1994-09-14September 14, 1994
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 14, 1994
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday,
September 14, 1994, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz Jensen, and
Ken Smith. Councilmember Phyllis Jessen was absent and excused. Also present were: City
Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson, City
Engineer John Cameron, Building Official Jon Sutherland, Finance Director Gino Businaro, and
the following interested citizens: Sarah & Philip Hofherr, Carl Glister, Rick Jorgensen, Lela
& Fernando Mazoleny.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Ahrens to approve the Minutes of the August
23, 1994, Regular Meeting, as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
1.1
PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 25 - OCTOBER 2, 1994, A~c
CITIES WEEK IN THE CITY OF MOUND
This item was brought back from the last agenda with a proposed proclamation.
Johnson moved and Ahrens seconded the following:
PROCLAMATION//94-118
PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER
25 - OCTOBER 2, 1994, AS MINNESOTA
CITIES WEEK IN THE CITY OF MOUND
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.2
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF HILLSIDE LANE,
CRANE BODINE, 5025 WREN ROAD, LOTS 1, 2, & 3, BLOCK 1, PID //13-117-2 4
13 0022; AND ROLAND BOETTCHER, 1780 HILLSIDE LANE, PART OF LOT£
5. 6 & 7, BLOCK 2, PID//13-117-24 13 0028; BOTH IN LINDEN HEIGHTE
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission and the Park & Open
Space Commission recommended denial because the vacation would not be in the public's best
436
September 14, 1994
interest. Neither of the applicants were present.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Carl Glister, 5008 Wren Road, stated that he and his neighbors are not in favor of this vacation
because they like the open space and the access to Crescent Park.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to deny the request to vacate a
portion of Hillside Lane because it is not in the public interest. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3 SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, RE:
1.4
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to set October 11, 1994, for a public
hearing to consider an ordinance amendment to Section 350:645 of the Zoning
Ordinance which relates to housekeeping items due to recent changes in the
Shoreland Management Ordinance. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
ADD ON ITEM - CASE g94-62: LARRY MELSNESS, 2612 WILSHIRE BLVD.,
LOT 2, REARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK 7, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT B, PID #24-
117-24 12 0009, VARIANCE REQUEST
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Smith moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION g94-119
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
RECOGNIZE AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING PORCH
ADDITION AT 2612 WILSHIRE BLVD., LOT 2,
REARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK 7, SHIRLEY HILLS
UNIT B, PID #24-117-24 12 0009, P & Z CASE #94-62
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
437
September 14, 1994
1.5
REOUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AND FENCE ON PUBLIC
DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT BY PHILIP HOFHERR, 4746 ISLAND
VIEW DRIVE, LOTS I & 2, BLOCK 8, DEVON
The Building Official explained that the applicants are seeking approval to install a retaining wall
and fence within a city drainage and utility easement. A city water main is located within the
easement. Work has started on the retaining wall and fence. This can cause a problem in the
future if work has to be done on the utility and the retaining wall or fence are damaged by this
work. The Building Official reported that the applicant received a permit in 1989 for retaining
walls in an easement on another part of the property. This permit was an administrative decision
and was not brought to the City Council for approval. The intent of staff is to change the
previously unregulated policy to one of examining each case and not allowing improvements in
easements that will at some point interfere with the utility or the maintenance of it. Staff has
taken the position that this policy change must take place after this case because the Staff offered
an alternative in the form of a Retaining Wall Maintenance Agreement.
The applicants had their attorney draft an agreement which would make them responsible for the
maintenance/repairs and/or replacements of the retaining wall and fence in the future if the City
damaged them when working on its utilities in this easement.
The Council expressed concern that this Agreement, even if recorded at the County, may not
show up if the house were sold on a Contract for Deed.
The City Attorney stated that it has never been a policy of the City to allow property owners to
build things in a utility easement. He stated that he and the City Engineer can attest to the fact
that anytime a city has to go in and do work on utilities in easements that contain personal
property improvements there are problems.
The Hofherrs were present and stated that the retaining wall partially built, but construction has
stopped because they could not file the Retaining Wall Maintenance Agreement without the
Mayor's signature. Had this discussion come up before, they would have never even started
construction, but fight now they are in the middle. They stated that if the watermain were to
break in the future they would move the retaining wall back to the property line. The Hofherrs
agree that if there is a utility problem, they will be responsible for repalfing or replacing the
improvements they have placed on the easement.
The Building Official stated that the applicant had called the City and asked if he needed a
permit for a retaining wall. He was told that no permit was needed if it is less than 4 feet in
height. Staff is now adding that it depends on if there are easements. Mr. Hofherr then came
in for a fence permit and that was when it was discovered that the retaining wall and the fence
were in an easement. It was then that the previous Maintenance Agreement was discovered.
