1994-11-22November 22, 1994
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 22, 1994
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday,
November 22, 1994, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz Jensen, and
Phyllis Jessen. Councilmember Ken Smith 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, City Planner Bruce Chamberlain, Building Official Jon Sutherland,
Finance Director Gin0 Businaro, and the following interested citizens: Jody & Dennis Emery,
Jeff & Sherry Zuccaro., Connie & Dennis Stahlbusch, Wanda Martens, Brad Blazevic, Sally
Custer, Nancy Clough, Harold Meeker, Brad & Sara Biermann, Alice Rogers, Ron Peterson,
Dave Willette, John Besseson, Bob Polston, Mark Hanus and Jerry Longpre.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
1.0 MINUTES
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Ahrens to approve the Minutes of the
November 9, 1994, Canvassing Meeting, the November 9, 1994, Regular Meeting,
and the November 15, 1994, Committee of the Whole Meeting, as submitted. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.1 RECONFIRMATION OF FINAL PLAT FOR TEAL PQINTE.
City Planner, Bruce Chamberlain, reported that several weeks ago John Besseson, representing
Teal Pointe Development, submitted final plat hard shells, requesting that the City release the
final plat for Teal Pointe. It has been a number Of months since the plat was approved. There
is some discrepancy in the Mound City Code regarding the amount of time the developer has
to file the final plat after City Council approval. This is the reason it is back before the City
Council this evening for reconfirmation. There is also one item that needs to be modified on
the final plat approval dealing with the time of construction. Under the original final plat
approval, construction would be completed within 180 days of the final plat approval, but
because of the time of year, the developer, is asking for '280 days from the time the City Council
reconfirms the final plat. The developer has submitted a number of items to the City in regard
to the reconfirmation but.the following items still need to be submitted before signing the final
plat which are:
1. Park dedication fee in the amount of $4,500.
2. Bond or letter of credit in the amount of $127,500.
Staff recommends approval of the reconfirmation and the modification proposed. One condition
should be added to the final plat approval, stating that the final plat should be filed at Hennepin
County within 60 days'of the approval of the reconfirmation.
545
November 22, 1994
Tom Casey, representing Biermanns, Rogers, Mr. Meeker and Ms. Clough, stated he has two
issues.
1. The legal status of the final plat.
2. The affect of this plat and this project on the property owners.
Mr. Casey stated that his comments will be on the legal status of the final plat. Some of the
neighbors may want to comment on the effect on their property. Mr. Casey then submitted a
letter/memorandum, dated November 22, 1994, to the City Council for the record. He then
stated that the final plat is void and was void 60 days after it was approved, as of July 10, 1994.
Mr. Casey stated that the hard shells needed to be received by the City before September 14,
1994, or one year after preliminary plat approval. Mr. Casey stated that since the final plat hard
shells were not received until just a few weeks ago, this did not meet the time lines for the plat.
He then stated that as he reads Mound's Code both the preliminary and final plat are now null
and void. This would require the developer to start all over again. Mr. Casey referred to the
following sections of the Mound City Code: Section 330:35, Subd. 1; and Section 330:35,
Subd. 9.
Mr. Casey further asked, "That since this development needs to start again, the City now has
time to correct its deficiencies in the original plat resolutions, i.e. reconsider the park dedication
fees based on a $200,000 market value versus a $45,000 market value (to gain another $15,500
in park dedication fees) by applying the ordinance correctly. The City could also do an EAW
which sets up an archaeological study, not done by the developer, who said for the record that
he only asked for the minimum archaeological study necessary." Mr. Casey also stated that
even the Met Council recommended in their reply to the EAW that Lots 1, 2, and 3 be
unbuildable.
The Council stated that at the time of the EAW, the Native American Indian Council indicated
that they accepted the findings. The lots being unbuildable discussion was done at the time and
yes now they would be unbuildable, but then they were not.
The City Attorney noted that the reason this is back at the Council tonight is that the developer
did not do what they were supposed to do under the terms of the ordinance. It is therefore,
being brought back tonight, and it is his understanding from the Planner and the Engineer, that
there have been no changes, no recommendations either on the ordinance or in the documents
that have been presented. He further stated that he would agree with Mr. Casey in one respect
and that is that it would be better if there was a public hearing just to satisfy that particular
question. The City can process both the preliminary and final plat at the same time. He stated
that he is not as concerned about Mr. Casey's comments about the one year on the preliminary
plat because once the final plat is submitted and approved, the preliminary plat is pretty much
ineffective. The only purpose of the preliminary plat is to run it through and then you make
changes so the developer can make changes to the hard shell and do whatever the Council has
asked. He advised the Council to hold a combined public hearing for the preliminary and final
plat.
