. Judy Cross, an owner of the facility, stated that she and her husband distribute any literature that they can get their hands on from the various governmental agencies. Babcock stated that he did not necessarily agree with the analysis provided by Nybeck that some of the amenities did not provide public benefit. Canning asked how the public meeting room was being utilized. Ms. Cross stated that the heaviest use of the room was during the City of Excelsior assessment sub- committee meetings. Other than that, the residents that are aware of it primarily live in the immediate area. Canning stated that Nybeck recommended that this meeting room be open up to the public either free of charge or at a nominal rate. He asked Ms. Cross if she had ever charged the public for the use of the meeting room. - 1887- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 9 Ms. Judy Cross stated that she and her husband have not charged the public for use of the meeting room in the past. However, she stated that she would like to have the ability to charge for custodial services if needed. Canning asked the applicants if they would be willing to advertise to the public that a meeting room was available to the public free of charge or at a nominal rate. Skramstad questioned whether the Board could hold the Cross' to notify that certain amenities are available to the public until the Board amends this Section of the Code. Babcock stated that the Board has not historically required owners of facilities with special density licenses to notify the public that a meeting room was available. They believed it was up to the applicants to decide how this public amenity is provided annually so that they get credit for it. Seuntjens stated that he did not believe the public amenities were clear in 2000 because there were a number of public amenities in the approved special density license order that staff recommended not be included or had questions about. Babcock stated that the public amenities included in the special density license order were concluded by the Board to be sufficient and the applicants agreed to provide them annually. If amenities were included in the special density license order that staff recommended not be included or they had questions, the Board concluded that they should in the approved Findings. Seuntjens stated that he would like to amend the approved public amenities for this facility and move forward. Foster stated that two amenities not proposed by the applicants that they might want to consider are the travel lift and use of the ends of the "T" docks for Water Patrol purposes. LeFevere stated that the only application the Board has considered was the renewal without change application for this facility in 2004. Staff raised public amenities to the Board attention because the applicants did not provide what they have agreed to. The Board could agree to move forward with the processing of the 2004 renewal without change application if it decides to forgive public amenities not provided in the past. Technically speaking, the Code requires a new special density license, with public hearing, if the applicants would like to amend their public amenities. This was overlooked in the motion that was approved at the 4/26/04 Regular Meeting. Canning stated that the 2004 renewal without change application was approved at the last Board meeting, subject to the applicants meeting with staff to review approved and possible proposed public amenities to be reviewed at this meeting. The Board discussed whether a new special density license application, with public hearing, was necessary for the Board to consider amending approved public amenities. There was discussion on the need to separate approval of the 2004 renewal without change multiple dock license application from the applicants interest to amend their approved public amenities. The consensus of the Board - 1 888- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page l0 was that the renewal without change multiple dock license application could be unconditionally approved by the Board and that the applicants would need to submit a new special density license application, with public hearing, to amend their approved public amenities. MOTION: Nelson moved, Canning seconded to rescind the motion approved at the 4/26/04 Regular Board Meeting and approve unconditionally the Shorewood Yacht Club (Site 2) 2004 renewal without change multiple dock license application. Scanlon stated that he would like the Board to focus on what is good for the lake, make a decision, and move on. Canning questioned whether the Board changedthe public amenities in the process to renew the 2003 renewal without change application because the Board imposed a permit requirement to provide free charter boat excursions or fishing trips for at least 200, rather than 100, handicapped or underprivileged persons per year because they did not provide this public amenity in 2002. The consensus of the Board was that the applicant needs to understand that the public amenities in the approved special density license need to be provided in 2004 unless a new special density is submitted and subsequently approved by the Board. Mr. John Cross stated that he and his wife proposed significantly more public amenities than required at this site because they did not believe they would not be able to amend them. The Board discussed at the previous Regular Meeting reducing approved public amenities to the minimum required 20 points. A procedure has been discussed to bring this request back to the Board for consideration and he and his wife will proceed accordingly. The list of public amenities was brought forward on their own and he expressed concern that there was a perception that they have been cheating. Nybeck stated that the list of public amenities referenced by Mr. Cross was provided because it was a requirement on their annual multiple dock license. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. The Board briefly discussed whether the applicants were mislead regarding the process to amend approve public amenities, the number of votes that are required to amend the previous action, whether the motion made at the 4/26104 Regular Meeting should be ruled out of order, and whether application fees should be waived on a future special density license application submitted by Shorewood Yacht Club (Site 2). B. Discussion of 5/7/04 staff memo that summarizes expenses incurred to be deducted from the $250 refundable deposits for recently submitted variance applications. Skramstad asked for background on this agenda item from Harper. Harper stated that the Board had recently processed variance applications for Bayview Event Center, James Houg, Maple Hills Homeowners Association, and Thomas Tallakson. All four variance - 1889- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page 11 applications submitted both a $250 base fee, which is non-refundable, and a $250 deposit that is refundable if not expended for administration, inspection and legal services required. The Board has historically deducted legal expenses incurred in the preparation of Findings of Fact and Order from the $250 deposit. Legal expenses incurred in the preparation of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of these variance applications were as follows: Bayview Event Center- $390.60, James Houg- $83.85, and Maple Hills Homeowners Association/Thomas Tallakeson- $1,161.00. He recommended that the Board refund James Houg $166.15 of the $250 deposit, invoice Bayview Event Center $140.60 for legal expenses incurred in excess of the $250 deposit, invoice Maple Hills Homeowners Association $330.50 for expenses incurred in excess of the $250 deposit, and invoice Thomas Tallakson $330.50 for expenses incurred in excess of the $250 deposit. He entertained questions or comments from the Board on this recommendation. MOTION: Valdesuso moved, Ambrose second to approve a refund for James Houg and invoice Bayview Event Center, Maple Hills Homeowners Association, and Thomas Tallakson as recommended in the staff memo, dated 5/7/04. VOTE: Ayes (13), Abstained (1, Skramstad); motion carried. C. Additional Business. Skramstad stated that although an update on the Lake Minnetonka Boat Density Sub-Committee was not a scheduled agenda item and not typically discussed under "Water Structures", he asked for an update on the progress of the sub-committee. Foster stated that there was a draft sub-committee report that he had prepared to discuss at the 3/24/04 Regular Meeting. Some sub-committee members expressed concern at that meeting that they had not reviewed and commented on the report prior to bringing it to the Board for discussion purposes. He pointed out that he had been out of town in April and that he would be forwarding this report to other sub-committee members for their review and comments. He stated that a sub- committee meeting would be scheduled in the near future to discuss this report, refine the report, and bring the report back to the Board in the near future, possibly as early as 5/26/04. The Board briefly discussed the Sunday, 5/9/04, Minneapolis Star Tribune article regarding boat density discussion and a number of other topics. There was discussion on the legal definition of a conflict of interest and when Board members should remove themselves. 2. FINANCIAL A. Audit of vouchers (5/15/04 - 5/15/04). Knudsen reviewed the audit of vouchers as submitted. 'MOTION: Foster moved, Valdesuso seconded to approve the audit of vouchers as submitted. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. :- - 1890- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page12 B. Review of timetable to consider draft 2005 LMCD Budget. Skramstad asked for background on this agenda item from Nybeck. Nybeck stated that the 2005 LMCD Budget process was beginning and the first formal review was scheduled for the 5/26/04 Regular Meeting, with subsequent review at the 6/9/04 and 6/23/04 Regular Meetings. The Board has typically scheduled a working session prior to the first formal review of the draft budget and he recommended that this be done on the week of 5/17/04 through 5/21/04. There will be an opportunity for interested city officials to review and comment on the draft 2005 LMCD Budget in the office at 12 NOON on Friday, 6/4/04. The adopted 2005 LMCD Budget will be forwarded to the 14 member cities by the July 1 deadline established by the state enabling legislation for the LMCD. The Board briefly discussed the draft 2005 LMCD Budget and the consensus of the Board was for Nybeck to schedule a working session in the LMCD office on the week of 5/17/04 through 5/21/04 to review it. Board members were encouraged to get involved in the 2005 LMCD Budget process early on beginning with the working session. C. AdditJonal Business. There was no additional business. 3. ADMINISTRATION A. Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for Administrative Technician, Judd Harper. Skramstad asked for background from Nybeck on this agenda item. Nybeck made the following comments: · A performance appraisal was recently conducted for Judd Harper. An overall grade of above average, the top category, for the period of 6/14103 through 4/30104. His anniversary date with the LMCD is 5/1/04 and he is compensated at an annual rate of $40,000. · During his performance review, strengths exhibited by Harper during the appraisal period were communicated, as well as areas he could improve on in the upcoming appraisal period. · Last fall, the Board reviewed proposed scales for the three full-time LMCD positions and agreed that they should be used as guidelines for staff. These pay scales utilized the Stanton Survey and the Administrative Technician position was compared to an entry-level planning position. Based on this comparison, the recommended pay guideline for the Administrative Technician position is $35,000 to $50,000. · Both an internal promotion and cost of living adjustment should be considered for Harper. He recommended a $3,000 annual salary adjustment for Harper, retroactive to 5/1/04. This recommended salary adjustment is within the pay scale guideline established for this position and is comparable to other positions in the Lake Minnetonka area. If approved, he recommended that $41,500 of his salary be allocated from the Administrative Budget and that $1,500 be allocated from the EWM Harvesting Program/Exotics Budget because of his Project - 1 891 - Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page13 Manager responsibilities. · He entertained questions or comments from the Board. Babcock stated that he would prefer that 100 percent of his salary be allocated from the Administrative Budget. MOTION: Babcock moved, Nelson seconded to approve an annual salary compensation adjustment for Judd Harper from $40,000 to $43,000 retroactive to 5/1/04, subject to 100 percent of his salary being allocated through the Administrative Budget. Seuntjens asked for clarification on the recommendation of an internal promotion as recommended by Nybeck. LeFevere stated that it was not uncommon for positions to have steps in the pay guidelines for a specific position. These steps range from entry-level staff members to more experienced staff members. The Board discussed this and the consensus was that Harper was making satisfactory progress and that he was receiving a compensation adjustment for the next step within the Administrative Technician position, as well as a cost of living adjustment. