1997-07-22Mound City Council Minutes July 22, 1997
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JULY 22, 1997
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, July 22, 1997, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in
said City.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City
Attorney John Dean, City Engineer John Cameron, City Planner Bruce Chamberlain, Building
Official Jon Sutherland and City Clerk Fran Clark. The following interested citizens were
present: Glenn & Brenda Isaacson, Greg Smith, Diane Rosencranz, Chris Alverez, Brenda
Bedell, Jerry Mader and Joe Zyhnan.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of
Allegiance was recited.
*Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the
Council and will be emwted by a roll call vote. There will be no sel)atztte discussion of these items
unless a Councihnember or Citizen so tz, quests, in which event the item will be removed from the
Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that art,, not listed and/or items
can he removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon ql?er the Consent Agenda has been approved.
Councilmember Hanus asked that Item E, Case //97-29 be removed from the Consent Agenda for
separate consideration.
*CONSENT AGENDA:
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Jensen to approve the Consent Agenda as amended.
A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
*1.0
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF TIlE JULY 8, 1997 REGULAR MEETING
MOTION
Ilanus, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.1 CASE 97-25: VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING SETBACKS
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF DECK~ PAUL TRUSHEIM, 5120 EDGEWATER DR.,
LOT 1, BLOCK 1, L.P. CREVIER'S, PID#13-117-24 42 0001
RESOLUTION 97-65
Hanus, Jensen, unanimously.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE
NONCONFORMING SETBACKS TO ALLOW-- '
CONSTRUCTION OF DECK, 5120 EDGEWATER DRIVE, LOT
1, BLOCK 1, L.P. CREVIERS, PID #13-117-24 42 0001, P & Z
CASE #97-25
372
*1.2
a - i & i &; &, ,, l, ~&, ,iL , Jl~
Mound City Council Minutes July 22, 1997
CASE 97-27: VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING REAR YARD
SETBACK TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF 3 SEASON PORCH, GREGORY SMITH
kSff) Mkl ¥ MCNEIL, g(Jg4 IIkI/TLETT gL'qb., LOT 1 & 2, IILOCK 1, §ItlP. ttlLL§
UNIT D, PID# 24-117-24 12 0043 & 0042
RESOLUTION #97-66
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE
A NONCONFORMING REAR YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF TWO CONFORMING ADDITIONS, 5054
BARTLETT BLVD., LOT i & 2, BLOCK 1, SHIRLEY HILLS
ADDITION UNIT D, PID 24-117-24 12 0043 & 0042, P & Z
CASE//97-27
Hanus, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.3
CASE 97-28: MINOR SUBDIVISION, 6607 BARTLETT BLVD., 6609 BARTLETT
BLVD., REARRANGEMENT OF LOT LINE, JERRY & LOIS MADER, PID# 22-117-24 43
0041
RESOLUTION//97-67
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION TO
REARRANGE A LOT LINE AT 6607 BARTLETT BLVD. AND
6609 BARTLETT BLVD., PID//22-117-24 43 0041 AND 22-117-24
43 0040 P & Z CASE//97-28
Hanus, Jensen, unanimously.
· l.4 CASE 97-30: SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK, 1641
GULL LANE, CHRIS ALVAREZ AND BRENDA BEDELL, LOT 11 & 12, BLOCK 12.
WOODLAND POINT, PID# 13-117-24 12 0202
RESOLUTION //97-68
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SETBACK VARIANCE TO
ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK, 1641 GULL
LANE, LOT 11 12, BLOCK 12, WOODLAND POINT, PID 13-
117-24 42 0046, P & Z CASE 97-30
Hanus, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.5
PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION
Hanus, Jensen, unanimously.
1.6 CASE 97-29: VARIANCE TO IMPERVIOUS SURFACE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
OF DECK, 5959 IDLEWOOD ROAD, GLEN AND BRENDA ISAACSON, LOT 6, BLOCK
10, THE HIGIILANDS, PI D// 23-117-24 42 0046
373
Mound Cio, Cotmcil Mitmtes July 22, 1997
The Building Official explained that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Since that time
it was discovered that there was an error made when the applicant drew in the hardcover on the survey.
