1999-05-25Mound City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MAY 25, 1999
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, May 25, 1998, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in
said City.
Those present were Mayor Pat Meisel, Councilmembers: Andrea Ahrens, Bob Brown, Mark
Hanus, Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were City Attorney John Dean, Police Chief Len
Harrell, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and Assistant City Planner Loren Gordon.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of
Allegiance was recited.
*Consent Agenda: Ail items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the
Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
APPROVE AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA
Brown asked that item 3D be pulled from the Consent Agenda. Weycker pulled item 3A from
the Consent Agenda.
1.0
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Brown to approve the Regular Agenda, as
presented, and items B, C, E, F, G, H, and I from the Consent Agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
1.1
CASE 99-12: VARIANCE; FRONT YARD AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS, LOT
SIZE, HARDCOVER; TO CONSTRUCT A CONFORMING DETACHED
GARAGE AT 2925 HOLT LANE; BLOCK 6, LOT $, MINNESOTA BAPTIST
SUMMER ASSEMBLY, MICHAEL STOLTENOW, 61810, PID//23-11%24 42 0074,
RESOLUTION g99-40 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD
SETBACK AND LOT SIZE VARIANCES IN ORDER
TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION A
CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE, AT 2925
HOLT LANE, BLOCK 6, LOT 5, MINNESOTA
BAPTIST SUMMER ASSEMBLY, PII)~ 23-117-24 42
0074, P & Z CASE//99-12
Ahrens, Brown unanimously.
397
Mound City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
1.2
CASE 99-13: VARIANCEi FRONT YARD SETBACK AND ~;TRF~T
FRONTAGE: TO CONSTRUCT A CONFQRMING DETACHED GARAGE AT
4420 RADNOR ROADi BLOCK 15, LOTS ;~-4-~ AND PART QF ~, AVALON,
JERRY BARELMAN. 37850, PID #19-117-23 34 0093,
RESOLUTION 099-41
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD
SETBACK AND STREET FRONTAGE VARIANCES
IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION A
CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE, AT 4420
RADNOR ROAD, BLOCK 15, LOTS 3-4-5 AND
THAT PART OF 6 LYING E OF W 20 FT THOF
SUBJECT TO ROAD, AVALON, PID# 19-117-23 34
0093, P & Z CASE g99-13
Ahreus, Brown unanimously.
1.3
CASE 99-18: VARIANCE; FRONT YARD SETBACK: TO CONSTRUCT A
LAKESIDE DECK AT 2625 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD: BLOCK 1. PART OF LOT
1,.SHIRLEY HILLS. UNIT C. DAREN AND JILL .IENSEN: 62030. PID # ~4-117-
24 13 0013,
RESOLUTION g99-42 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD AND
SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCES TO
CONSTRUCT A CONFORMING LAKESIDE DECK
AT 2625 WILSHIRE BLVD, PART OF LOT 1,
BLOCK 1, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT C, PID 24-117-24
13 0013, P & Z CASE//99-18
Ahrens, Brown unanimously.
1.4
MOTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING; CASE# 99-22; PUBLIC HEARING TO
CQNSIDER FINAL PLAT~'CONDITIONAL-USE PERMIT WITH. VARIANCES
FOR TH~ LYNMQRE SUBDIVISION TWIN"HOME PROJECT LOCATED
WITHIN THE R-2 ZONING DISTRICT,, LOTS 1-6, BLOCK 3,. SHIRLEY HILLS
UNIT A.-AT 4901 SHOREL~ .ENE DRIVE,'PID. # 13-117-24.44 0032. SUGGESTED
DATE - JUNE 8, 1999,
MOTION
Ahrens, Brown unanimoUSly.
398
1.5
1.6
Mout~l City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
MOTION TO APPROVE LICENSE RENEWALS AS FOLLOWS:
CLUB ON-SALE
SUNDAY ON-SALE
ON-SALE WINE
ON-SALE BEER
OFF-SALE BEER
MOTION
Ahrens, Brown unanimously.
PAYMENT REQUEST NUMBER 1 (PARTIAL PAYMENT) NORWOOD LAND
STREET UTILITIES CONSTRUCTION.
MOTION
Ahrens, Brown unanimously.
1.7
PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION
Ahrens, Brown unanimously.
1.8 MINUTES OF MAY 11, 1999
Weycker stated that on page 13 (1718) of the May 11, 1999 Council meeting minutes, paragraph
#3, should read:
"Weycker asked Hanus (not attorney)/f this was still impacted by the Roanoke area.,
Weycker added to this paragraph the following:
"Hanus answered yes. The attorney was asked if it was a conflict of interest to have
Ahrens participating in this discussion."