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. The Board thanked Harper for his continued growth and active participation in the Administrative Technician position. B. Additional Business. Van Hercke stated that she believed it would be helpful to have a one paragraph that summarizes the mission statement of the various committees and sub-committees of the LMCD, citing the Lake Uinnetonka Boat Density Sub-Committee and the Save the Lake Advisory Committee as examples. Additionally, she believed it would be beneficial to have a paragraph that summarizes the financial process of the LMCD. The Board discussed this and the consensus of the Board was for Nybeck to prepare a draft summary statements for the committees, sub-committees, and financial process of the LMCD as recommended by Van Hercke. 4. EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE Nelson updated the Board on the zebra mussel related activities that he and Suerth had been working on to date. Some of these activities require funding and some of them do not. These activities include: the drafting of a letter, to be signed by Chair Skramstad, to mayors of the 14 member cities stating that this is the problem and this is what the LMCD would like to do; the need to schedule a presentation with the city councils of the 14 member cities; finalizing the power point presentation, including comments from the MN DNP,, and dete~nining the number of bound copies to be printed; authorizing the printing of a zebra mussel - 1892- l,i, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page14 brochure; possibly creating a zebra mussel video with the Freshwater Society similar to the one viewed prior to this meeting; and the need to update the LMCD website to have a link to it that summarizes the issues and solicits contributions for this program. Skramstad complimented the efforts of Nelson and Suerth on this project to date. However, he stated thatthe Board should have a better understanding of the proposed action items, and approve when necessary, before proceeding so that a common message is communicated. He suggested that he believed it would make sense for the Board to approve action items on educational efforts that would cost the LMCD nothing or a limited amount of funds. The Board discussed the activities communicated by Nelson and a summary of this discussion is detailed below: Letter to be sent to the 14 member cities The consensus of the Board was that this letter should go out in the near future and that Board members interested in recommending changes to the draft prepared by Nelson should forward them to either Nelson or Skramstad ASAP. The Board also recommended that this letter be sent to other organizations that might have an interest in this project, citing the MCWD, the LMA and the Minnesota Lakes Association as examples. · Scheduling of presentations with the city councils of the 14 member cities Nelson stated that staff had prepared a spreadsheet that summarized the schedule for city council meetings of the 14 member cities. The consensus of the Board was that this spreadsheet should be forwarded to the Board members so that presentations could be scheduled in the near future with city councils that have not seen the power point presentation. · Finalizing the power point presentation The consensus of the Board was that the power point presentation should be finalized ASAP and that an adequate number of bound copies should be printed for the 14 city administrators, 14 mayors, the city council members of the 14 member cities, and the 14 Board members. A copy of this bound copy should accompany the letter to be sent out to the 14 mayors in the near future. The Board also expressed an interest in having the finalized power point presentation available on the LMCD website. · Printing of a zebra mussel brochure The consensus of the Board was that the brochure should be printed up and that funding alternatives should be explored. Creating a zebra mussel video - 1893- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page15 Nelson stated that creation of this video with the Freshwater Society would have a total cost of $10,000, with the Freshwater Society agreeing to pick up $5,000 of the costs. The remaining $5,000 would need to be paid by the LMCD and he believed this would be an ideal "Save the Lake" project. The consensus was that this video should be focused only on Lake Uinnetonka and the LMCD or "Save the Lake" gets some form of credit at the beginning and end of it. MOTION: Scanlon moved, Knudsen seconded to authorize up to $5,000 of"Save the Lake" funds to create a 30-minute zebra mussel video with the Freshwater Society. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. · Creating a link on the LMCD website The Board stated that establishing a link on the LMCD website for fundraising purposes could be more difficult than anticipated because of logistical issues. The consensus was that this should be checked into further and reported back to the Board in the near future. 5. LAKE USE & RECREATION There was no discussion. 6. SAVE THE LAKE There was no discussion. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Nybeck updated the Board on four items. First, the lake level on Lake Minnetonka was 928.37' on 5/11/04, with the dam closed. Second, the most recent quarterly Executive Director Newsletter was included in the handout folders for informational purposes. Third, discussions continue with City of Wayzata and LMCC officials regarding the possible use of the Wayzata city council chambers for future LMCD Board meetings. There is a significant amount of work that needs to be conducted and he stated that he would keep the Board up to date on this project. Fourth, a number of the local fire departments have expressed an interest in storing their fire rescue boats in the water, primarily at municipal docks. He stated that he would check into existing Code provisions that would regulate such storage and that he would report back to the Board with an update on this in the near future. 8. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. 9. NEW BUSINESS Minimum Wake Restrictions Proposal Van Hercke stated that she would like the Board to consider establishing a "minimum wake" restriction for - 1894- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 12, 2004 Page16 the evening of July 4th similar to restrictions that are established during "High Water" emergencies. The primary purpose would be for public safety purposes. The Board discussed this and there was no consensus of the Board. One concern raised was whether this restriction, if adopted, could be enforced by the Sheriff's Water Patrol. The Board suggested that Van Hercke check with the Sheriff's Water Patrol on her recommendation. Boat Density Discussion Babcock stated that he understood there was a recent mayors meeting and that one of the mayors made a recommendation regarding boat density issues on Lake Minnetonka. He expressed concern that a representative was not present at the mayors meeting because it involved concerns of the LMCD that the LMCD was not able to address at that meeting. The Board briefly discussed this and Nybeck was directed to forward the letter referenced by Babcock to all Board members. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m. Tom Skramstad, Chair Jose Valdesuso, Secretary -1895- BOARD MEMBERS Tom Skramstad Chair, Shorewood Katy VanHemke Vice Chair, Minnetonka Jose Valdesuso Secretary, Excelsior Paul Knudsen Treasurer, Minnetrista Bob Ambrose Wayzata Doug Babcock Tonka Bay On,, Burma Mound Miles Canning Greenwood Bert Foster Deephaven Debbie Halvorson Orono Pete Nelson Victoria Tom Scanlon Spring Park Tom Seuntjens Minnetonka Beach Herb Suerth Woodland LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 952/745-0789 · FAX 952/745-9085 Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR May 27, 2004 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LMCD City Administrators LMCD Board Members Greg Nybeck, Executive Director Draft 2005 LMCD Budget Enclosed is a draft of the 2005 Lake Minnetonka Conservation Distdct (LMCD) Budget for your review. A meeting has been scheduled in the LMCD offiCe on Friday, June 4, 2004 at 12 NOON to review it and receive your input on it. A light lunch will be provided to those that attend. The proposed levy to the member cities ($261,294) would increase 6.9% when compared to the levy for the 2004 LMCD Budget ($244,453). The LMCD has held the levy forwarded to the member cities fiat for the past three years ($244,621 in 2002, $244,995 in 2003, and $244,453 in 2004). In the proposed 2005 LMCD Budget, we are planning increases in two primary areas. These include: 1) Personnel services (an additional $22,076 compared to 2004), and Zebra MusSel Operational expenses (an additional $5,000 compared to 2004). The LMCD values your review and input on the draft 2005 LMCD Budget. If you are unable to attend this meeting and would like to comment on the draft 2005 LMCD Budget, please forward your comments to the LMCD office by Monday, June 21, 2004, My e-mail address is: ,qnybeckC, imcd.or,q. Also enclosed is a copy of the 2003 LMCD Audit that was prepared by Abdo, Eick & Meyers. It was reviewed and accepted by,the LMCD Board of Directors at its May 12, 2004 Regular Meeting. Please RSVP to the LMCD office by 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 2, 2004 if you plan to attend the June .4th meeting so that we have an idea on the amount of food to order. Feel free to call me if you have questions or concerns relating to the draft 2005 LMCD Budget or the 2003 LMCD Audit. Iiook forward to your comments on the draft 2005 LMCD Budget. 50% Recycled Content 20% POSt ConsUmer Waste Web Page Address: httP://wWw.lmCd.org E,mail Address: ImCd@lmcd.Org - 1896- ~0 ~0 ~ ~-- 0 ~'- ~ O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LUc,i Z z g 0 X -J ~0000000~ ~0000000~ ~000~000~ O0 00~ ~ ~0 oO~ z~ _o.~ ~00000 O~ molt} ILl rJ IJ.I ..J 898- -1899- - 1900- , ,I, ,I ,,mi & ,1, Ii- 0 Z]~ ~~ ~z~ O0 o ooooo oo~o~ ~o~ - 1901 - - 1902- o 0 - 1903- ABDO EICK & MEYERS Cert~ed Publtc Accountants & Constdtants February 5, 2004 Grandview Square 5201 Eden Avenue Suite 370 Edina, MN 55436 Board of Directors Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Deephaven, Minnesota We have audited the financial statements of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (the District) for the year ended December 31, 2003 and have issued our report thereon dated February 5, 2004. Professional standards require that we provide you with the following information related to our audit. Our Responsibility Under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States of America 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 accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute assurance and because we did not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, fraud, or other illegal acts may exist and not be detected by us. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the District for the year ended December 31, 2003, 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 the internal control. However, we noted certain matters involving the 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 District's ability to record, process, smnmarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. We noted the following reportable condition. Segregation of Duties Our study and evaluation disclosed that because of the limited size of your office staff, the District 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 District 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. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial 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 material weaknesses as defined above. However, the reportable condition described above is not believed to be a material weakness. 