There is additional hardcover on the site, which can be removed from the calculations and it may be that
a variance is not needed. Staff would like to work with the applicant to revise the placement of hardcover
on the survey. Then if a variance is needed it would go back to the Planning Commission for review ant
recommendation.
The Building Official explained that the applicant calculated hardcover that was not on the lot. They
calculated their whole driveway and they did not need to calculate the area in the road right-of-way. There
was also a shed on the property that appears is nonconforming to setbacks which would require
recognizing. The applicant may move this shed which would then make it conforming. He has discussed
this with the applicant. If the hardcover is at 40% or less, the applicant would not need a variance.
The original Staff recommendation was for denial. The Planning Commission recommended approval,
finding that the hardcover could be calculated at 40% ratio rather than a 30% ratio.
The applicant expressed frustration with the process.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens to table the request and have the applicant
go back in through either a survey or being able to identify the irons themselves to Staff's
satisfaction and have the information brought back to the Planning Commission.
The Council discussed the motion.
Hanus withdrew his motion and Ahrens withdrew her second.
MOTION nmde by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens to have the applicant go back in throngh
either a survey or being able to identify the irons themselves to Staff's satisfaction and have
the information brought back to the Planning Comnfission for further clarification, if
necessary. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Hanus to refund the variance fee to the applicant,
if it is determined that they do not need a variance. The vote was 4 in favor with Jensen
voting nay. Motion carried.
1.7 ADD-ON ITEM: ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS & SETTING BID OPENING FOR
BUILDING DEMOLITION - AUDITOR'S ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
The City Manager explained this is for three properties for the Auditor's Road Improvement Project.
Suggested date is Wednesday, August 20, 1997, at 11:00 A.M.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Hanus to authorize and advertisement for bids for
Building Demolition - Auditor's Road In~provement Project, for Wednesday, August 20, 1997,
at 11:00 A.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
374
1.8
Morned Ci(v Council Minutes July 22, 1997
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
WESTONKA SCHOOLS, SHIRLEY HILLS ADDITION. (PLEASE NOTE:
THIS HEARING SHOULD BE CONTINUED UNTIL A DATE CERTAIN
DUE TO THE CURRENT STUDY UNDERWAY REGARDING THE
FEASIBILITY OF RENOVATING THE EXISTING WESTONKA COMMUNITY
CENTER. (SUGGESTED DATE: AUGUST26, 1997.)
The City Manager explained that on June 10th this Public Hearing was continued to this date. The purpose
of the continuance was to wait until the study was completed on the renovation of the existing Westonka
Community Center. That study is not completed yet as the committee is still meeting and a joint City
Council Meeting Mound/Minnetrista and the Committee who is studying the renovation will be held on
Thursday, July 24. This meeting will be to talk about where we are headed. Thus, the recommendation
is for the Council to continue this public hearing until Tuesday, August 26, 1997. The School District
agrees with the continuance.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens to coniinne this public hearing until August
26, 1997. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
NONE.
1.9 APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT, MAPLE MANORS, JOE ZYLMAN
The Building Official explained that at the April 8th Council Meeting tile Cotincil asked that the following
issues be addressed:
1. Get the balance of the escrow account. This has beeu resolved and the applicant has
sub~nitted additional flmds.
2. The commons area and the holneowners agreement. This is being resolved by the addition
of au Exhibit and wording change to the proposed resolution (Item//4).
3. gl0 of the conditions in the proposed approval resolution. There were some conditions
in the proposed resolution that had to do with the modification of the flood plain for
the holding pond. The Bniiding Official and the City Engineer are comfortable with
the language in the resolntion that we can get that elevation change modified on
the plat before it is tiled.
4. The hardcover issue. Staff addressed that issue. A memo front the City Planner states
that a varia,~ce is uot reqnired because there is less than 30% hardcover on the whole
site.
5. The agreement with the Watershed District. The Watershed District Permit and
agreement issue has now been resolved. The letter front the Watershed District was
on Page 2714 of the packet.
375
MoutM City Council Minutes July 22, 1997
The City Engineer presented the erosion control change in the development agreement and reviewed it with
the Council. There is a fee requirement of $500 for each lot to ensure that erosion control barriers and
all other steps required to be taken to control erosion have been taken and remain continuously in place.