Hanus disagreed that he answered in the affirmative.
MOTION made by Weycker to approve the minutes with this amendment. The motion
died on the floor for lack of a second.
399
MoUnd City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1'999
Hanus had the following changes:
Last.Paragraph on page 8 (1713), second sentence should read:
"Someone pom the audience stated ..." (not Hanus).
Seventh paragraph on page 10 (1715) should read:
"Don Schervem, Sr. has a concern about the park. He has heard the
equipment in the park is to be moved. The Mayor stated that was rumor only.
He also stated that he had signed the petition .... He is glad to work with the
City, he ~aid he would even take over the park maintenance at his own expense.
After the hearing that the City was not closing the park, he did not care what
happened to the dock."
Paragraph two on page 11 (1716), Brown stated he was willing to represent the Council,
not the neighborhood.
In the fifth paragraph on that page, Hanus stated that the third sentence was garbled.
He wanted to deleted the sentences "This is a park/beach .... Not a large park area."
He also suggested that it should read:
"He pointed out that the records for the original Task Force
recommendation covered both small and large park complexes."
Weycker did not agree that this was what he said. After discussion, the attorney
suggested that the minutes review be tabled until such time as the hand written notes
of the meeting have been reviewed. The tape recording of the meeting had been
turned off unbeknown to the Council at that meeting for a period of time. That
period of time would cover these discussions.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Weycker to table the approval of the
minutes to provide time for review of the handwritten secretarial notes. Motion
carried 5-0.
1.9
CASF~ 99-16: VARIANCE: LAKESIDE SETBACK: TO CONSTRUCT A
CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE AT ~513 BARTLETT BI,VD1 PART OF
LOTS 13. & 14 AND' ADJOINING ABANDQNDED BOULEVARD. THE
BARTLETT PLACE, CLYDE BONNEMA, 61'510, PID# 24-.117-24..23 0015,
Prior to any di~cUssi0n, Mayor' Meisel abstained from this discUssion sin~ it'involved a
neighbor or hers. She-turned the leadership of' the meeting over to Acting MayOr Hanus.
. 4.00
Moutul City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
Brown stated that the proposal .on page 1767 of the packet while conforming is a line of sight
issue for Commer.ce Boulevard Since the structure is proposed to be located near the front
property line. He further indicated that the existing 'cabin" is more of a small house. A
firewail is needed to separate the cabin from the garage. In his experience, he stated, that if
there was a fire, it would also take the house. He feels that locating the garage near the
front property line "clutters up the street."
Brown proposed that the plan be returned to'the .City Building and Planning Departments for
them to work with the applicant in reviewing this plan to locate it elsewhere'on the property.
Since there is already an existing attached garage, he.feels the new proposed one should be
reviewed for the above reasons.
Hanus asked if the proposed garage is four feet from the house. Yes, it is. Hanus has
difficulty denying a conforming structure. The ordinances allow up to three accessory
structures on a property in this zone. The apPlicant is only proposing one. Since the cabin
belongs to someone else, Hanus feels the applicant is being "punished" enough to have to put
up a firewall befween the garage and the cabin. Further, stated Hanus, he does not see
where else the garage Could be located on the property and be conforming.
At the best, stated Hanus, the garage would have to be downsized to meet' ail other
requirements. Actuaily, since it is the curb to curb with of the street is shorter .than the
right-of-way, the garage is actually 8 feet back from the road. He does not see any need to
redirect this back to the Planning Commission to review.
Clyde Bonema, the applicant was present and explained that the purpose in locating the
garage where it is proposed is to do' two things. One it is to locate it on the east side of the
driveway so that a turn around can be constructed going out onto the west side of the
driveway to Commerce Boulevard. The second purpose is to locate it in a spot that "looks
nice" on the property and in the neighborhood~
In a response to a question from Mayor Meisel, Mr. Bonema indicated that the drainage plan
is to put gutters ail around draining towards the driveway and the lake. Some will drain onto
the street where the natural flow of the land directs it that way. The structure will be
finished as the house is.
Hanus indicated that the drainage plan should be reviewed and approved by the City engineer
and should be a condition in the resolution.
Brown accepted the owners explanation and withdrew his motion to return this to the
Planning Commission.