The City Att6rney stated that the City Code does need to be changed to make the time-lines
more clear.
546
November 22, 1994
John Besseson, representing the Teal Pointe Deyelopmcnt, stated that he has worked with
City Staff and the neighbors on the retaining wall issue since May trying to eliminate the
retaining' wall and work with the neighbors to landscape theii' property. He stated that
he has letters from his company to the r/eiglibors on the issue. He stated he had several
meetings with the homeowners, one with the City Manager and City Engineer, and Mr.
Besseson determined that in working with the homeowners, they would not have to be
quite as concerned with the 60 day filing of the plat because he thought he could amend
it. After this meeting he contacted the neighbors and they said that after the meeting
with the City and discussing how it was going to affect them, they would be perfectly
happy with the retaining wall. The rbason this was done was to. give them a clear
understanding of how the site would impact the neighborhood. It took longer to deal
with the neighbors but he stated he wanted to be cooperative., The neighbors did not
want to go along .with anything but what was on the plan. He stated that he it was his
understanding that a petition was signed not wanting .any dirt. spread on their property.
That was the problem for not getting'back to the City in a timely manner. He further
stated that he would like to get into, the property and put his steel pilings in, rough the
road i.n, do the class 5 grading, and be able to put the lift station and sewer in before the
ground is frozen. The only thi,ng that may have to wait until Spring would be the
asphalt. He. wants to be able to grade the site and make it dri'veable, stake the lots and
market-them for Spring sales. He requested, that his extension be approved tonight so
he could get on with the development.
The CoUncil stated that they have to stand by the ordinance and require a public heating.
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Ah~ns to refer Teal Pointe back to the
Planning Commi~ion for their review and recommendation and then set a public
hearing for the City Council to consider the prelimlnsry and fmal plat of Teal Pointe
for January 10, 1995. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Harold Meeker, 5132 Waterbury Road, stated that the neighbors never agreed to the retaining
wall.
1.2
CASE//94-72: ' BRADLY T. BLAZEVIC, 1871 SHOREWOOD LANE, LOT 2,
BLOCK 12,' SHADYWOOD POINT, PID #18-117-23 23 006.1, VARIANCE FOR
ENTRY DECK.
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval
with the findings that practical difficulty exists. The applicant has made the effort to comply
with criteria in the Resolution g92-75, there is no reasonable place on the lot that the shed could
be located that is not in the floodplain, and the site is unique.
The Council asked if there was a double fee charged because work was started before a permit
was taken out. The Building Official stated yes.
Jessen moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
547
November 22, 1994
RESOLUTION g94-150
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING
SETBACKS AND A SHED IN THE FLOODPLAIN TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING
ENTRY DECK AT 1871 SHOREWOOD LANE, LOT
2, BLOCK 12, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID//18-117-23
23 0061, P & Z CASE/D4-72
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3
CASE #94-74; WANDA MARTENS, 4961 BEDFORD ROAD. LOT 5 & ELY 10'
OF 6, BLOCK 97, WYCHWOOD, PID//24-117-24 41 0144, VARIANCE TO LOT
AREA FOR NEW HOME.
The Building Official explained the request. The Staff and Planning Commission recommended
approval. The existing undersized, dilapidated house will be demolished.
Ahrens moved and Jesse~ seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-151
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LOT SIZE
VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
NEW DWELLING AT 4961 BEDFORD ROAD, LOT 5,
AND THE EASTERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 6, BLOCK
37, WYCHWOOD, PID //24-117-24 41 0144, P & Z
CASE #94-74
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.4
APPROVAL OF OPERATIONS PERMIT, PXC CORPORATION, 5314
SHORELINE DRIVE (BALBOA BUILDING).
The Building Official explained that Operations Permits are required for businesses in the Balboa
Building. PXC, located at 2321 Commerce Blvd., is proposing to expand its operation into the
Balboa Building and operate a division known at Ameriweb, Inc. Ameriweb will be involved
in the design, engineering and assembly of materials handling machinery. They will occupy
approximately 10,500 square feet and have a staff of approximately 15. They are taking part
of the area previously used by Drop Ship Express so increased traffic will not be an issue.
Ahrens moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-152
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN OPERATIONS
PERMIT FOR PXC CORPORATION d.b.a.