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. We noted no instances of noncompliance. 952.835.9090 ° Fax 952.835.3261 ~.aemep.s.com - 1904- Lake Mirmetonka Conservation District February 5, 2004 Page Two Significant Accounting Policies Management has the responsibility for selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. In accordance with the terms of our engagement letter, we will advise management about the appropriateness of accounting policies and their application. The significant accounting policies used by the District are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. The District implemented the requirements of Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 during 2003. We noted no transactions entered into by the District during the year that were both significant and unusual, and of which, under professional standards, we are required to inform you, or transactions for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. Accounting Estimates Accounting estimates are an integral part of the 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 accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the poss~ility that future events affecting them may differ significantly fxom those expected. Audit Adjustments For purposes of this letter, professional standards define an audit adjustment as a proposed correction of the financial statements that, in our judgment, may not have been detected except through our auditing procedures. An audit adjustment may or may not indicate matters that could have a significant effect on the District's financial reporting process (that is, cause future financial statements to be materially misstated). We had no unadjusted audit differences. 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 financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the Dislrict's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to detennine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. 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 District'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. 952.835.9090 ° Fax 952.835.3261 www.aemcpas.com - 1905- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District February 5, 2004 Page Three Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 As mentioned previously, the District has implemented GASB Statement No. 34 for the December 31, 2003 financial statements. The main change resulting from the implementation was issuing f'mancial statements under a new reporting model. The main features of this model are summarized below: · Narrative analysis through the Management Discussion & Analysis (MD&A) letter on pages I through V. Government-wide financial reporting that builds upon traditional fund based financial statements. The Government-wide financial statement on pages 3 and 4 are intended to give a more concise view of the government as a single unified entity. More long-term focus for governmental activities. The District now has fixed assets on its Statement of Net Assets for Governmental Activities. The addition of this information should help direct users to a long-term view of the financial · A distinction between major and non-major funds. More information is provided on individual funds that meet the criteria to be included as major funds. All funds of the district are presented as major. · Budgeting analysis that considers both the adopted and final budget. 952.835.9090 * Fax 952.885.3261 www. aemcpas.cora - 906- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Februa~ 5, 2004 Page Four Other Matters The following are items that came to our attention during the audit that we feel should be reviewed. Financial Position and Results of Operations General Fund The fund balance increased $49,483 to $190,553 at December 31, 2003. The total fund balance represents 55 percent of the 2004 budget. The District has designated $22,000 of the fund balance for a managemem plan to be conducted in 2004. With this designation removed the undesignated fund balance is 49 percent of the 2004 budget. We recommend a minimum fund balance for working capital be approximately 30 percent to 50 percent of planned expenditures. A table summarizing the general fund balance in relation to budget follows: Fund Following Balance Fund Year as a Percent Year Balance Budget of Budget 2003 $ 190,553 $ 345,953 55% 2002 141,070 317,295 45 2001 125,684 305,543 41 2000 103,730 280,433 37 1999 111,300 285,679 39 $400,000 Fund Balance as a Percent of Next Year's Budget $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $- - - $305,543 $317,295 $345,953 $285,679 $280,433 39% 37% 41% 45% 55% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 * Fund Balance --~-Budget] 952.835.9090 · Fax 952.835.3261 www.aemcpas.com - 1907- _- Lake Mirmetonka Conservation District February 5, 2004 Page Five Special Revenue Funds The special revenue funds account for revenue sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes (not including major capital projects). These funds include the Save the Lake fund, New Equipment Acquisition fund, Eurasian Milfoil fund and the Equipment Replacement fund. The Save the Lake fund and the New Equipment Acquisition fund are funded only through donations and interest income. The following table summarizes the change in the fund balance for each special revenue fund. Fund Balance (Deficit) Increase Fund 12/31/03 12/31/02 (Decrease) Save the Lake Designated for: Water patrol project $ 8,933 $ 8,433 $ 500 Purchase from donated funds 237,442 223,647 13,795 New Equipment Acquisition (9,579) 100,305 (109,884) Eurasian Milfoil 91,166 74,452 16,714 Equipment Replacement 187,696 184,426 3,270 Total $ 215.658 $ 591.263 $ (75.605) The deficit in the new equipment acquisition fund should be eliminated with a transfer from another fund. 952.835.9090 * Fax 952.835.3261 www. aemcpa..eom - 1908- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District February 5, 2004 Page Six This report is intended solely for the information and use of management and Board of Directors and the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. 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. The comments and recommendations in the report are purely constructive in nature, and should be read in this context. 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 oppommity to be of service and for the courtesy and cooperation extended to us by your staff. February 5, 2004 Minneapolis, Minnesota ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Certified Public Accountants 952.835.9090 ° Fax 952.835.3261 www.aemcpas.com - 909- June 16, 2004 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 F/kX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com Brian Pellowski Mound Marketplace LLC 4969 Olson Memorial Highway Golden Valley, MN 55422 Dear Brian, I am writing in regards to the water wall and landscaping at Mound Marketplace Plaza in Mound. The water wall continues to be inoperative. My employer, Mound City Council, continues to ask me about the problemand if they can expect to see the water wall operating soon. It is their and my contention that the City of Mound has a vested interest in the completion of the water wall for two reasons. First, the Harbor Wine & Spirits pays tenant association fees that support the promised amenities. Secondly, the City of Mound, through its contributions of Tax Increment Financing, is a partner in the Mound Marketplace project, and would naturally expect the completion of the water wall as a design component covered by the TIF agreement. For the same justifications, it is also the expectation of the City that landscaping maintenance be performed that replaces dead landscape materials and backfills bark mulch that has settled since construction. Please realize that it is the desire of the City that Mound Marketplace is a long term success. We want it to be the retail gem that was promised the public of Mound and the west lake region. We await your reply on these matters. Sincerely, Kandis Hanson City Manager Cc; Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Carlton Moore, Public Works Director Mayor Meisel and City Council Members Larry Olson, Metro Plains Development printed on recycled Paper 1910- June 22,2004 To: Brian Pellowski President/Owner From: Dave Earls Director of Properties Re: Mound MarketPlace Update The waterfall project is finally nearing completion. It is our goal to have it fully operating by the 4th of July holiday weekend. The new pumps and stands for the pumps are to be installed June 22nd and June 25th and the water proofing will be done by Commercial Aquatics the week of June 28. Another issue at Mound is the landscaping and mulch around the property. This is already in progress and the mulch should be done by the end of the week of June 26th. We will not be topping of mulch or replacing landscaping along the Lynnwood Road (South Side) until the road construction is completed, which is per the recommendation of our landscaper. We now have the property posted with signage pertaining to loitering, biking, and skateboarding. This was at the request of the Mound Police Department. Finally, we are working on placing at least one bike rack on the property down by Scotty B's restaurant. Scott is also working on some ideas for outside seating and I will be following up with him in the next couple of weeks. Environmental Review Beginning on Downtown Redevelopment Project An environmental review process for proposed redevelopment plans in downtown Mound is underway. The City of Mound is preparing an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for a portion of downtown Mound generally located south of the realigned County Road 15 and adjacent to Lost Lake and Lake Langdon. Most of the area is proposed for redevelopment by the Mound Harbor Renaissance (MHR) development team which includes over 200 housing units and 140,000 square feet of office and commercial space. A 70 room hotel and banquet facility is being proposed by Rick Bloomquist (BFL2). The development would be constructed in phases beginning in the spring of 2005 through approximately 2008. The proposed development is another piece to complete Mound Visions, which was adopted by the City of Mound in 1992. Mound Visions is a plan for the downtown area which focuses on recreating the historic Lake Minnetonka resort architectural character, improving pedestrian and vehicular connections, providing a mixture of housing types and business opportunities, creating connections with the lake, and designing for sustainability. Other parts of Mound Visions which are completed or under construction include Mound Marketplace, the new Post Office, Village at Cooks Bay, realigning of County Road 15, and the Lost Lake Greenway and docks. The City of Mound is conducting the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) to address environmental impacts anticipated from development. The AUAR will address substantially the same issues and follow a similar process as the more familiar Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Conducting an AUAR will allow the City of Mound to evaluate the impacts of redevelopment over'the entire project area. A plan for the mitigation of development impacts will be programmed into development planning and other ongoing efforts. Over the next couple of months the City's AUAR consultant team will be gathering data, analyzing impacts, and identifying mitigation strategies. Beginning in the fall the draft AUAR will be available for public review and comment. A public open house will be held to present the findings, answer questions, and discuss concems. For additional information about the development plans or the AUAR process, please contact Sarah Smith, Community Development Director at 952-472-3190. -1911- Mound Visions AUAR Agency/KickoffMeeting Notes June 3, 2004 Attendees David Braslau, David Braslau Associates Inc John Cameron, McCombs Frank Roos Architects, Inc. Bruce Chamberlain, Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Renae Clark, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Loren Gordon, Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Kandis Hanson, City of Mound Anne Ketz, 106 Group Leslie Knapp, EarthTech, Inc. Carolyn Kra]l, Landform Engineering Co. Carlton Moore, City of Mound Stacey Puranen, Hennepin Conservation District Mark Rothfork, Earth Tech, Inc. Sarah Smith, City of Mound Ed Terhaar, Benshoof & Associates, Inc. Rita Trapp, Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Mike Wyatt, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Joe