This may be part of the Letter of Credit on the original development contract. This will save the developer
from having to come up with $500 each time he takes out a building permit.
The City Engineer reported that he and the Public Works Superintendent have reviewed the plans and specs
with the Developer. They had a pre-construction conference today and they are ready to finalize a few
of the minor things that were of concern. They will be furnishing a revised building plan and normal
submittals, i. e. the lift station, etc., then they will be ready to go.
The Council discussed the hardcover issue as it relates to a PDA or PUD. The City Attorney suggested
that typically any variances would be addressed in the resolution for the PUD or PDA. The Council asked
the City Attorney to address this hardcover issue.
The Mayor suggested that the Council move on to the next item on the Agenda and come back to Maple
Manors. The Council agreed.
1.10 APPROVAL OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS, TEAL POINTE SUBDIVISION
City Planner explained that the final plat for Teal Pointe was approved in 1995. One of the conditions of
final plat approval was that Conservation Easements be established along the wetland edge for all the lots
in Teal Pointe. There are 9 lots in the subdivision and each had a conservation easement established 50
feet from the edge of the wetland, inland from that point. The conservation easements were drafted in
order to conserve the natural vegetation and topography along the wetland edge and among other things
they disallowed construction, tree removal, and excavation within those areas. The easement was not filed
with the County along with other plat documents. For whatever reason, this fell through the cracks. Now
all the lots have passed from the original developer into new ownership. There are a couple of issues to
look at this evening.
The conservation easement was determined at the time of the project being platted to be
a good tool to protect the evironment during and after development of the property.
The extent and restrictions of the conservation easement as originally drafted, make
development on some of the parcels nearly impossible. This was not discovered until some
of the building permits came into the city for review. The area of development is actually
very small and difficult to put a home on. Staff has reviewed the issue and spoken to the
current owners of the Teal Pointe lots, with the exception of the owner of Lot 5. All are
willing to accept a modified conservation easement on their property from what was
originally drafted.
The Planner stated that Lots one through three would have an easement applied exactly the
same as was originally proposed. In return for the easement on Lots one and two, the
owner would like assurance from the City that no additional review requirements would be
placed on the development of those lots. Lots four through nine would have a modified
376
Mound City Uouncil Mimttes July 22, 1997
easement applied to them. Lots four through nine the easement would change from a 50
foot area on the edge of the wetland to a 40 foot area. Lots four and five within that would
have the same management restrictions as the original easement. Lots six through nine
would allow necessary grading and tree removal to occur in the easement within restricted
limits and only during the initial construction of the home. Upon the Certificate of
Occupancy being issued, the restrictions on management of the easement area would revert
to the language originally drafted, so it would be more restrictive.
The City Engineer explained that basically what's happening is that many of the lots that are being
developed are very difficult to develop with the existing conservation easement and what the City Council
is being asked to review and look at whether they would be willing to apply new conservation easements
with the approval of the property owners in that development. The way the original conservation easement
is worded it allows absolutely nothing to be done (grading, filling, fertilizing, weed spraying, etc.) in the
easement area. This makes some of these lots ahnost impossible to develop. Once the initial construction
is completed, then they cannot do further grading or tree removal in the easement area.
In Staff's opinion, the modified conservation easement meets tile intent of tile EAW but allows the property
owners enough flexibility to adequately develop the land.
Jensen moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//97-69
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MOUND MODIFYING CONSERVATION EASEMENTS FOR
ALL LOTS IN THE TEAL POINTE RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
The Council returned to the Maple Manors item.
1.9 APPROVAL OF FINAL PI. AT, MAPLE MANORS, JOE ZYLMAN
The City Attorney reported that ill something that is not a PDA type development you look at each
individual lot which is the clear intent of 350: 1225, Subd. 6b of the City Code. The exception to that is
in the PDA provisions where you are looking at cluster platting where there will be portions of the PDA
where setbacks, lot area, density, hardcover with respect to an individual lot will not be met. Then the
question is, can you look at the subdivision as a whole? Unfortunately, there is nothing in Section 350:46
that specifically addresses that issue.