AMERIWEB, 5314 SHORELINE DRIVE (BALBOA
BUILDING)
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carded.
548
November 22, 1994
1.5
CASE g94-63: RESOLUTION TO VOID RESOLUTIQN//94-128 AND REPLACE
IT WITH THIS RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SETBACK VARIANCE TO
H~ON LA~ WO CONS~RVC~ON 'A PORCI~ A~O OE¢I~ AW 5000
ENCHANTED ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 21, SHADYW00D POINT, PID #13-117-24
11 0069.
The Building Official explained that the owner asked that the original reSolution be modified to
delete several conditions that have been met prior, to filing the resolution at Hennepin County.
The Building Official recommended approval.
Jessen moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-153
RESOLUTION TO VOID RESOLUTION//94-128 AND
REPLACE IT WITH THIS RESOLUTION TO
APPROVE A SETBACK VARIANCE TO HERON
LANE TO CONSTRUCT A PORCH AND DECK AT
5000 ENCHANTED ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 21,
SHADYWOOD POINT, PID//13-117-24 11 0069, P &
Z CASE g94-63
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT,
There were none.
1.6
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMM[qSION
RE: MOUND VISIONS PROGRAM - LOST LAKE CANAL REHABILITATION
PROJECT AND AUDITOR'S ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
The City Manager stated that he and the City's .Economic Development Coordinator would like
to present the plan to proceed on doing the Lost Lake Canal Rehabilitation Project and the
Auditor's Road Improvement Project. The 'City has been involved in the Mound Visions
program for about the last 3 years. This was developed because of a study done for downtown
Mound in .1990 and through the work of Bruce Chamberlain, Economic Development
Coordinator, a strategy for Mound Visions was prepared. This concept was to look at 3 basic
areas of economic development, one in business cluster development, one in aesthetic or physical
improvements, and one in promotions. At that time the EDC (Economic Development
Commission) became the .steering committee for the Mound Visions Program. It was under this
program that the downtown revitalization plan was developed. A promotional packet was
developed and implemented. A conceptual plan was then presented.
Phase 1 -
Would be rerouting Auditor's Road which would take place at the same
time as the Lost l_ake dredging project.
Phase 2 -
Would deal with rerouting County Road 15 at Belmont taking it north to
Lynwood Blvd. then going west.
549
November 22, 1994
In March of 1994, the City Council authorized submission of a grant application for the dredging
of the Lost Lake Canal. This application was sent to the federal government for Intermodel
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) funds under a program called Transportation
Enhancements. The City was successful in securing this grant for 1997. There will be about
a year to a year and a half of planning work, which involves not only physical planning but
engineering and environmental testing, soils work, etc.
The City Manager stated that the EDC is asking the Council for their endorsement of the project
and a proposed resolution was presented. The resolution addresses the two projects and
identifies the engineering and consultant fees that will be part of the project that are not funded
by the ISTEA grant. Cost estimates are a part of Exhibit A of the resolution.
City Planner, Bruce Chamberlain, explained the 3 components of Phase 1 Downtown Mound
Redevelopment:
Lost Lake Canal.
Auditor's Road Improvement project.
Auditor's Road Streetscape Parkway.
Portions of the costs for the Auditor's Road Improvement Project will be paid with Municipal
State Aid (MSA) funding.
The City Planner then reviewed his memo of November 17, 1994 with the Council. The
estimated fees. described below are outlined by project, according to anticipated time of
expenditure:
Lost Lake Auditor's Auditor's Rd. Est.
Road Stscp/Pkwy Totals
Round 1: August-
December 1994 $ 38,000 $ 3,000 $5,000 $ 46,000
Round 2: January-
May 1995 $ 54,000 $10,000 $6,500 $ 70,500
Round 3: June-
October 1995 $ 7,000 $ 2,500 $ 9,500
Round 3B: Nov. '95-
March '96 $38,000 $ 38,000
Round 4: April 1996-October 1997
Estimated project totals:
$ 83.000 $31,000 $114.000
$182,000 $84,500 $11,500 $278,000
The City Planne, x notod tho following:
550
November 22, 1994
Fees for round 3B have not been determined for the Lost Lake project because they are
services which wouM only be needed if project modifications based on permit denials
were required.
Fees for the Auditor's Road project would be 100% funded by Municipal State Aid funds.
This will not be known until the time the work is done.
A go/no go assessment will be made at the end of each round at which time the projects
could be stopped if there are insurmountable obstacles to completion.