The Staff was trying to accommodate the Hofherrs. In the future all fence or retaining wall
438
September 14, 1994
permits are going to be reviewed by the Public Works Superintendent for any easements that
may be on the property so this does not happen again.
The City Attorney summarized the dilemma. The Staff has told the applicant that now that they
have built this retaining wall, the city needs to do something to protect itself from future
maintenance or replacement of it. At this point the applicant incurred the cost of an attorney
to prepare a maintenance agreement. Sometime after that the staff called the City Attorney and
he gave them the same opinion as was given tonight that nothing should be allowed to be built
on a utility easement. But the Staff had previously told the applicant differently, so the City
Attorney reviewed the Agreement and made some changes and referred it back to Staff for
presentation to the City Council for their review and possible approval.
The Council expressed concern about future City maintenance of any improvements placed on
a utility easement by residents.
Johnson moved and Smith seconded the following resolution:
RF_~OLUTION #94-120
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A RETAINING
WALL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH PHILIP
& SARAH HOFHERR, DATED AUGUST 12, 1994,
LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 8, DEVON, HENNEPIN
COUNTY, MINNESOTA AND THAT PART OF
ADJACENT, VACATED OXFORD LANE ACCRUING
THERETO.
The City Attorney suggested a further proviso be as follows: "That the City Staff is
directed to take any and ail means necessary to keep improvements from being
constructed on city right-of-way." The Council agreed.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carded.
1.6 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL ON PUBLIC DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT BY FERNANDO MAZOLENY, 4758 ISLAND VIEW
DRIVE, LOTS 3, 4, & 5, BLOCK 8, DEVON
The Building Official explained that before he and the Utility Superintendent could get through
the previous item on the Agenda, the neighbor requested a rock retaining wall in the easement.
There is a public sewer line located within the easement. The walls are less than 4 feet in
height. The applicant has been notified that Staff is not recommending approval. The area can
be graded to a slope to match the adjacent property and condition. It may be difficult to mow,
but it is possible. Staff recommends that if this is approved a maintenance agreement be entered
439
September 14, 1994
in~ ~a, it,h II~ applicant as was done in the previous case.
Ma'. ~ ~ lm,.a~nt and stated that these are not really retaining walls, they are basically
~ of fle. klata~ ~o atop erosion.
The Cemneil discussed the following:
Where the sewer is located and the fact chat if the sewer needed maintenance, the
rock could be set aside, but the entire easement would probably need to be used.
2. The fact that the erosion needs to be addressed.
This is an unusual parcel because of topography, with no place to park a vehicle
except where there is a cut into the ~ill over the easement and no on street
parking. ,"
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Ahrens to deny the request to construct
retaining walls on a public easement at 4758 Island View Drive, but authorizes the
property owners to take steps to prevent erosion on the property. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carded.
1.7 PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED 1995 BUDGET
The City Manager presented the proposed 1995 Budget, the preliminary levy and the suggested
dates for the public hearings. The suggested dates are Tuesday, November 29, 1994, and
Tuesday, De,ember 6, 1994.
Jensen moved and Smith seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-121
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1995
PRELIMINARY GENERAL FUND BUDGET IN THE
AMOUNT OF $2,408,340; SETTING THE
PRELIMINARY LEVY AT $1,808,130; LESS THE
HOMESTEAD AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA) OF
$499,460, RESULTING IN A PRELIMINARY
CERTIFIED LEVY OF $1,308,670; APPROVING THE
PRELIMINARY OVERALL BUDGET FOR 1995; AND
SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATES
The vote was uaanimously in favor. Motion carded.
440
September 14, 1994
1.8 RESOLUTION CANCELLING ~YI-IE LEVY OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION
IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1980 IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,075,00
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-122
RESOLUTION CANCELLING THE LEVY OF THE
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS
OF 1980 IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,075.00
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.9 HRA LEVY
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-123
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO
EXCEED $24,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF
DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATIONS,
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469, OF
THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
OF THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR 1995
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
There were none.
1.10 BID AWARD:
PUBLIC WORKS STORAGE AREA CITY OF
MINNETRISTA/CITY OF MOUND JOINT PROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
SITE AND ACCESS ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
The City Engineer reported that on September 8, four bids were received for the Site Grading
and Access Road Reconstruction of the new Material Storage are in Minnetrista. They were as
follows:
1. Aero Asphalt, Inc. $147,620.00
2. Busse Construction, Inc. $155,811.00
3. Imperial Developers, Inc. $140,167.00
4. Stenger Excavating $157,047.50
441
September 14, 1994
The low bidder was Imperial Developers of Bloomington with a total bid of $140,167.00. The
Engineer's Estimate was $135,420.00. This project was previously bid on July 29th and the low
bid then was $166,689.50.