Yanta, Army Corps of Engineers Dave Zetterstrom, Hennepin County Overview of past planning efforts and projects This kickoff meeting was held at the beginning of the AUAR process as a chance for the agencies, city staff, and consultants to meet each other and discuss what issues should be considered in the environmental review process. The work scope for the AUAR process includes at least one additional group meeting to discuss findings and outstanding issues before the formal review process begins. The City of Mound has been working on its Mound Visions project for over 14 years. Mound Visions took a comprehensive look at redevelopment in downtown. The planning effort was undertaken because the City recognized that the existing downtown did not function very well and is not oriented toward the natural assets of the community. The City is interested in a mixed use downtown which is very walkable. Mound Visions is divided into a series of districts such as Lost Lake, Landgon, Auditors Road, and True Value. The City is currently working on its fourth extension to the developers agreement. The next big step will be the concept and environmental review. The estimated values to date are $98 million with a public investment of $15 to 20 million. Projects identified in Mound Visions which are already underway include the greenway along the north side of Lost Lake, reahgnment of County Road 15, and the construction of Auditors Road. Mound Visions is a pubhc and private redevelopment effort. Along Commerce Boulevard, Mound Marketplace is complete and nearly full. There is also a new residential development which is about half completed. A transit facihty is being proposed next to the abandoned railroad line. In the short-term, the line is to become a walking/biking trail with a possible future use of hght-rail. The Greenway project currently underway has -1912- restored Lost Lake Canal, which was originally built in the early 1900s to get excursion boats to Downtown. Water quality in this area is an issue. Most of the water from downtown and the nearby area has historically flowed directly into Lost Lake. As part of the County Road 15 project there will be stormwater ponding to handle surface runoff from the roadway. The proposed Mound Harbor Renaissance will be treating stormwater within the development. Carolyn Krall from Landform Engineering Co. provided an overview of Mound Harbor Renaissance (MHR). The MHR plan is somewhat different than Mound Visions due to market feasibility challenges. The project will be done in phases. Although the exact order has not been determined, the Lost Lake District will likely be done first with Auditors Road and Langdon following. Lost Lake will have two sections - one primarily with housing and the other with a mixture of retail and offices. Auditors Road is proposed to include a hotel, retail, and condominiums. Langdon is a mixture of retail and condominiums. Much of the project will have underground parking. The development did receive a water quality grant which will assist with design, engineering, and some construction costs for innovative stormwater techniques. The development team is looking at a variety of methods including small ponds, rainwater gardens, and permeable paving methods. Overview of AUAR process and identification of significant issues The City and Mound Harbor Renaissance jointly agreed to conduct the ALIAR process after consultation with the Environmental Quality Board (EQB). The AUAR process was chosen because it is more complete and deals with mitigation, which will likely be needed for this area. Although the individual projects in the Mound Visions plan would likely not require environmental assessment, it was felt that the entire area would, so it would be beneficial to conduct the AUAR now rather than doing a series of environmental reviews. The AUAR process will examine two scenarios. One scenario, focused on the worst case, would be what is allowed by the City's Comprehensive Plan. The other scenario will be the Mound Harbor Renaissance as proposed. The AtlAR process will not include existing development, like True Value Hardware, Lost Lake Canal, Auditors Road, Mound Marketplace, or the reconstruction of County Road 15. The ALIAR process is just beginning. The consulting team has recently started the data gathering process and will be working on the two scenarios in the next month. The team will then examine impacts and discuss mitigation methods. Another meeting with agency representatives is anticipated to discuss the scenarios, impacts, and mitigation methods. It would be held before the draft ALIAR is completed and formally distributed for review. There are a number of potential ALIAR issues that have already been identified, including traffic and surface water runoff. The MHR plan includes additional dredging of Lost Lake for 40 new docks. The former dump site has construction issues, as well as water quality issues that the development team is working to address. Since the downtown currently has no stormwater management, the hope is that this project will improve water quality in Lost Lake. Discussion of key issues with agencies Mound Visions AUAR June 3, 2004 Agency/Kickoff Meeting Minutes P~e2 -1913- Mike Wyatt asked whether the proposed development follows the Comprehensive Plan, especially in the Langdon District. The Comprehensive Plan has a redevelopment chapter which incorporates Mound Visions. The MHR plan follows the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan. Mike noted that the MCWD has recently revised its water quality goals, including the removal of 50% of the current levels of phosphorus. The model they used shows most of the area in the Langdon District as remaining open. If there is going to be increased development, the model should be reviewed and their Capital Improvement Plan for achieving the goal may need to be revised. The model can be used by the consultants through a third party agreement. The MCWD would like the AUAR to address how the proposed development will assist in achieving their water quality goals. Carolyn from Landform mentioned that the grant will assist the development team in looking at the overall design of the stormwater system. They would be interested in using the model. Jurisdictional issues will need to be evaluated more once the plan is in place. Oversight depends on the actions that will be taken, such as grading, shaping, and replacing of wetlands. Agency representatives did not have much feedback on the proposed dredging and docks. Most said that they would need a specific proposal. The MCWD uses a list of criteria to evaluate, including existing/historic uses of the area, whether it will create new riparian rights, existing/historic bottom contours and whether other dockage is available on the lake. Clarification was requested on the stormwater ponds proposed as part of the County Road 15 reconstruction. The two ponds adjacent to the roadway do not have excess capacity because they were built specifically to address the roadway runoff. The third stormwater pond, which is on the Mound Visions plan, but not in design is for the True Value District. The site belongs to the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) so further development is not possible yet. The proposed MHR development will have to address stormwater on their site. There was also a question about the technical challenges and previous studies regarding the dump site. Studies of both the Maxwell site and the dump site have been done and are being referenced by the development team and the consultants. Mound Visions AUAR June 3, 2004 Agency/Kickoff Meeting Minutes P~e3 -1914- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 STAFF REPORT To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Date: June 1,2004 Re: Board of Adjustment and Appeals SUMMARY. Annick Pratbernon is requesting review of the accessory structure located at 2146 Cedar Lane by the Board of Appeals and Adjustment pursuant to City Code 350:505. Based upon the State Building Code and Zoning Ordinance, the Building Official (former) deemed the structure to be a "carport" which is therefore subject to the accessory building requirements and ordered that it be removed. The owner is requesting that the structure be considered as a pergola and therefore be allowed to remain in its current location as it is more appealing than a temporary membrane structure. Members of the City Council are advised that a building permit was not issued for the structure. PROCESS. According to City Code Chapter 350:510, the Board of Appeals and Adjustment is the City Council. Prior to review by the City Council, Planning Commission review is required. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING REVIEW. The request was considered by the Planning Commission at its June 7, 2004 meeting. Discussion took place about the favorable aesthetics of the existing structure as opposed to a membrane structure which is permitted in residential districts subject to a 3-foot setback provision following recent approval of the new ordinance. The proximity of the structure and whether it extends into the street right-of-way was also discussed. It is important to note that the property owner was not present at the meeting. RECOMMENDATION. Based on its review, the Planning Commission voted six (6) in favor and (2) opposed to affirm Staffs recommendation to remove the structure. A copy of the meeting minute excerpts from the June 7th meeting has been included. A resolution has not been prepared in advance of the City Council's review. Depending upon the outcome of the Council's decision, Staff should be directed to prepare a resolution based on the findings to be brought back to the next meeting to be held on July 13, 2004. -1915- ADDITIONAL COMMENT. The request was submitted on or about March 31,2004. The 60-day deadline for governmental action on the request expired on or around May 29, 2004. Therefore, Staff executed a 60-day extension on May 24, 2004 for an additional 60-days regarding the City's review period which will expire on or about July 28, 2004. Members of the Council are advised that the review of the request by the City was delayed at the applicant's request until after May 14th due to a planned vacation. · Page 2 -1916- MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 7' 2004 BOARD OF APPEALS REVIEW OF STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 2146 CEDAR LANE AND APPLICABILITY OF ZONING ORDINANCE AND UNIFORM BUILDING CODE PER CITY CODE CHAPTER 350:505 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS The applicant requests review of the structure located on her property. According to the UBC and Zoning Ordinance, staff has deemed it to be a "carport" which is subject to the accessory building requirements. The owner is requesting that the structure should be considered as a pergola and be allowed to remain in its current location. The building official indicated that the structure does not meet the 20-foot front yard setback for the R-2 zoning district. It also does not meet the structural requirements (i.e. snow Icad requirements) of the State Building Code. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Miller, to affirm staff recommendation and require removal of the structure. Discussion Mueller asked how this differs from the tarp carports. Unlike a tarp carport it has no roof. Schwingler asked if it met setbacks. established for this type of structure. subject to 3-foot setbacks. Staff indicated there were none currently Smith said that we allow membrane structures Mueller said that all she would have to do is add a tarp over the top to qualify for a temporary membrane structure. Miller thought we ought to hold the line and if the Council approves it, so be it. MOTION carried. Voting for: Schwingler, Glister, Michael, Hasse, Osmek and Miller. Voting against: Raines and Mueller. -1917- Memo To: From: CC: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor and City Council Matt Simoneau, Building Official 4/12~2OO4 2146 Cedar Lane On March 24, 2004 an order was issued to remove the accessory structure located at 2146 Cedar Lane. The structure is in violation of both the State Building Code and the City of Mound Zoning ordinance for the following reasons; 1. The structure does not meet the 20 foot front yard setback for the R-2 zoning district. 