401
MOund City Council Meeting.Minutes May 25, 1999
Weycker moved and. Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION g99..43
RESOLUTION TO APPRO~/E A LAKF~IDE
SETBACK VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A
CONFORMING DETACHED 'GARAGE AT 5513
BARTLETT BLVD, E 40 FI' OF LOT 13 & W 40 FY
OF LOT 14, AND. ADJOINING ABANDONI*~I)
BOULEVARD, THE BARTLETT PLACE, PID 24-
117-24 23 0018, P & Z CASE g99-16
Brown recommended that a condition be placed on the resolution to have approval of
the drainage plan from the City Engineer. Both Weycker and Ahrens accepted the
amendment.
Motion carried 4-0.
Acting Mayor Hanus turned the meeting back over to the Mayor.
1.10
COMMENTS AND SUGGF.$TIQN$ FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
Peter Meyer, Chairperson of the Parks and Open Space Commission addressed the Council with
concerns over what had transpired at the last two meetings regarding the multiple dock
commons. He also addressed the "Letters from the Readers" (From the May 22, 1999 issue of
THE Ldg/~'submission from Mr. Hanus in response to this issue.
He feels that at best, Mr. Hanus mislead, if not deceived the people regarding this issue. Mr.
Meyer went on to explain that he thought Hanus was "catering to a special interest group." He
believes the issue should have come before both the Docks and Commons Commission and the
Park Commission prior to the City Council as the Council's advisory boards.
Mr. Meyer did thank the Council for getting the citizen's involved in the process. HOwever,
he stated, a petition with ninety signatures was presented against the configuration and the
Council still "did not listen to their wishes," At the eM'of additional comments against what
had taken place, Mr. Meyer thanked the Council for .'qetfing him vent" his opinions.
Brown responded to Mr. MeYer with the fact that this iS a new Council. Some of the members
have only sat on it since January. He stated that they have been handling issues that should have
been resolved long before they came. To further delay~ this process by. sending these issues
through the advisory boards, he felt was unfair to the citizens.
402
'Mound Ci~ Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
While not all the decisions made, stated Brown, are always the best, they are making decisions
and moving forward. In cases where a better solution is possible, they can revisit the issues.
He believes that moving forward, the Council will have a more positive impact that before.
Mayor Meisel stated that several neighborhood residents in the concerned area had volunteered
to work on a task force to come up with a better proposal after this boating season. The groups
to be represented include the Park and Open Space Commission. She asked Mr. Meyer if he
would serve as the representative from that board.
Mr. Meyer indicated that Parks programs have not been funded or supported 'in the past and this
was a frustration to them. The Mayor and other Council members discussed wa~,s that this has
changed and was changing. Mr. Meyer asked why the Council bypassed the advisory boards
on the multiple docks issues, Hanus asked that this conversation be suspended. That is because
much time was spent in the last two council meetings specifically and for months prior.
Mayor Meisel responded that she. understood that the Parks and Open Space Commission felt
slighted. However, the solution implemented at this point was not a permanent solution and
would be. revisited. When it is revisited, the Parks and .Open Space Commission will have the
opportunity for representation on the committee.
1.11
CASE # 97-39; VARIANCE. SETBACK, LOT AREA WIDTH, TO
CONSTRUCT A NON CONFORMING DWELLING AT 2$XX DRIFrWQOD
LANE, ROBERT STEELE, LOT 10, SKARP'S EAST LAWN, PID # 1;5-117-24
44 0059.
Gordon reported that this case came before the Planning Commission originally in November
1997. The application was tabled to develop a more suitable proposal. The request is for a
variance in buildable lot size and for lot width variation, as well as flood plan elevation.
The proposed structure will be a lot that will have 5900 square feet of buildable land, thus
requiring a 4100 square foot variance from the required 10,000 square feet. The lot width is
fifty-five feet as opposed to a sixty foot required width.- The proposed foundation with a
finished floor would be at 933.8 feet elevation that meets the elevation standards for
floodplain areas. Gordon also stated that the soil was poor and even if filled would wash out
as time goes by.
The property owner has applied to the Watershed District in order to sign off on the
compensation area requested to back fill this property. The proposed grading plan does then
come under the jurisdiction of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. A letter from Jim
Hafner provides comment on this issue.
The record notes that a memorandum from Ceil Strauss, the area hydrologist at the State of
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources arrived in the office on April 12, 1999. This
403
Mound City Council Meeting MinUtex May 25, 1999
memo w.as brought to the meeting for review. Based on her surVey, on' April 2, 1999, this
lot would require "net .filling.', 'She stands opposed to net filling in the floodplain area and
that .this property would not meet the City's regulation of fifteen'feet from all directions of
the house to have the property, be within the elevation for the 100 year height.