The City Engineer reported that they have checked Imperial's references and have found them
to be a reputable contractor. Therefore, the recommendation is to accept Imperial Developer's
bid at $140,167.00.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-124 RESOLUTION TO AWARD FOR THE SITE
GRADING AND ACCESS ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
OF THE NEW MATERIAL STORAGE SITE IN
MINNETRISTA TO IMPERIAL DEVELOPERS, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,167.00
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carded.
1.11 REAPPOINTMENT OF TOM REESE TO TIlE LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
The City Manager stated the Mr. Reese's 3 year term on the LMCD expires October 26, 1994.
He has indicated his willingness to serve another term if the Council desires.
Jensen moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-125
RESOLUTION TO REAPPOINT TOM REESE AS
MOUND REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LMCD FOR A
THREE YEAR TERM BEGINNING OCTOBER 26,
1994
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.12 PELICAN POINT - EAW & EIS
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-126 RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT BASED ON
PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW), AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) IS
NOT WARRANTED AND NO FURTHER STUDY IS
REQUIRED FOR THE PELICAN POINT MULTI-
442
September 14, 1994
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.13 SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE
STREET KNOWN AS BAYWOOD SHORES DRIVE
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Smith to set September 27, 1994, for a
Public Hearing to consider the vacation of a portion of the street known as Baywood
Shores Drive. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.14 APPROVAL OF PAYMENT REQUEST //3, WATER METER READ SYSTEM,
SCHLUMBERGER, IN THE AMOUNT OF $64,781.45
The City Manager reported that the City Engineer has recommended approval.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to approve payment request//3 to
Schlumberger Industries, for work completed through August 13, 1994, on the water
meter read system, in the amount of $64,781.45. The vote was unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
1.15
APPROVAL OF FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST, PAINTING OF EVERGREEN
WATER TOWER, ODLAND PROTECTIVE COATINGS, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$6.102.50
The City Manager reported that the City Engineer has recommended approval.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to approve the final payment from
Odland Protective Coatings, for the painting of the Evergreen Water Tower, in the
amount of $6,102.50. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.16 PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Smith to authorize the payment of bills as
presented on the pre-list in the amount of $614,430.48, when funds are available.
A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.17 ADD-ON - COUNTY ROAD 15
The City Manager explained that Hennepin County has been working with Orono, Spring Park
and Mound trying to deal with the traffic problems that occur during rush hour on County Road
15, between County Road 19 and County Road 110. He stated that the County is trying to
443
September 14, 1994
alleviate the problem in Spring Park by restriping the entire strip of County Road 15 from 19
to 110 and making 4 lanes (2 lanes each direction), except for the area in Spring Park from
Interlachen to the Seton Bridge which would remain the same, 1 lane each way with a middle
turn lane.
The Council discussed the possible bottle neck problem where the road, going east, would
narrow at the Seton Bridge to the three two lanes (one eaelt way and the center turn lane)
entering Spring Park.
The Council discussed having County Road 15 in Mound striped for 3 lanes (one each way and
a center turn lane). They asked the City Manager to check into this with the County.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
A. Department Head Monthly Reports for August 1994.
B. LMCD Representative's Monthly Report for August 1994.
C. LMCD Mailings.
Letter from Tim Becker, owner of property on Three Points Blvd. to Representative
Steve Smith in response to Smith's letter.
E. Planning Commission Minutes of August 22, 1994.
Committee of the Whole Meeting, Tuesday, September 20, 19947 (NOTE:
Councilmember Jessen and City Manager will be absent). Do you still want to hold the
meeting? There would be two members absent, Jessen and Ahrens. Therefore, the
September COW Meeting was cancelled:
NOTICE of Met. Council Regional Breakfast Meetings. Please let Fran know if you
wish to attend and which session.
1.18 EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION
The Council went into Executive Session at 9:35 P.M. to discuss pending litigation.
The Council returned from Executive Session at 10:10 P.M.
The City Attorney reported that the Council discussed the following items in Executive Session:
444
September 14, 1994
A lawsuit - Dakota Rail vs. City of Mound. The Court of Appeals rendered a
decision that was adverse to the City and Mr. Allen Barnard, the Attorney from
Best & Flanagan representing the City, is recommending that they be authorized
to pursue a Petition for Review by the Minnesota Supreme Court. The Council
was advised on questions relating to this petition. They are hopeful that this can
be done with a minimal amount of expense because most of the research has been
done.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Johnson authorizing the firm of Best
and Flanagan to pursue a Petition for Review in the Minnesota Supreme
Court in the case of Dakota Rail vs. City of Mound. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
2. An update was given in the case of Flack vs. City of Mound.
Also discussed were some of the problems and concerns relating to the Piper
Institutional Government Fund.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Ahrens to adjourn at 9:45 P.M. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
~~o_ ~ l .~/, City Managei~
l~ward i Shukle, L ~
Attest: City Clerk
445
BILLS
---SEPTEMBER 14, 1994
BATCH 4083
BATCH 4084
TOTAL BILLS
$500,582.11
113,848.37
$614,430.48