2. The structure does not meet the structural requirements (i.e. snow load requirements) of the State Building Code. Pursuant to City Code Section 350.505 any person aggrieved by any procedure or decision of the Community Development Director may appeal to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. The attached letter is a request from the owner Annick Pratbemon to consider the structure a pergola and allow it to remain in its current location. -1918- Annick Pratbernon 2146 Cedar Lane Mound MN 55364 952 472 1706 March 29th 2004 To the Mound city Council Dear ladies and gentlemen. I am a new resident of the city of Mound. I moved in Mound April 2003 at 2146 Cedar lane. This house does not have a garage and during the summer I had a carport erected in front of my house. Before doing so, I went to city hall and inquired about building permit. I was told that there was no such permit. But that nothing permanent could be put up. Many neighbors have erected some tubular structures that are used to hold tarps to cover cars, boats or whatever. I personally do not care for the look of these so I had a non permanent wood structure put up on which I intend to grow ivy in order to create a pergola under which I will be able to store my car as well as my garbage can and recycling bins. Last week, the owner of the rental duplex next to my house called the city complaining about my carport. On March 24th I received a letter from the city inspection office giving me until April 9% to take my carport down. I would like to appeal this ruling as I fail to see how my carport is any worse looking ("making the neighborhood look like a slum" as this neighbor said) than the other tarp covers that are around. This carport has been up since July 2003 no one ever complained about it until last week. None of the neighbors living around me said anything negative about it. I thank you very much for taking my request into account in letting me keep this pergola. Best regards. -1919- Mound City Code Subd. 3. Residential District Fences. 350.47/5, Subd. 3. Front yard fences may be solid or open and shall not exceed four (4) feet in height. ~ Rear and side yard fences located behind the front yard setback line may be solid or open .and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, Fences shall be required around ~wimming pools in conform~ce with Subsection 350.645, SuM. 3. Sub& 4.' A, Business and Industrial District Fences. Fences in Industrial Districts shall not exceed six (6) feet in. height. Fences in Business Districts shall be by Conditional Use Permit and shall not exoeed six (6)f~ot in height. Subd. 5. Shoreland District Lakeshore Setback Fences. Fences to. be located within any portion of the fi.fly (50) foot principal structure lakeshore setbaok shall not exceed., a maximum of three (3) feet in height and shall maintain a see-through visibih'ty level equal to that of a chain-liak type fence. MI fence maleri.als must be trea~.d so as to blend with. the natural surroundings of the setbaok area. Subsection 350.500 - ADMINISTRATION ~i~350.505 Admlni~rati0n of Zoning. Code. The Director of Community Development l~ shall be responsible for the ..adminis~afion and enforcement of this code, and ..the implemo~t~'On and enforcement of' the Comprehensive Plan. The' director of Comm~ty DeveloPiaom'shall create and maintain saoh systems"o~-ree°rds and files and establish such administxafive prOCedures as are necessa~ to. pvomom the efficient administration and enfomcm0r~t ~f. as c~e and .tl~ ~Comprehensive Plan. The Director of Co~:ty,. admi~fi"~:ieunfor~ ~""cod~,, ..:~.y .~.~n'.~gfieved.b¥ ~Y.proe~t.~.~ .o[...demsion of the addition t°".~'~goag~ i~gl ~i,ree~r. of. ~m~ I~. ~elopmom or i.ndi~iduals acti,g on u~at perSOmS d~on sl~l have u~e following. ~ezponsibitl~s: (O .RD, 08-2001, Subd. I. Issue occupancy, Building and o,fl3, er pomaits, and make and rn~.':~ t~., reOO~Is., thereof. ' Sub& 2. Condu°t inspections of buildings md. use of land to determine eomp~i, ame wi, ,th. ~e ~s. of flai~ Or&nance. 37 9/23/01 - 1924- 350.500, Subd. Mound City Code Subd. 3. Maintain permanent and eurrent ~ee0rds of this Ordinance, including but not limitod to: all maps, amendments, and special uses, variances, appeals and · applications therefore. Subfl. 4. Receive, file, and forward all applications' for .appeals, variances, uses or other, matters to the designated official bodies, Subfl, 5. Institute in the name of the City, any appropriate aetiom or, proceedings against a violator as provided for. Subd. 6. Serve as an ex-officio non-voting member of the Planning Commission. 350.5..10 A . eats and the Board of 3, 'ustment and A eats. Subd. 1. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments shall be the City Council. The Planning Commission shall hear and advise the City Council of its findings and determinations. ard of Adi'~stment and Appeals shail act upon: all questions as Subd. 2. The Bo 'J . . . inte retafiOn of they may arise in the administration of'this Ordinance, ~neludmg the rp zorting maps, and it: shall hear and deoide appeals from and roy. jew any order, · with .... ,~ --,. ~-,~al may be. taken by any person, firm or corporation requirement, d~ision, or d~termination made by an administrati'~e"Offi¢ial"eharged enfoming ..me . .; - _~--~,~, hnarel r bureau of a town, mun p .' fy, aggrieved or by any omeer, oopamn~,., ..... o . eomnty or state. · ... Subd..3.,.. The conditions for the issuance of a variance are as indicated in '¥Subsex3~ton 350,530°f this Ordinance. No use vaxianees (a use different f~-om that permi"~texi in the di, stde0.shalt be issued, by the Board of Adjustmem and Appeals~.~' ' ' n s of the Board of Adjuslment an.d Appeals'shal! be held~.~thin. ' Subd, 4. Henri g .... . ' .. "..: ' in tts afl6 t~fl:mies sueh time and upon suehmofice to interested pomes :as. is provided P for the ~ansaefion of its'bUSiness:`: 'The'B°ard;·shall' mithin.a.xeasonable tin~.~, make i~s. a.eopy"of m,h'ordor-upon ah, :ap .l~llmt- o~der deei .ding .the. realtor and:shal"lr s~..e ' ' p*fi~onor by mall. ~Y .paz~y'~, appear at ~,hearing ,in person or:by ag~ttt or Subd. 5, The Board of Adjustment and: Appeal. s may reverse or affi:m~, wholly or pa~ty or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination as.irt i, ts opinion ought to be made in .the premises and to that end shall have al:l the powers of ahe officer ~om whom. the appeal was taken .and may issue or direct, the issuance of a permit. The reasons for the Board's decision, shall be stated, 9/23/01 38 - 1925- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 MEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission and Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Community Development-Director Date: June 15, 2004 Re: Proposed Ordinance To Regulate Dock Lot Parcels - Supplemental Information Summary. At its June 7, 2007 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposed draft of an ordinance to regulate dock lots which are physically separated and would be combined with a nearby residential property. Based on its review, the Planning Commission requested additional information including, but limited to, the following information: · Copies of similar ordinances Details regarding the subdivision process at Hennepin County to ensure that a dock lot parcel could not be split off from the primary lot without City approval and/or prior knowledge. Additional provisions to the ordinance to regulate exterior storage, hardcover, and improvements which could and/or could not be done on the dock parcel. Dock Lot Ordinances. The following cities were contacted to find out if they have regulations regarding dock lots: Chaska - No ordinance. Minnetonka - No ordinance. Orono - The only existing dock lots are across the street from the principal lot. New ones are not allowed. They don't allow docks on outlots. White Bear Lake - They have a conservation district that determines dock requirements. Their minimum lot size requirement wouldn't allow a lot for just docks. No ordinance that specifically addresses the issue. Maple Grove - The shoreland ordinance establishes their requirements. A copy of the dock lot provisions were provided via fax and have been included as an attachment. - 1926- Wright County - Doesn't have jurisdiction within the city limits. Planning Director was not available Staff didn't think the County ordinance specifically addressed dock lots. Hennepin County Subdivision Review Process. According to Jim Holen of Hennepin County Taxpayer Services, the County's approval of land divisions or property transfes follows the procedures outlined in M.S.S. 272.162 (copy attached .) So as to ensure that no subdivision and/or combination of property occurs without local approval, it is suggested that the City adopt a resolution pursuant to M.S.S. 262.162, Subd. 3. According to Mr. Holen, in most cases (if not all), Hennepin County informally sends out a proposed division to the City for review / approval prior to processing. However, adoption of the resolution makes the process mandatory. Members of the Planning Commission are advised that this provision was used in the City of Wayzata for both land divisions and lot combinations. Additional Provisions - Draft Ordinance. Staff has included a number of provisions to the draft ordinance which have been included in highlighted/strikeout form for easy review. The document is under review by the City Planner and City Attorney and therefore may be subject to change. Staff will provide further comment at the meeting(s). · Page 2 - 1927- DISCUSSION DRAFT NO. 2 CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. -200__ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 330 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE (SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE) TO INCLUDE PROVISIONS TO ALLOW THE ....... CREATION-OF-DOCK PARCELS FOR-P1;IRPOSE OF P~',OViDiNG LAKE ACCESS FOR NEARBY PROPERTIES The City of Mound does ordain: Subsection 330:05 (Definitions) of the Mound City Code is hereby amended and renumbered to add the following definitions: Dock Parcel. A parcel or tract of land located on the shore of a lake which is combined with a nearby but non-contiguous residential parcel. Dock Parcel Subdivision. The process of: (i) creating the Dock Parcel, if necessary, by division of a larger parcel; and (ii) combining the Dock Parcel with a non-contiguous residential parcel. Residential Parcel. The non-contiguous nearby residential parcel with which the Dock Parcel is combined. Subsection 330:10 (Procedural Requirements) is hereby amended to add a new Subsection D as follows: Do Dock Parcels Subdivision Dock Parcel Subdivision will be processed as a Subdivision Exemption under 330.10 C of this Code, subject to the following additional provisions: The approval of a Dock Parcel Subdivision will include an approved site plan showing the nature and location of all structures and improvements that may be constructed on the Dock Parcel. No structure or improvement other than those shown on the approved site plan may be constructed on the Dock Parcel unless the site plan is amended. 2. The d=Dock Pparcel shall be located within (200)- Residential Parcel. feet of the 3. The Dock Parcel must be separated from the Residential Parcel by a public street. JBD-248623v2 MU220-5 - 1928- , ,I,, ,J ,,il =. ,l, The approval of the Dock Parcel Subdivision will not be given until the City is assured that the Dock Parcel cannot be separated from the Residential Parcel and sold separately without the consent of the City. The form and documentation to ensure satisfaction of this provision, which may-shall include a development agreement~and -shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. : The approval of the Dock Lot Subdivision will be automatically cancelled and rescinded if the applicant has not furnished the City with evidence that the Dock Parcel and the Residential Parcel have been tax combined within 45 days following approval of the Dock Lot Subdivision. The Dock Parcel will not be subject to any of the restrictions applicable to Lots under the City Zoning Code; but must be of sufficient width to qualify for a Lake Minnetonka Conservation District dock license. 7. The Dock Parcel Subdivision shall not create any new nonconforming conditions. 8. Square footage of the Dock Parcel shall not be included in hardcover, lot area or lot coverage calculations for the Residential Parcel. 9. Dock Parcel Subdivision shall not trigger loss of non-lot of record status for the Residential Parcel. 10. No a/~ccessory structures with the exception of those allowed in City Code Chapter 350:__ :1200.(Shoreland Regulations) shall nm be allowed on the '~"'"~' .... Dock Parcel 11 · No exterior storage shall be allowed on the Dock Parcel with the exception of water-oriented structures as outlined in City Code Chapter 350:1200 (shoreland ordinance)including, but not limited to, boat lifts and docks. Boat vehicles and trailers shall not be allowed to be stored on Dock Lots durinq the non-boatinq season. 