In a later conversation with the applicant, Ms. Strauss has indicated-that they would not
oppose this proposed structure and would write an amending letter if necessary.
Gordon stated that in the first meeting in April 1999, 'the recommendation of the Commission
was to table this proposal until receiving additional information regarding similar cases in
recent history. The proposal was brought back to the Planning Commission in late April for
further consideration.
After much discussion of the issues, the precedent cases, the Commission recommended that
the variance be denied on a vote of 4-3. They feel that there may be other alternatives in
recombining lots.10 - 12 to make a lot that has a more buildable lot size.
Brown commented that he felt rather strongly about this case. He stated such comments at
the Planning Commission meetings. First of ail, he stated, the fact that the sea wail is
eroding is not due to the fault of Mr. Steele. It is due to lack of maintenance. Additionally,
Mr. Steele is paying assessments for sewer even though a septic tank is used on this site.
water is available.
Mr. Steele, Brown explained is proposing to place a nice structure on this property, tie it
into the City sewer .system, place additionai fill on this land to create additional lot area
above the floodplain level, ail of which would provide a more decent view from one of the
main channels of the City.
Ahrens commented that in the handOut that Mr. Steele provided to ail the Council members,
he had provided the 'City with Comparisons of other properties that had received variances to
build that aiso were grossly undersized. She stated that based on some recent applications
that had been granted, :she would have trouble not granting this one.
Staff's response to some of the 'more recent applications that had been approved covered that
the applicants aiready lived on site and the "structure" was not vacant. They are trying to
improve the infrastructure of the City and raise the housing standards which ties to their
reason for recommending non approvai.
The Mayor asked if they were Saying that the lot was unbuildable unless it was combined
with other lots. Gordon answered' that no, but it was a lot smailer than standards. The
Mayor indicated that the staff should not be looking at. other properties to 'recombine with.
The fact tl~at his daughter owns the adjacent property should not play into the decision.
Mound City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
Brown reiterated that this applicant had been paying taxes~ assessments just like anyone else.
"To say his land was unbuildable was wrong," stated Brown.
Sutherland indicated that when the'applicant purchased the property, they purchased both tax
parcels. He should have been aware of the building ordihances when he sold part of the total
property to his daughter. The applicant should have been aware that the remaining parcel
was not large enough to build on and does not meet the City's Comprehensive Plans and
Goals.
Hanus stated that he had an issue.with this. Both of these properties were "lots of record"
and-were separate tax parcels. It is not reasonable to expect all owners to know all the
zoning codes. Ahrens did not feel that the argument that the applicant was not, currently
occupying the home was a valid one either.
The Council hM discussions about what the various jurisdictions stated about this property
and the ability they had to regulate certain aspects of the property. This was when Mr.
Steele reported his conversation with the DNR.
Hanus stated that if the Watershed District approved the proposal, the applicant should be
granted the variance.
Brown started a motion to recommend approval of the variances, the setbacks, the lot area
and width and the grading exceptions which was seconded by Hanus. However, both
withdrew their motions after the recognition that a resolution should be drawn up to grant the
variances.
Ahrens felt the Council should direct staff to prepare a resolution for approval which would
be conditioned on the Minnehaha Watershed District's approval on the land fill.
Weycker commented that if the structure was 'conforming, she felt he should be able to build
it. Hanus also supported the proposal by looking at both sides. Yes, the lot was undersized,
however, that was a case in a lot of lots in Mound. Secondly, instead of an old cabin, now
there would be nice home.
MOTION made by Brown, seconded by Hanus to direct Staff to prepare a resolution
approving the variances requested by Mr. Steele subject to Minnehaha Watershed
District approval and an approved drainage plan as reviewed by the City Engineer.
Hanus seconded this motion to add clarification to it. The building should
conform to the setbacks and floodplain regulations. It should be hooked up to
sewer and the septic tank properly abandoned. Finally, it should come back to
the City Council the second week of June 1999 for final approval.
Mr. Steele came forward with the following comments. When he brought the
other cases before the Planning Commission for comparison, he did that to show
405
Mound City Council. Meeting Minutes .May 25, 1999"
.the good points of his plan. One, he would be improx~ing the drainage' situation
that exists today from the vacated Driftwood l_ane. He recognizes and thanks the
Council for taking each of these cases on their own merit, i They have allowed
owners to do what is a "fair and reasonable use of their Property.