The decision before the City Council at this time is the approval of design, administration and
associated professional fees apart from the actual construction costs.
The City Engineer explained what criteria would need to be met to receive MSA funding. He
and the City Manager will work on this.
Jerry Longpre, m6mber of the EDC, stated that this project could make Mound the commercial
center for this area. He thanked Bruce Chamberlain, City Planner, for his efforts in obtaining
the ISTEA Grant for the City of Mound. He stated that the EDC is excited about moving
forward with the project.
Johnson moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION#94-154 REsoLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION OF
DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATIVE
FEES. TOWARD THE COMPLETION OF THE LOST
LAKE CANAL REHABILITATION PROJECT,
AUDITOR'S ROAD RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
AND THE AUDITOR'S ROAD
STREETSCAPE/PARKWAY PROJECT
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.7
RECOMMENDATION FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RE:
PROPOSED PUBLIC RELATIONS STRATEGY FOR LOST LAKE CANAL.
Bruce Chamberlain, Economic Development Coordinator, explained that a Lost Lake Public
Relations Task Force has been put together to do the following:
Educate and capture the interest of the public, and
Get the community physically involved with the project before construction ever
begins.
Chamberlain then presented the Task Force's five objectives:
1. Create a master plan along with artist's renderings for the Lost Lake site with
combined Park & Open Space Commission and Economic Development
Commission/Mound Visions input and oversight.
551
November 22, 1994
e
Relocate the Mound Farmer's Market from its current location to Lost Lake and
expand days and hours of operation.
Place an information ldosk close 'to Shoreline Drive and adjacent to the new
Farmer's Market.
Start a "buy-a-brick" program to help raise money for a Lost Lake project and
get the community directly involved in the rejuvenation of Lost l_ake.
Work with the Minnesota Transportation Museum to locate and possibly restore
a historic or reproduction transit boat like the ones that used Lost Lake during the
resort era.
The City Planner reviewed each objective in detail. The Council thanked all the volunteers who
have worked on this project.
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by'Jensen to accept the Lost Lake Canal -
Public Relations Strategy as proposed by the Task Force directing that they go
forward with the plan and bring back cost information to the Council for further
review. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.8 APPROVAL OF 1995 DOCK LOCATION MAP.
Dock Inspector, Tom McCaffrey, reported that two changes to the map are proposed. The first
change is to delete Dock Site//33120 located on Stratford Lane, abutting 4536 Denbigh Road.
This land has eroded to the point where it has reverted to private lakeshore. The
recommendation from the POSC is to approve this deletion from the 1995 Dock Location Map.
The second change is to add two dock sites,//54970 and//56180, abutting Lost lake Park. This
was requested by residents of the Lost Lake Addition. Staff has determined that there is
adequate space to allow the two additional dock sites in the area. The POSC voted not to
recommend approval of these additional two dock sites on a 1-5 vote.
Councilmember Jessen stated that when this subdivision was approved and the original 6 dock
sites were approved the LMCD was concerned about the number of docks the City of Mound
has on Lake Minnetonka and the increased boat traffic.
The Dock Inspector stated that all the dock sites available to Mound have not been assigned due
to erosion, a tree in the way, etc., so we would not be increasing the total number of docks
assigned to Mound by the LMCD.
The Council discussed the fact that even though the residents of the Lost Lake Addition have
requested the additional dock sites, they are not reserved for the people of the Lost Lake
Addition. 'The docks would be assigned on a first come/first serve basis as of January 1st of any
552
November 22, 1994
Councilmember Ahrens stated that at the POSC meeting it was pointed out that of the six sites
that are available on Lost Lake, all six are shared docks. She further stated that she will vote
against this because it sets a terrible precedent to start adding more dock sites to an area
particularly after the things that have come out of the direction that the LMCD is taking.
The Council discussed the fact, if approved, 'they are not increasing the number of docks Mound
has available overall and that with the dredging of the Lost Lake Canal there will be increased
boat traffic in this area which was a concern when the original 6 docks were approved in 1988.
They also discussed what has changed in six years i.e., more houses on Lost Lake, the water
was very low.
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Jensen to approve the 1995 Dock Location
Map with as proposed by the Dock Inspector with the following changes:
Removal of Dock Site//33120, at 4536 Denbigh Road because it has reverted
to private lakeshore due to erosion of the shoreline.
e
The addition of 2 Dock Sites at Lost Lake Park, bringing the total dock sites
in this area to 8.
The vote was 3 in favor with Ahrens 'voting nay. Motion carried.