12. Hardcover on Dock Parcel shall be no more than ( ) percent. 13. No vehicles can be parked on the Dock Parcel. 14. Dock Parcel shall be used soley by the owners of the Residential Parcel and shall not be used for rental purposes. 15. No alteration of the existinq public road or curb line, if applicable, shall be allowed on the Dock Parcel. JBD-248623v2 MU220-5 - 1929 - 16. Placement of any dock shall be subject to the provisions of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Passed by the City Council this day of Pubiished in The Laker the day of Effective on ,200_. 200 . AAA , /UU_. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel JBD-248~23v2 MU220-5 .- - 1930- , I& Page 1 of 2 ==272. 162 272.162 Restrictions on transfers of specific parts. Subdivision 1. Conditions restricting transfer. When a deed or other instrument conveying a parcel of land is presented to the county auditor for transfer or division under sections 272.12, 272.16, and 272.161, the auditor shall not transfer or divide the land or its net tax capacity in the official records and shall not certify the instrument as provided in section 272.12, if: (a) The land conveyed is less than a whole parcel of l~nd as charged in the tax lists; (b) The part conveyed appears within the area of application of municipal subdivision regulations adopted and filed under section 462.36, subdivision 1; and (c) The part conveyed is part of or constitutes a subdivision as defined in section 462.352, subdivision 12. Subd. 2. Conditions allowing transfer. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 1, the county auditor may transfer or divide the land and its net tax capacity and may certify the instrument if the instrument contains a certification by the clerk of the municipality: (a) that the municipality's subdivision regulations do not apply; (b) that the subdivision has been approved by the governing body of the municipality; or (c) that the restrictions on the division of taxes and filing and recording have been waived by resolution of the governing body of the municipality in the particular case because compliance would create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply would not interfere with the purpose of the regulations. If any of the conditions for certification by the municipality as provided in this subdivision exist and the municipality does not certify that they exist within 24 hours after the instrument of conveyance has been presented to the clerk of the municipality, the provisions of subdivision 1 do not apply. If an unexecuted instrument is presented to the municipality and any of the conditions for certification by the municipality as provided in this subdivision exist, the unexecuted instrument must be certified by the clerk of the municipality. Subd. 3. Applicability of restrictions. This section does not apply to the exceptions set forth in section 272.12. This section applies only to land within municipalities which choose to be governed by its provisions. A municipality may choose to have this section apply to the property within its boundaries by filing a certified copy of a resolution of its http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/getsl- 1 93.11i 6/16/2004 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 7, 2004 OLD I NEW BUSINESS Review of proposed amendment to Subdivision Ordinance to regulate physically separated dock lots Smith outlined the specific requirements being considered for the ordinance. Osmek explained the Council's concerns as: 1) Assuring that the "dock lot" couldn't be split off from the parent parcel and sold or combined and developed; and, 2) Providing for those who do not have access to the lake. Mueller felt that the ordinance was not tight enough to prevent finagling by individuals. Hasse said that these lots, by definition, were too small to build on. Glister questioned proximity to the primary lot. Smith indicated the intent was that it be a relatively close parcel. Mueller wants examples from other community codes. Address the parcel use for boat or fish house storage, adding gravel, parking areas, curb modifications, and hardcover. Also, address our proviso to keep someone from selling off the dock lot by itself without city knowledge. Defining "nearby" - Take a close look at what is being offered by the person that brought this forward. How does it benefit Mound besides tax values. MOTION by Raines, second by Glister, to recommend tabling the application for further information. MOTION carried unanimously. _-. - 1932- Page 2 of 2 governing body making that choice with the auditor and recorder of the county in which it is located. HIST: 1982 c 564 s 1; 1983 c 239 s 1,2; 1986 c 444; 1988 c 719 art 5 s 84; 1989 c 329 art 13 s 20 http://www.revisor.leg.sta_t~.mn.us/cgi-bin/getsl- 1 93.371 6/16/2004 FROM :CITY OF MAPLE GROVE C~,ED 612 494 642S 08:04 MAFLE GROVE CODE. #920 e. O2/OJ · .The'sewe~sd lot i'~ea ~,e~sions in sub'sectio~s (~X1) ,'"and"(2) of th~ section' car~ onl~ be used if publiclr Owned' sewer system service is ,'available to the l:U;operty, ' ' . .' , '..'".'.: " " .... ".' " "':" ":' :" '/"" ': '". " " ·: . .. (3) Subdi. 'vi~zons of duplexes, triplexes, ,n,~ quads ~n .natural. environment'lakes must. also' ' · :; ::" :, .: .: .' . . 'ii: ."-.: ':~a~.b,,"~,,, ~u~ ~.ba,k a~ l,~, 200 :f~t ~o= ~he ~ ~h-~,,~" ' ' .":..'.'.".'.. "'.'.. '". .'.'' · ".'. levd; ..... :...[. '." -"' . · .. ' ....' . '.'. ' .. ...... ' :'" i" ". .... ' '."' ......:. b:.: Each buildin~ must.'~ c°.nn'~'cted to.~ublic:siwer'and war,ri"'. ~i .. '. '.. '...... '¥." .:' . .." .'. .c. ':' Wa~;,~ do~ r=~iue; ro~"'aci; ~ot =~ t,e'~i~,,~..~a i,,'o~ ~O~oa az,ct :'..' .,... :..::... ~:.... . . serve all.'dwe .ll~ngunit~.in the building;'and ' ,: '.'. . . '.. ,. '. '..... :,' · .;.'.' . .... '...'~ ... ...... -.- ' ' ' ceveloplnenr, s. . '. i'. *- ' '.'- · .' .:': .. -" .... ... ':.' .. ... ..... . . · (4) "Lots intended'as controlled accesses to ptiblic war'ers, or ~s recreation area~ for Use. bY.' :.O~,.,ers or. ~o~panan ~ot,'~t~,-: ~bdivl, ion~ sha!l.' requi~e ~ ~onditi.onal · . axm.must meet or exceed the foil.owing standarch: .... ' " "...,. :.": .': ....' .' "'. ' '. il f i":.'... :'":. ..... ..:..,...:....... ,.,..:.. ........ .. · :.,:.. :.............. .. '. :".: ..' pla~,' ,~ pr~ s~i,u Rt. t0rm' t~e~'~ an '~ ~aCmu~,. ~o:.~e ~ea ~'~ ~h~.' ':.' '. ~ '- :'... ", ' .." '.' ~aown.' e~, ~,~ me p~¥o~ed a~op',.,,. '..".': ' .'..'.':'~.."::: ¥".. '.. ;' ..' ...:...' ... · '....:.. .,!:. '. .' .:..!'.... . [.. . 1... Such plan shall set forth the location. ,~fl Size .of the.p~oposed docld~, . '. · ' ...... ' .... latm~hing and/or, mooring fa to be us~ the land. own.ers vi;it the' ' ' ':' ': ": proposed devel0pm~nt'. : "~ ' ' ... .':. '.... . c0nti~'uous thereto when.the usage 0fsuch £aci!ities is to be.by the owner of '..' .... .. "". . land which land has been de~.eloped'6r platted'subsequent'to July 7, 1976, ....... . ·: '..' -.. '.' . '.. . without the faciliti~s.hav/ugheen approved by ~he'c/ty c~imciL .. '..... ' ... · .. city, .approve only such facilities whic~ Cen,tr~li-.~ 'the do~in~, iaunchin~...' ..... "and/or moorin~ 'or watercraft owned or .used. by .landowners within the <.. , . · . :.... ['. ..' .. . · .. " ..... : development. . ..... .. .' ::' '""":' ' ' ~. rh~ '~ity ,o~c~ ~i'" "' ' '" ' ' ' : "~" .....' · ' .'. he~o~e '~,,'~ a~,~;ai.' or ~,,y'such' .... id thew ted'craft dens'ity of the b ak n,'thatI " -. . , "':..coils er a 11~ ~'eaallds ~11~1 e'a ndi :. ... ..... · approval of such .facilities does not disproportionately increase average. .- ... the .... .... .. : . .. ~ . watercratt use densit~y formal'on ~s land' Properties .in.the :area.. '. ........ .': " '..'...."-'.:' '.'.ii .""...., ".'.:' ", ' · '""'" CD$6;134 ' "' ' · ' "" ' - · .' " " '[..i .' ' . . . ' : ,.. '. .' . ' - . · . . . -.. ... - 1934- ~ROM :C I TY OF MAPLE GROVE CS, EED ~ '-: ." : o~ ~d not subjea t0 a ~c W~ay qr ~ ~ement adiac~nt t0 ~- :'"" · .' "':. "?' · . ,... "" :" ' ' ' ':' ' '""' ~ess' dth~ ^'.' "'" '"''""' '"' """ :""--. ": '...'" ''' .: .....~. ... ": iooZ-~O~ "" ' ' '.: ~o~ i' :.:...,"'.. '."'. ,." · ':'"" . .:. -': . ."... 201--300" -- ..' .. :"i:" ..' .:.' ":'"..'" /'.. -"" i§" '.'" ' "'' "' ...: . '" ::'(....(.: ".... '....: :'.. '.( .... ' .::" '~r~a~ ,.~-"~o0 .. ', '.."..' ": i:.": .: ':' ': '".'..' "' ,' '.. '.. '.' '...',...'"'5.'i:/.-.',... :."' j/.!.: ~'." '"-"' "; .... ;;.:'i .'. '.' "".'.:. ~ .., . . . .. , , ,. . . , .. ... , . · .... ...~ ; . ' .., · : ..... ., .'~ ....;..,, .:. :''( .... '-', ,.... · i' :.: /. '" ": .... ' 'd."- Such lots taus{ be jointly owned by all purchaSers 6flo{s in ~he'subdivi~ion'~ by', ':-'." '.'; "-.. "". ": ':' :.."""' "...:-'. "; ': ..': '.. . .'i~ll pu~h_~seiz of ~o-rriparian lots in the subdi.vision who are p~'ovided riparian . :.. .- .... · ,'. ·b_~/".... '. '. '. · .-., ~,~. ,; ~,,a,.~.. ~11 ~,CCeBS lOtS. 'i.:';;' :'" . .:.'"" .: "" "'" " .... ' ""; ..... "' ':' ' *" ' ';"' a:,,So',,s,,, i. he ~ ;.-.. ;.. .... ~,; ,.......:..........;.:....:: ...: .. ., :...... .. '.' ...'.e. ' Cover~au...ts or other.'equ~ly ~ffect~.'ve legal instriun, ent' must be d~velop~d'that. /:'.";.' :.:; :" ' ' ' '... :" .. '.' specify Which'lot owners' hace autholity {o u~e the access lo~ and. what'acti~i~ie~: .. ...'..;" ' !i.:. !:'..': .... ."."'"..':"' .... '-'.....'..': .... · ." i.' . .' :' ):" .' '. ........ " "~ ... ".; ':'..> "' "..":"'"?'"".": ->'"' "":'. .... ': . '' - ' .... ";'' ..... . .. '... ' .,' ..:. 1. i" Tha a~i~s m~i~ude,,.at,r=.~ ~-~,'10-'~..g; s~ora~,, bea~-h~,..'. '. :'. :." "" :. ...... . "..'.. .... mooring, or.. d~ldn$. They must also include other outdoo~ recreational · ....... :. ·~ ..7 "" . " : .... .activities that do not.' .significantly conflict With' general public use of'the: .... .'.. .... . ....... .. publi.c water or the enjoyment of. normal, property ~ights by. adjacent .... .' ': . property 'uwuers,' Examples'of the'nonsi~i~ant conflie~ activitieS' include ' ".' . . m swimlmin[, sunbathing, or.piclg~king... .. ' . i' ' " ' · ... 'i.:'.. · ' -2. ' 'The covenants. ·must limit the t~cai nUmber';fvehid~s~loW~d to be parked '.' ' ;"' · .and the total number of watercraft allowed to be. continuously moored, ;... ' " .;. ...' ; - . . . . .. .: . . · .- ".docked,.or stored over water, and must require centralization of ali common .. '.. .: ': '.'/.'. ' ' :' 'facil{ties and activ~tie~ in the most sultabl~ locations on th~- lot to minimize.· '....' .:.. · .' .. " '.... topol~raPhic a~d. vegetation alterations, They m.ust/dSo require' all'parking '.... .' .. . · areas, .storage buildings, and other facilities t~ be screened ~ry vegetation or :" '" :. : topography as much as practical from view from, the public water, ass,,m.' ins ' .' · . ":' - .... · .summer, leaf-on'conditions.' ..... _: . '.. · ' -' ..' · . " .: .: · ,~,~"~,~,,'~-~'i:~.,,~;;;'~"" :" ' '- '"!' '.' ' ' ' ' ' "' ' " more than'one s0tback applies to a site, .structures mid facilities must' ' · ~-' :" ..... .'.'be l~cat~d:tJo~meet all set, backs. Where stnict~res exist on the adjoini~g'lgtl on both sides Of.a '" .'.,.~: . , .'proposed building'site, structure setbacks may be altered'without a variance to ~onform to the ;" .../ . .. . · .. .: .. .. :..,; ;" ......... cDa6 .'