He reiterated that he is trying to do everything that is 'possible to make this a
good lot. The statutes should be applied fairly and evenly across the board.
While he agrees that the City's ordinances should be met where possible, he is
presenting the best proposal for his property.
Motion carried. 5-0.
The Mayor reiterated that Staff would be in touch with Mr. Steele and that this would come
before the Council again on June 8%
1.12 pR~ENTATION OF THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT BY
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
The City's financial director presented the auditor from Abdo, Abdo, Eick and Meyers. They
are hired to review the City's financial reporting and to make sure that all numbers and cash
flows are represented fairly.
The auditor reported that the City had received an "unqualified" report and that was a "clean''
report. The one comment he made regarding the report that could be improved upon was in the
segregation of accounting functions. However, he stated, this is common in smaller
municipalities. It is difficult to fully enact these measures and that Businario had done an
excellent job of managing the various priorities this involves.
The auditor covered various aspects of the 'report in more detail outlining where the City was
and should/could be. He compared these 'numbers to similar municipalities and opened, questions
and answers with the Council members. ~
When he was done, Businario pointed out the following items:
One, he thanked the auditors for their report and for the non-qualified opinion.
This once again, he-stated meets the certification requirements2
He also indicated that the re.port would be available for review both at City hall
and at- the local library.
He addressed the separation of duties issue and.stated that was a major function of the
City Council to his department. He appreciates their COnsistency in. reviewing the bills as he
prepares them.
406
Mound City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
Ahrens moved, Hanus seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-44 RF3OLU~ON ACCEPTING AND APPROVING
THE AUDIT AND FINANCIAL REPORT FOR 1998
Motion carried. 5-0.
1.13 ZONING CODE STREAMLINING AN3D PROCESS ENHANCEMENT
Gordon covered the actions of the Planning Commission regarding these processes. In 100%
of the cases that were conforming' structures over the past couple of years that the Planning
Commission has recommended, Council has also recommended. Therefore, this became an
issue to pursue and see if there were other ways to stream line the processes for both the
City and the citizen.
Staff prepared the following guidelines for the Planning Commission to review. Under
streamlining the following two were recommended:
Option #1
Section 350:420. Nonconforming Uses
Subd. 11. Residential properties with a nonconforming principal structures may be
improved by adding a conforming detached accessory structure provided that any
nonconforming detached accessory structure and the principal structure are in sound
condition as determined by the Mound Building Official. Furthermore, impervious
cover on said lots shall be compliant with Section 350:1225, Subd. 6. B. 1. Of the
Mound Zoning Code or shall not exceed the amount allowed under prior variance
approval.
Option//2
Section 350:420. Nonconforming Uses.
Subd. 9. A nonconforming structure may be expanded if .the expansion meets all
applicable city ordinance requirements.
The following Process Enhancement Was offered:
Section 350:510. Board of Adjustment
Subd. 1. The Board of Adjustments shall be the Planning Commission.
Commission shall hear and act on all variances to this ordinance.
The Planning
Gordon stated that this Process Enhancement was allowable by the State of Minnesota.
Weycker asked if it was tree for Statutory Form B. Yes, stated Gordon.
407
Mound City Council Meeting Minutes'May 25, 1999'
Hanus is opposed to the process enhancement. He stated that he would have to think twice
aboUt Who was on the Planning Commission if that were enacted. He, stated"that as an
elected official, he would want to make sure that his. opinions and views are what are voted.
.on. He. fee, Is that the Planning Commission is,a mostly -"nbn-political" body in a 'highly
political" town. He was in support of the streamlining option fi2, however.. He stated that
this was hardly any different than the proposal he made a couple of years ago when the
streamlining began.
His goal is to relieve the long process for the applicant. He stated, "we are here to serve
them." He further stated that he would not "sweat the small stuff that an additional pair of
eyes might catch."
However, he stated, he would like to see the language of option g2 tightened up. He'
suggested the following:
"Nonconforming principle and accessory structures may be expanded, and conforming
principle and accessory structures may be added, provided that all uses on the parcel
are conforming, and provided that the entire expansion or construction meets the
current zoning regulations and no other non-conformities within the zoning ordinance
are created."
Weycker asked if what he was really saying was that there was an existing variance on the
property. Hanus responded that he was not saying a variance existed.
Sutherland stated that Hanus' language was good. It defines the situations well and is better
than the staffs suggestions.