The Council discussed the common land that the Homeowners Association will have ownership of and
control over. The City Attorney advised that if anything was to be built upon that land, it would have to
come before the Council for approval.
A revised resolution was handed out for consideration. This included that erosion control paragraph in
the Developer's Agreement, the deletion of Paragraph 11, and the new Article XI Dissolution in the
377
Mound City Council Minutes July 22, 1997
Articles of Incorporation of Maple Manors Homeowners Association, Inc.
Hanus moved Ahrens seconded the following revised resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-70
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT AND CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT APPROVAL FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
AREA (PDA) WITH VARIANCES FOR 'MAPLE MANORS'
TWIN HOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, P & Z CASE
//97-12
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.11
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PLANNING ASSISTANCE GRANT
2827-2828
The City Manager explained that we are now required to update our comprehensive plan by December 31,
1998. In order to assist COlnmunities, the Metropolitan Council is making available grants and loans to
cover the costs of these updates. He and the City Planner are recommending that we apply for the funds
in both grant and loan form. The maximum amount under the grant is $20,000. The estimate for this is
between $30,000 and $60,000 because it also requires a stormawater management plan as well as general
land use issues. In the loan application we have figured $40,000 with 20% coming from the City. This
is an interest free loan.
Weycker moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-71 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
GRANT
APPLICATION FOR A
PLANNING ASSISTANCE
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
A. Financial Report for June, 1997 as Prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director.
Bo
We have received verbal communication t¥om the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD)
that the Proposed Cooperative Agreement that you recently approved has been approved by the
MCWD at their Meeting of July 10, 1997. We are awaiting receipt of the approved document.
In addition, please note that under Item #6 above, the MCWD has eased its requirements regarding
Cooperative Agreements since they recently established a Task Force to Study Rule B.
378
Co
Do
Notice regarding the joint Minnetrista/Mound City Council Meeting of July 24, 1997, 7:30 P.M.,
Mound City Hall. The agenda will mainly focus on the possible renovation of the WESTONKA
Community Center. If we have time, there may be other issues you would like to discuss i,e.,
compost site, etc. The Joint Committee studying the possible renovation will also be attending.
A copy of the Minutes of the Westonka School Board referring to a discussion they had at their
July 14, 1997 School Board Meeting asking that the City of Mound give a commitment regarding
the sale of the Lynwood Site and an addition to Shirley Hills if a survey, to be done by Decision
Resources, comes back with a negative response. The Minutes do not reflect what the actual
discussion was so you may want to view a tape of the meeting via Channel 20. I also have a copy
of the tape from that portion of the meeting if you do not have cable or the opportunity to view it.
1.12 SURVEY - WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Hanus to authorize the expenditnre of $2,600 for the
survey for the Community Center. The School Board made an offer that was predicated npon
some guarantees from the City Council that they do uot want to give them at this time. The
City could recover this expenditure as the project proceeds.
Councilmember Weycker asked if that was the total. The Mayor stated it was $1,300 per
participant. The City Manager stated the total estimate for the survey was $3,360. which
would be $1,120 per participant.
The vote was 4 in favor with Weycker voting nay. Motion carried.
E. Park and Open Space Commission Minutes of July 10,1997
Fo
Information from the National League of Cities (NLC) Re: Annual Conference to be held
December 2-6, 1997, Philadelphia. If you are interested in attending, please let Fran know ASAP.
Memo and letter fi'om Lee Gustafson, City Engineer, Minnetonka indicating that Ed Shukle, City
Manager, has been appointed to serve on the Steering Committee Re: MCWD.
Ho
REMINDER: Joint City Council Meeting with Milmetrista along with Joint Committee studying
Westonka Community Center Renovation, Thursday, July 24, 1997, 7:30 P.M., Mound City Hall.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus
unanimously in favor.
Attest: City Clerk
to adjourml at 8:40 P.M.
Motion carried.
The vote was
379
Mound City Council Minutes July 22, 1997
THIS PAGE LEVI' BLANK INTENTIONALLY
380
Bills July 22, 1997
BATCH 7072 $282,882.06
Total bills
$282,882.06