. ' :' ' " .. :.' '. .. :135 ," ' '. ' - 1935- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT May 2004 41.67% May 2004 YTD BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND Council 72,850 13,773 28,154 Promotions 3;750 0 3,750 City Manager/Clerk 276,900 21,068 110,609 Elections 13,460 0 1,098 Finance 234,070 16,250 84,594 Assessing 79,300 11 16 Legal 135,580 14,615 42,295 City Hall Building & Srvcs 124,270 13,203 73,773 Computer 29,900 7,477 10,935 Police 1,301,340 93,288 527,907 Emergency Prepardeness 7,130 (838) 1,843 Planning/Inspections 367,880 26,459 144,112 Streets 1,036,130 68,579 360,654 Parks 498,220 58,704 225,666 Cemetery 9,610 0 603 Transfers 256,690 31,944 159,720. Cable TV 50,000 10,576 10,576 Contingencies 60,440 1,165 4,710 VARIANCE 44,696 0 166,291 12,362 149,476 79.284 93.285 50 497 18.965 773 433 5 287 223 768 675 476 272 554 9 007 96 970 39,424 55.730 PERCENT EXPENDED 38.65% 1 OO.OO% 39.95% 8.16% 36.14% 0.02% 31.2O% 59.37% 36.57% 40.57% 25.85% 39.17% 34.81% 45.29% 6.27% 62.22% 21.1 5% 7.79% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 4.557.520 376.274 1.791.015 2.766.505 39.30% Area Fire Service Fund 638,140 Dock Fund 143,150 Capital Projects 0 TIF 1-2 0 Water Fund 687,240 Sewer Fund 1,201,940 Liquor Fund 559,800 Recycling Fund 167,680 Storm Water Utility 96,870 80,234 204,235 433,905 32.00% 8,477 35,350 107,800 24.69% 167,967 391,493 (391,493) 2,958 371,388 (371,388) 46,790 238,379 448,861 34.69% 65,302 417,800 784,140 34.76% 31,294 209,871 349,929 37.49% 27,864 79,302 88,378 47.29% 1,418 30,551 66,319 31.54% Exp-02 06115~20O4 Gino _. - 1936- GENERAL FUND CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT May 2004 May 2004 YTD BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE Taxes 2,222,510 0 0 Business Licenses 9,150 180 5,710 Non-Business Licenses/Permits 273,500 21,339 55,811 Intergovernmental 368,200 507 13,200 Charges for Services 257,050 12,074 32,053 Court Fines 100,000 12,433 37,410 Franchise Fees 352,000 7,498 150,817 Street Lighting Fee 75,000 9,299 44,218 Charges to Other Dpts 14,000 (184) 2,464 Other Revenue 38,600 5,607 6,460 TOTAL REVENUE FIRE FUND DOCKFUND MOUND HRA WATERFUND SEWERFUND LIQUOR FUND RECYCLING FUND STORM WATER UTILITY 3.710.010 68,753 348,143 674,140 37,084 324,981 115,900 2,144 112,269 0 0 178 700,000 47,355 221,951 1,202,000 94,197 523,031 2,400,000 149,845 739,759 137,400 17,694 48,736 120,500 10,771 52,581 41.67% PERCENT VARIANCE RECEDED (2,222,510) 0.00% (3,440) 62.40% (217,689) 20.41% (355,000) 3.59% (224,997) 12.47% (62,590) 37.41% (201,183) 42.85% (30,782) (11,536) 17.60% (32.1401 16.74% (3.361.8671 9.38% (349,159) 48.21% (3,631) 96.87% 178 ERR (478,049) 31.71 % (678,969) 43.51% (1,660,241) 30.82% (88,664) 35.47% (67,919) 43.64% 06/15/2004 rev2004 Gino - 937- General Fund $707,014 CDBG 1,114 Area Fire Protection Services 218,693 Dock 229,990 G.O. Bonds 2001 - C 96,522 Commerce Place TIF (292,751) G.O. Bonds 2003 - C TIF 1-2 (33,135) G.O. Bonds 2001 - A 7,122 G.O. Bonds 2003 - A 178,474 HRA Lease Rev Bonds (235,381) Capital Improvement 2,898,529 MSA 19,280 Sealcoat 38,809 CDB 4,264 Downtown TIF 1-2 269,511 HRA Public Safety Bldg 3,882 Water 1,503,331 Sewer 1,191,128 Liquor Store (354,440) Recycling 270 Storm Water 298,510 Fire Relief (48,208) HRA 0 Note: The above schedule shows the combined cash and investment balances by fund for the months indicated as recorded in the General Ledger. The balances do not reflect receivable, payables, authorized transfers, encumbered funds, or dedicated/reserved resources, etc. Only some accrued transactions are reflected. Investment income will be distributed to the funds at the end of the year and is not included. A long and complete process is followed to record all transactions, before we close the books, at the end of the year. In addition, the audit from the independent auditor is performed and an official Comprehensive Report will be presented to the City Council and made available to interested parties. In no way this schedule is intended to represent balances of funds available for spending. 06/15~2004 CashReportCouncil Gino _. -1938- I& Page 1 of 4 Kandis Hanson From: "Leah Weycker" <weyckerl@westonka.k12.mn.us> To: "Leah Weycker" <weyckerl@westonka.k12.rnn.us> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 2:46 PM Subject: WHCC 6~23~04 ** Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative Wednesday, June 23, 2004 ** 12:00-1:30 PM Gillespie Center 2590 Commerce Blvd. Mound Any comments or questions, contact Leah Weycker, Collaborative Coordinator, at 952-491-8058 or 1. Lunch 12:00 Feel free to bring your own bag lunch or join us for a light "free will donation" lunch, suggested value $6.00. 2. Introductions 3. Additions or Changes to the Agenda / Minutes 4. Announcements 5. Discussion of WHCC and Alliance priorities. The large group will review WHCC and Alliance trends, concerns and gaps in service. We hope the information will direct our advisory and task force groups in identifying trends that need more research and action. "If you do not know where you are going, every road will get you nowhere." - Henry Kissinger ** Advisory Group Updates Health - Depression and Suicide Awareness Task Force Sandy Olstad, Mary Goode, Jeanette Metz, Mark Brekke We are still working on a plan for Ridgeview Hospital's $7,500 to be used for services for uninsured or under insured people. We will be working with WeCAN to set up a method for allocating this service. Youth Activities - Skate Park Task Force Sandy Rauschendorfer-temp chair, Jean Ann Thayer, Kathy Jones, Kim - 1939- 6/16/2004 Page 2 of 4 Erickson Heiar The skate park construction has been delayed due to rain and lack of volunteers. Please... we need help finding people with cement laying skills. A small portion is needed to be finished before we can open the park. NYPUM, the summer mini bike program with the YMCA, has started with 5 students going on Monday afternoons and 7 advanced students going on Wednesdays. Leah is taking the students to Monticello for the motorcycle group and is out of the office most of Monday and Wednesday. Adult helpers are welcome to come to the event on Mondays since we have extra van seats. Kim will be sending over the final paperwork for the school year drop-in center. We will plan to do a smaller drop-in again next year. Parent Education Sandy Wing, Sandy Olstad, Bill Erickson, Amy Taggart The parent education group is working on a parent newsletter. Send any ideas or topics our way. Amy has been presenting parent information at community events. If you know of any events that draw a number of parents, please let Amy Taggart know. Community Margaret Holste, Carol Olson, Ginny Lozano, Jeanette Metz, Dena Kuenzel The community group reviewed the housing and home improvement fair. The community group will meet again in the fall. Executive / Finance Kim Heiar, Carol Olson, Margaret Holste, Sandy Wing, Sandy Raushendorfer, Mary Hughes The Executive group did not meet this month. Alliance for Families and Children in Hennepin County The Alliance is renewing several grants that we receive. We are working on outcome reports for Primary Project, 8-9 grade Excel Program, 10/12 grade Learning Lab, Attendance Initiatives, Parent Advocate, and Westonka.org. ** Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative Minutes - May 26, 2004 ** Present: Kim Erickson-Heiar, Carol Olson, Sandy Olstad, Amy Taggart, Johanna Eckman, Ginny Lozano, Dena Kuenzel, Mary Hughes, Laura Lundberg, Kathy Jones, Jennifer Wigton, Gloria Lundberg-Jorgenson, Leah Weycker, Margaret Holste, Jim Kurtz, Bill Erickson, Jeanette Metz, John Rogers Guests: Dave Santella, Mound Psychological, and Delwayne Hahn, Interim Pastor at St. John's 1. Everyone introduced themselves, (and some were asked by the recorder to spell their names.) - 1940..-. 6/16/2004 Page 3 of 4 2. Additions or Changes to the Agenda/Minutes: It was determined that Mary Hughes had made the motion to approve the budget at the March meeting. Margaret Holste's name should be added and Sandy Olstad should be deleted from the list of those attending last month's meeting. Also, Leah shared information about the dollars from Ridgeview Hospital designated for health care for the under or uninsured rather than Sandy Olstad. Kathy made the motion to approve the minutes with these changes. Mary Hughes seconded. Passed unanimously. 2. Announcements: * Cement for the skate park has been delivered by Cemstone. Leah took pictures which showed their truck with their logo and sent them to the President of the company. He has agreed to donate some of the last cement. We also received $5,000 more from the Tom Stokes group so we are back on track. Kids need to be told to wait to use it until it is completed as it is dangerous currently. Police have been monitoring. If there are problems, call Leah. Kids are really excited about the park. * Amy represented us at Minnetrista Days on Saturday. It was held indoors and was a successful event. * Sandy Olstad shared information from Arlene Mclntyre about the Blood Drive, June 8 at Mount Olive from 12 pm to 7 pm. There were promotional pieces about donating blood as well as "Hooked on giving blood" which encourages you to bring a friend. If you do, you'll get a t shirt. · Appointments are preferred. * Kathy had written the letter to the Editor in the Laker on April 24, 2004 and there were just a few responses. Some parents felt accused but were assured that it didn't apply to everyone on spring break. Pastor John has been concerned about what he'd heard about use over spring break including parents and kids who expressed much concern about the use and the pressure to use both groups experienced. So, he wrote a letter in his church newsletter, something he does rarely. Two to four people per day have thanked him for doing so and for taking the stand he did. One person sent an anonymous letter who was very upset with his letter. Jeanette suggested that we be proactive before next spring break giving suggestions about how to stay safe on trips as well as with drinking and drugs (many are available over the counter in Mexico). There is concern that parents aren't doing their job with setting limits and seem to be abdicating their responsibility, especially by the 10th grade year. This adult behavior is really concerning. A discussion ensued about how to deal with these issues. A plan to communicate with them effectively seems key. * Dena shared flyers about the Alzheimer's Walk and Scare Crows in the Park ($5.00 fee) scheduled for September 25, 2004. There will also be a gift and craft sale that day. They are seeking corporate sponsors. 4. Community Statement: Amy has been doing research about what other groups have done to deal with the issue of youth chemical use. Sharon MacDonald shared a history of the Hopkins Reduce the Use group as well as some of the activities they offered. There is a web site to get - '1941 - 6/16/2004 Page 4 of 4 more information. Parent Talk Parties are one of the ways they communicated with parents. We need to empower parents so they feel they can take a stand with their kids without them or their kids feeling stigmatized. Next step: How can we get the community behind us and the statement we developed. Many people may have thought it was just "common sense". We need to figure out our target audience and then figure out how to get the message to them. It seems important that the message come from a variety of groups in the community, e.g., employers, service groups, churches, and not just the school. Amy shared a sign up sheet for a task force to focus on this. Jim Kurtz said the police are still getting negative response from some parents when there are juvenile drinking issues. He plans to send parents a letter with resources when a juvenile is cited. Kathy as well as the WHCC offered to collaborate with him on this. Kathy feels we need to arm parents with more and more support. 5. Countywide priorities: The five priorities identified by the County and the Alliance include: Children thrive in early childhood and are ready for school Children succeed in school All youth exhibit positive social behavior Physically and mentally healthy children and adults Safe and Stable Individuals, Families, and Community The Alliance did some planning around the five county wide priorities recently. We need to look at our efforts so we are in alignment with them, especially so that we are prepared when moneys become available. Those in attendance were divided into groups to address each area. Since groups were not able to complete the task in the time allowed, this project will be continued at the meeting in June. Jeanette suggested that we reformat the written materials and align our actions with the needs to determine gaps or ways we want to expand our efforts. This would help us develop plans that we could later use for grant writing. Leah will do this and e-mail each section to the groups who worked on them today in anticipation of continuing the work at the next WHCC meeting. Amy moved, seconded by Carol, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion passed unanimously. Margaret Holste, Recorder - 1 942- 6/16/2004 m Jun 18 2884 17:34:12 Uia Fax -> 95Z4?ZOGZB Administrator Page Bal Of 081 -FridayFax- League Board holds special meeting to discuss LGA issue In a special meeting today, the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors unanimously adopted a position calling on the Governor and legislative leaders to convene a special session to address a need for a technical fix to the LGA distribution formula. A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities June 10, 2004 Page 1 LGA distribution significantly for Minneapolis and St. Paul and to a lesser extent other cities primarily in greater Minnesota. Other cities, primarily in the metro area, would experience LGA increases. The League will post estimates of the impacts