Ahrens agreed with Hanus both on the process enhancement issue and on the selection of
Option fi2 for streamlining. She stated that the Planning Commission was an advisory
commission to the Council and were appointed people and not elected representatives: She
sees issues with granting authority to an advisory body.
Hanus stated that another issue was the lack of the presence of the attorney at the Planning
Commission meetings. He also had real problems with the suggestion of a fee if the
applicant chose to appeal to the Council a Planning Commission's ruling.
Ahrens pointed out that they needed to be careful not to confuse uses with variances.
MOTION made by Hanus,. seconded by Ahrens to direct staff to prepare ·
ordinance langUage based on his earlier comments ("Nonconforming' principle
and accessory structures may be expanded, and conforming principle and
accessory structures may be added, provided' that ail uses on the .parcel are
conforming, and Provided that the entire expansion or construction meets the
current zoning regulations and no other .non-conformities within the zoning
408
Mound City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
ordinance are created.") and. to take back to the Planning Comm[anion for
comment and review and to set a Public Hearing date. Ail areas of the ordinance
impacted, should be changed consistently. Motion carded. 5-0..
Hanus stated that if this was adopted, it certainly would be more user friendly f~r the
applicants. Sutherland.thanked the Council for their actions and suggestions.
1.14 ESTABLISHING PILOT PROGRAM FOR PERSONAL WATERCRAFT AT
AVALON PARK
In his memorandum dated May 21, 1999, Fackler reviewed that the Docks and Commons
Advisory Committee is. asking that a pilot program be initiated to provide sites for personnel
watercraft at multiple slip docks. Results from a survey indicate that site holders at Avalon
park are positive in allowing a pilot program to take place there for the 1999 boating season.
They have suggested a lottery process to assign the available slips.
In this case, there are sufficient slips to accommodate the desired holders. However,
Ahrens, stated, she would prefer a seniority process versus a lottery process. Hanus leaned
this direction also.
Weycker stated that from the April minutes of the Docks and Commons Advisory committee,
each .individual multiple dock should be able to recommend their own use for this. Hanus
stated that they would have to restrict the program to accommodate only up 12 foot vessels
such as fishing boats, jet skis, or long canoes, etc.
The Mayor suggested that this be tried for the 1999 boating session and reevaluated after the
completion of the season.
MOTION by Weycker, seconded by Hanus to direct staff to approve the pilot
program for Avalon Park multiple dock to be set up with four sites to be
designated with conditions restricting watercraft/life size to 75 square feet,
current site holder only, application procedure based on a lottery and fees to run
$50 plus the LMCD fee. This program is to be reviewed in October, 1999.
Ahrens asked if they should look at seniority rather than lottery. It was decided to accept
this for now and look at other options in the fall.
Hanus stated that it needed to be recognized that these slips would be marginal slips and that if
the water level went down, they could become unusable. The Mayor indicated that for the pilot,
that was fine.
Motion carried. 5-0.
409
Mound City Council Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. Minutes of 5/13/99
LMcD mailings
Dock and Commons Minutes of 4/15/99
D. POSC Planning Commission Minutes of 5/10/99
The Mayor pointed out the memorandum from Fackler regarding the Albrecht dock.
The City should only pay what they can recover for his dock.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus, to direct Harrell to arrange for the
even exchange of fees for Mr. Albrecht's dock per Fackler's memorandum dated
May 24, 1999. Motion carried. 5-0.
Brown discussed the letter from Tim Becker. He walked the property today and it is
like a swamp. He feels that staff needs to insist on a water test/measurement today.
Mayor Meisel discussed Mound City Days and the parade and whether or not Council
should fide in the parade. She also had been given a suggestion of buttons to hand
out to the citizens. They would say "Mound on Lake Minnetonka." She has all the
necessary items and tools to make these buttons and they would not cost the City
anything. The Council agreed on this and debated what would be better to sit on, a
trailer or a pontoon.
The Mayor mentioned that the City Attorney would bring information on recruiting
finns for City Managers to the next meeting for the Council to review.
There were other discussions centering around upcoming contract negotiations for the
Police department. Chief Harrell discussed various idea that could be used as
incentives to keep people and to keep them living in Mound.
He stated that they needed to do something since nearby communities often had more
money to pay and other incentives to keep the officers there. He has also heard some
discussion among the administrative staff regarding unionizing.
MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Brown, to adjourn. Motion carried. 5-0.
The meeting adjourned at 10:56 p.m.
410
~I'999'L8I $
S~IH T~O&
I~06 qoaug
0~'L99'§
0~06 qv~e~