1.9
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC LAND ALTERATION PERMIT FROM DAN1EI. AND
SANDRA STROT, 1566 EAGLE LANE, LOT 3, 4 & 5, BLOCK 2, WOODLAND
POINT, DOCK SITE//02250, SEED/SOD PARKING AREA.
The Building Official explained the request. The Park Director and the Park Commission
recommended approval. The neighbors in the area were notified of this meeting and there were
no negative responses.
Jessen moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION g94-155
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SPECIAL PERMIT
FOR A LAND ALTERATION ON PUBLIC LAND
KNOWN AS WAURIKA COMMON TO ALLOW
RESTORATION OF A PARKING AREA ABUTTING
1566 EAGLE LANE, LOTS 3, 4, & 5, BLOCK 2,
WOODLAND POINT
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.10
APPROVAL OF PAYMENT REQUEST #I - MOUND~~STA PUBLIC
WORKS OUTDOOR MATERIALq STORAGE - IMPERIAL DEVELOPERS -
$63.217.66.
The City Manager reported that the Engineer is recommending approval of this payment request.
553
November 22, 1994
1.11
1.12
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Ahreus to approve Payment Request #1
from Imperial Developers for work completed on the Mound/Minnetrista Public
Work Material Storage area in the amount of $63,217.66 and also approve Change
Order #1 to Section I of this project which is a net deduct from the original contract
of $1,797.50. Revised Section I contract amount $98,205.00. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
APPROVAL OF TEM1N)RARy ON-SALE NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR
LICENSE FOR OUR LADY OF THE LAKE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR
FEBRUARY 4, 1995.
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Ahrens to approval a Temporary On-Sale
Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church
for February 4, 1995. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Jessen to authorize the payment of bill~ as
presented on the pre-list in the amount of $499,471.27, when funds are available.
A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
Aw
De
Financial Report for October 1994 as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director.
Park & Open Space Commission Meeting Minutes of November 10, 1994.
Letter from Jim Miller, Executive Director,' League of Minnesota Cities RE: 1)
Candidacy of several City officials for the National League of Cities Board and Officers
positions, and 2) City of Mound's potential in being represented on the National League
of Cities Small Cities Council.
Information from LMCD on a proposed ordinance amending the LMCD Code to
establish Planned Usage Development Procedures and Standards and a definition of
Public Piers.
Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 1994.
REMINDERS:
Budget Hearing - Tuesday, November 29, 1994, 7:30 P.M. '-.
NLC Conference, December 1-4, 1994, Minneapolis Convention Center.
. Continued Budget Hearing (if necessary), Tuesday, December 6, 1994, 7:30
P.M.
554
November 22, 1994
Annual Christmas Party, Friday, December 9, 1994, American Legion.
Thanksgiving Holiday, Thursday and Friday, November 24 & 25, 1994, City
Offices closed.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council went into Executive Session at 9:30 P.M. to discuss several matters of pending
litigation. The Council returned from Executive Session at 11:30 P.M.
1.13 DAKOTA RAIL LITIGATION
The City Attorney reported that the Council met tonight with Alan Bamard, attorney
representing the City in the Dakota Rail matter, and he informed the Council that we have
received an order from the Minnesota Supreme Court denying further review of the Dakota Rail
Case. Mr. Barnard has laid out certain options to the Council. There was discussion and Mr.
Bamard will report back to the Council in the future.
1.14 PIPER INVESTMENT LITIGATION
The City Attorney reported that Mound has an investment in Piper's Institutional Government
Portfolio Fund and there has been a reduction in the value of that investment. The Council
previously suggested that we review the possibilities and the alternatives available to the City
and those were discussed in detail, i.e. do nothing and see if the fund rebounds, sell the fund
and take the losses, try to work with Piper to make some arrangements, join the class action
lawsuit, or to retain an attorney to commence an action or an arbitration. After discussion, the
Council's thought is to retain the services of Jerome S. Rice who has experience in the securities
field.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by jensen to authorize the City Manager and
the CitY Attorney to negotiate to retain the services of Jerome S. Rice and to
investigate the possibility of commencing an arbitration action or some other
litigation against Piper. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Ahreus to adjourn at 11:40 P.M. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
AtteJt: citY'~l&k-'~i'
555
II ,Ii I Il & l J, &, & ,I,
BILLS.
-November
22, 1994
BATCH 4103
BATCH 4112
TOTAL BILLS
$370,825.89
128,645.38
$499,471.27