on our web site when they are made available. In the 2003 special session tax bill that contained the most recent LGA reforms, the legislature inadvertently failed to delete a paragraph dealing with the LGA grandfather. In administering the formula last summer, the Department of Revenue accepted letters from House Tax Chair Ron Abrams (R-Minnetonka) and Senate Tax Chair Larry Pogemiller (DFL- Minneapolis) requesting that the 2004 distribution follow legislative intent with an apparent understanding that the 2004 legislature would fix the technical problem. During the 2004 legislative session, both the House and Senate tax bills contained the fix and in committee discussions of the provision, no one testified in opposition to the elimination of the paragraph. In addition, the House and Senate written summaries of the provision indicated that the deletion of the paragraph was an inadvertent omission from the 2003 tax bill. Despite the non-controversial nature of the provision, the House and Senate never negotiated a conference committee compromise and therefore, the technical fix did not become law. Administration officials as recently as yesterday indicated to us that they had not yet concluded how to interpret the law. In today's St. Paul Pioneer Press, however, the governor indicated that he would direct the Department of Revenue to interpret the law as drafted, including the grandfather paragraph. It is unclear whether this would impact the distribution in both 2004 and 2005 or just in 2005. Later today, we anticipate receiving official estimates from the Department of Revenue on the impact of this change. Unofficial estimates indicate that the change could redistribute approximately 8 to 10 percent of the LGA appropriation. During the League Board's deliberations today, members discussed the importance of following legislative intent as outlined in last summer's letters from the House and Senate tax chairs. Members also discussed the need for stability and predictability in the LGA formula. Given that the legislature did not act to correct the problem during the 2004 session and given the governor's statements in the paper today, it appears that a special session is necessary to have the 2005 LGA distribution follow legislative intent. Interpretation of the effect of including the paragraph is not entirely clear. However, under either of the two interpretations that the League has heard discussed, including the grandfather paragraph in the formula would reduce the The League will be communicating this position to the governor and legislators this week. For more information on city leg;ialalive iasuea, conlacl any m~mb~ of the LeaB, ue of Minneaola C/lies Inler~overnmantal Relat/ona team. 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 - 1943- ~. h Rol/inaRook He nfk en, .Am-sYel ' Rp. nk.e La, att 12pk Bo#le Paok ean Mike's Hard Lemonade 12pk o#le - 1944- Leinie r, raft lI pk Bo#le Fosters Lager 12 pk ~offles ~.9.99 ,I, ,ii ,Bi & 4 ~ PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES June 10, 2004 Present: Commissioners Derrick Hentz, John Be,se, Ron Motyka, Nor~nan Domholt, Mike Mason, City Council Representative Bob Brown, Park Superintendent Jim Fackler, Commissioner Susan Taylor arrived late. Absent or Excused: Secretary Den,ce Widmer Citizens Present: Vicki Besler 4609 Tuxedo Bird Cathy Bailey (No Address Given) Mary Ellen Storlien 1595 Dove Lane ~,:~!ii!iiiiiii~!i!iiiiii!ii::i:~ ......... Ted Metz 1601 Bluebird Lane Th~ii~i~g~':::::~::::" was called to order at 7:35pm. ':.*.~'~i'hould 6~i~*::~:ted that the main tape used to record this meeting did not function :iiii::i::iiSii:::i: ...... ~:~:,,:.:. prOPerly. HoW~g~.:,the backup tape regarding the Street Vacation Request did function properi~?iii~0.,r, mation on Items 1-4 and 6-12 were taken from Park ~::::::::%iiiiiiiiiii::~:::.. Sup~0tendent Jim:~!~kler's notes and Commissioner Susan Taylor's notes from -': ::::::'l:?{'il}i!~:Approvai of the March 11, 2004 Minutes "::~!i!i}~i~p. yll and May meetings were cancelled due to lack of quorums.) ...... ~TION by Beise to approve the March 11, 2004 Minutes. SECOND by .:?~::'::::~'~::::!::iiii~i}ii}~ii::i?' Motyka. MOTION CARRIED. 2'? .... Agenda Chan~es. .:5" None. However, Bob Brown made comment on the Hanus vacation request. Comments from citizens present. None Discuss: Scherven Park Play Structure Replacement Requested by: Vicki Besler 4609 Tuxedo Bird (952-472-5316) Vicki Besler presented pictures of the play structure at Scherven Park. Discussion followed on how to fund not only play structure replacement at Scherven Park, but at other parks in Mound. MOTION by Brown to ask the City Council to consider bonding $250,000.00 for play structure upgrades at up to five parks in 2005. (It should be noted that these parks last saw installation of equipment 12 to 14 years ago and are in need of replacement.) MOTION SECONDED by affirmation. MOTION CARRIED. Discuss: Request for Street Vacation Applicants: Mike Gardner and Ted Metz 1699 and 1601 Bluebird Lane Mound, MN 55364 Fackler gave a brief background on this request. Applicant Ted Metz was present. Applicant Mike Gardner was not. (It should be noted that the DCAC approved this request and the Planning Commission did not approve this POSAC Minutes, July 10, 2004 - 1945- _. request. Minutes from both meetings were included in this packet.) Discussion followed. Motyka excused himself from the discussion because he was one of the major litigants in the Woodland Point case. Brown and Beise expressed their disapproval of this request. Domholt stated that he could not approve this request unless there was a legal and equal division of the property that would allow for continued public access. Applicant Ted Metz also gave a brief background on this request. Citizen Cathy Bailey (no address given) stated her opposition to this request. MOTION by Brown to deny the request for street vacation. SECOND by Beise. MOTION CARRIED. (It should be noted that Motyka did not vote as he had e~d himself from this discussion.) .... ~iiiiii::?'~it~uss: H~ghland Park Play Structure Color and Design ':~iiii!iiiii" r~iii~ks Commission elected to go with Quotation - Option #2. (Attached) .::~iiii!!!~:. :~%:,. PreS'~,~ion: Mound Blues Fest (Bob Brown presenting) .... ~iiiiiiiii~ ................ There a¢~ii~l details such as the liquor license, fireworks, etC., but it is tentatively .::~:. scheduled '~!~:~10th. If the organizers can't get it together for this year, it will ..... ~!~!iii~ili!!!i..8..,::~iifli?'"'"~pdate: '?'Snowmobile Sub-Committee (John Beise presenting) .... ~iiiiiii!ii iiiiiiiiii~::.' Beise stated that the Task Force has been formed. He is also working on the ii!~ .... "::~!~!.:~!~!~i~::~p. urpose document draft that Taylor requested The Task Force will be scheduling ::::i!~!ili!!? .... '? .... at 5:00pm and leave at 5:10pm. (The tour replaces the July meeting, and shall be a 10. standard July calendar item for 2005, etc.) Discuss: 2005 Capital Outlay Requests Faclder reviewed some of his budget requests. Discussion followed on what POSAC hopes to do with the bond issuance. 11. Discuss: July Agenda Calendar The Parks Tour is the only item on the July Agenda Calendar. 12. Reports: Fackler gave a brief rundown On his summer help, equipment, etc. MOTION by Hentz to adjourn the meeting SECOND by Mason. MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 8:50pm, POSAC Minutes, July 10, 2004 - 1946- ~. 2 ,ii ,I ,Ill & ti ,, .... innesota .._, Municipal Beverage Association /.~..~.~r~SOT^ ~U~c~,~ ~ I N C O R P O R AT E D ~'~ I~Sli ~ An organization composed of the municipally-operated dispensaries of Minnesota OFFICERS PRESIDENT Steve Grausam Edina VICE PRESIDENT Dan Bahr Bemidji SECRETARY/ TREASURER Brenda Visnovec Lakevilie DIRECTORS DIRECTOR*AT-LARGE Scott OIson Park Rapids DIRECTOR-AT-LARGE Gary Buysse Rogers DISTRICT 1 Ron Henry Pine ~sland D [~7-~ICT 2 ~ ~adke DISTRICT 3 Candice Woods Hutchinson DISTRICT 4 Dan Bahr Bemidji DISTRICT 5 Tom Agnes North Branch DISTRICT 6 Steve Grausam Edina Steve Halseth Buffalo Brenda Visnovec Lakeville DISTRICT 7 Michael Friesen Hawley Paul Kaspszak Executive Director Tom Ryman Financial Secretary Box 32966 Minneapolis, MN 55432 ~. 763-572-0222 1/ ' 48-4912 Ext. 3925 763-572-8163 www. municipalbev, com Date: June 9, 2004 To: Municipal Liquor Managers and City Officials From: Paul Kaspszak, Executive Director For the fourth year in a row, Wine in Grocery Legislation was defeated!! This success is due to the active legislative coalition of the Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association, League of Minnesota Cities, Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association, Minnesota Join Together, Minnesota Beer Wholesalers, Minnesota Wine & Spirits Wholesalers and Minnesota Teamsters. Another participant in the debate, was the Wine, Beer & Spirits Federation of Minnesota (VVBSFM) and their lobbyists Kenn Rockier, Maryann Campo and Daniel Campo. WBSFM is a d.b.a, of the Bowling Proprietors Association of Minnesota and is an organization started a few years ago by a small group of on & off sale retailers unhappy with internal reforms implemented by new leadership of the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association. in the past, WBSFM representatives have contacted municipal beverage operations concerning various legislative issues and they may do so in the future. However, please be aware that WBSFM is not a part of our coalition and their policies and tactics on Wine in Grocery and other issues are often disruptive and totally opposite of MMBA. Please take that fact into consideration during possible future discussions. Believe it or not, the Grocer's are indicating they will be back next year. However, MMBA will be working with our coalition partners, throughout the summer, to prepare for the 2005 battle. Thank you for supporting MMBA and your efforts in defeating Wine in Grocery. As always, please contact me if I can be of any service. - 1947- June 3, 2004 City of Mound Attn: Pat Meisel, Mayor 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Mayor Meisel: I've recently seen a mock-up design of the hotel area city improvement plans which look very exciting, but I just wondered one thing. Rather than condominiums behind the ProFix building on Commerce Boulevard, has anyone considered a enltnral center? It just seems that a public center of some sort in that spot would do more for the life of the city than a set of condomiums. A cultural center could be a gathering place for all seasons and a wide variety of events, and the view from that spot would be great. It would also tie in very well with the hotel clientele Mound is hoping to attract. It just always bothers me when condominiums go up along a lovely natural lakeshore because rather than creating a space for many people to enjoy the area, it limits enjoyment to only those people who own the condominiums. I think we'd do much more for the city of Mound if we were to seriously consider a public building of some sort, with perhaps lake trails integrated into the plan- something more like Wayzata's bay front. Is that something the city planners could look at? - 1948- _. Metropolitan Council Building Communities that Work " Environmental Services May 26, 2004 Carlton Moore Public Works Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 952-472-0636 Re: Lift Stations L-48, L-50, and L-51 Improvements. MCES Project 809007. Dear Mr. Moore: MCES plans a rehabilitation of the lift station L-50 in the City of Minnetrista as part of the above project. The 410-ft long L-50 forcemain that crosses Tuxedo Rd. and is in Sulgrove Rd. will be replaced as well. According to our survey the forcemain in Sulgrove Rd. is located on the City of Mound side. Enclosed please find a set of project drawings for your information. Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me at the numbers below. Sincerely, /~~_____.~ Eugene Natarius Project Manager Metropolitan Council Environmental Services 3565 Kennebec Drive Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Phone: 651-602-4519; Fax: 651-602-4533 E-mail: eugene.natarius(~_ ~metc.state.mn.us CC: Scott Dentz, Engineering Manager, MCES - 1949- ;AL PLAN & SECTION ;AL DETAILS TITLE ~N PLAN N PLAN & PROFILE )SION CONTROL PLAN ,ILS AN & SECTION rlTLE ~N PLAN ;HANICAL PLAN & ]RY RD]] -. ,-- LAKE MINNETONKA 6-MT-647 PHELP BAY · ENCHANTED ISLAND MINNETRISTA LOCATIO, NO SCALE APPROVE,~,9,5._°,.;3RD DRAWING PROJECT NO. , ~,, a FROM LAKE M I NNETONKA COMMUN I CA P. 02 -1951 - 86-17-2884 10:28AM FROM lAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICA TO 4720620 P.03 -1952- TOTRL P,03