Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2009-11-24
I* PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AGENDA �I�-- �`l ;II TUESDAY, NOV 24, 20,99- 7: "' MOUND CITY CO NCI Cln D �� *Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by a single roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member or Citizen so requests. In that event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. Page 1. 2. 3. 4. L_J 5 • 6. Call meeting to order Pledge of Allegiance Approve agenda, with any amendments *Consent A eg nda *A. Approve payment of claims 2500 -2523 *B. Approve minutes: November 10, 2009 regular meeting 2524 -2527 *C. Approve amendments to Docks - Section 438 and Slips — 2528 -2535 Section 439 of the Mound City Code *D. Approve an Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo by the 2536 -2537 Knights of Columbus for Jan 23, Mar 20 and Nov 13, 2010 *E. Approve Resolution Approving 1 -Year Extension Regarding 2538 -2562 City approvals for Woodlyn Ridge Major Subdivision *F. Approve Resolution Approving 1 -Year Extension for Variance 2563 -2569 for property at 2933 Cambridge Lane *G. Approve Resolution Approving Front Yard Variance for 2570 -2594 Property at 1890 Shorewood Lane *H. Approve Resolution Approving the Release of Tax Forfeited 2595 -2610 Property at 19- 1177 -23 -34 -0063 at 3101 Tuxedo Boulevard Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda (Limit to three minutes per speaker) Sheriff Rich Stanek, Hennepin County 1 PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 7. Ray Hanson, Engineering /Planning Tech, requesting approval for purchase of 2611 security fencing at Public Works Facility 0 8. Vicki Weber, representing the Administrative Code Committee, presenting 2612 -2614 recommendations for language changes to the Mound Administrative Code 9. Catherine Pausche, Finance Director Overview of proposed utility rates for 2010 and the new water 2615 -2622 conservation law (MN Statutes, Section 103G.291) 10. Sarah Smith, Community Development Director A. Discussion/action on Planning Case No. 09 -15A 2623 -2654 Variance — front setback for deck to porch conversion 1744 Avocet Lane Bruce and Judy McKeeman B. Discussion/action regarding notification to Metropolitan Council 2655 -2662 regarding the expenditure of funds under Council Grant No. SGO04 -129 for parking structure in Auditor's Road within established timeline 11. Jim Fackler, Parks Superintendent, with overview of Dock Program budget, 2663 -2680 requesting action on 2010 Dock and Slip Fees 0 12. Miscellaneous /Correspondence A. Comments /reports from Council Members B. Reports: Finance Department — Oct 2009 2681 -2686 C. Fire Commission Agenda — Nov 18, 2009 2687 -2695 D. Minutes: Parks & Open Space Comm — Nov 12, 2009 2696 -2697 Planning Comm — Nov 17, 2009 2698 -2701 E. Correspondence: Resignation of Tim Hughes, CSO 2702 Letter from Mediacom 2703 13. Adjourn This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. More current meeting agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site: www.cityofmound.com • COUNCIL BRIEFING November 24, 2009 • Upcoming Events Schedule: Don Forget!! Nov 24 – 7:25 – HRA regular meeting Nov 24 – 7:30 – CC regular meeting Dec 1= 7:00 – Interviews for Planning Comm applicants; CC recommended to attend Dec 8 – 6:30 – HRA regular meeting Dec 8 – 7:30 – CC regular meeting (adopt 2010 budget) Dec 10 – 7:00 - Interviews for Parks Comm applicants; CC recommended to attend Dec 22 HRA and CC meetings canceled due to holiday season, demand permitting City Hall Closings Nov 26 -27 Thanksgiving Dec 24 (1/2 day) + 25 Christmas Eve /Christmas Day City Official's Absences Dec 9 -20 Kandis Hanson Vacation Of Particular Note You are encouraged to attend and observe the Planning Commission and the Parks Commission interviews listed about—Dec 1 and Dec 10. We are taking applications through Nov 20 and Council Members will make appointments at the Annual Meeting on Jan 12. • Notify me please ........ Council Members are reminded to notify me of their planned absences, for our scheduling purposes and so we can anticipate when we have those topics that have certain voting requirements under the law. Thank you! Council Members who have questions on the content of their packets are asked to contact me in advance so that more research may be done or additional information may be provided that will assist in your quality decision - making. Thanks! C ou4irtAW d oww........two-to-g&! 0 0 0 NOVEMBER 24, 2009 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1 111109SUE $675 NOV I 1 111809SUE $11,300.62 NOV I 112409SUE $351,450.90 NOV I TOTAL $1,037,801.03 -2500- City of Mound *Check Detail Register© November 2009 11/19/09 8:41 PM Page 1 • Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Wells Fargo Paid Chk# 032953 11/11/2009 CUSTOMER DRIVEN REALITY R 601 -49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenues $49.76 11 1109 W/S REFUND 4773 ABERDEEN ROAD Total CUSTOMER DRIVEN REALITY $49.76 Paid Chk# 032954 11/11/2009 FAS -AHM UTILITY LLC $46.67 R 601 -49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenues $16.52 11 1109 W/S REFUND 4720 MANCHESTER ROAD Clothing and Uniforms Total FAS -AHM UTILITY LLC $16.52 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE Paid Chk# 032955 11/11/2009 GMH ASPHALT $81.65 111109 E 401 -43109 -500 Capital Outlay FA $ 673,915.53 RE QUEST #5 REQUEST #5 2009 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 111109 Total GMH ASPHALT $673,915.53 Clothing and Uniforms Paid Chk# 032956 11/1112009 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 2009 BOOT ALLOWANCE E 101 - 49999 -430 Miscellaneous $69.45 19 1172322001 2ND HALF PROP TAX #19- 117 -23 -22 -0010 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER $69.45 Paid Chk# 032957 11/11/2009 HOOPER, PAUL E 101 - 42110 -434 Conference & Training $12.50 11 1109 10 -21 -09 TRAINING Total HOOPER, PAUL $12.50 • Paid Chk# 032958 11/11/2009 INTERBANK R 60149400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenues $75.26 11 1109 W/S REFUND 2187 CEDAR LANE Total INTER BANK $75.26 Paid Chk# 032959 11/11/2009 KLOCEK, ROBERT R 281 -45210 -34725 Dock Permits $50.00 11 1109 KEY DEPOSIT VILLA SLIP #12 Total KLOCEK, ROBERT $50.00 Paid Chk# 032960 11/11/2009 LEMOINE, MIKE - R 281- 45210 -34725 Dock Permits $50.00 11 1109 KEY DEPOSIT VILLA SLIP #15 Total LEMOINE, MIKE $50.00 Paid Chk# 032961 11/11/2009 PUCCI, JOSEPH - ---- R 601 -49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenues $76.32 11 1109 W/S REFUND 1601 GULL LANE Total PUCCI, JOSEPH $76.32 Paid Chk# 032962 11/11/2009 SCOTTY B'S E 101 - 41310 -431 Meeting Expense $17.00 11 1109 LUNCH MEETING, HANSON, NORLANDER Total SCOTTY B'S $17.00 Paid Chk# 032963 11/11/2009 SKINNER, GREG �- -'°-� E 60149400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $46.67 111109 2009 BOOT ALLOWANCE E 60149400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $81.64 111109 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE E 60249450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $81.65 111109 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $46.66 111109 2009 BOOT ALLOWANCE E 10143100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $46.67 111109 2009 BOOT ALLOWANCE E 101 -43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $81.64 111109 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE • -2501- I* City Of Mound 11/19/09 8:41 PM Page 2 *Check Detail Register© November 2009 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 10100 Wells Fargo $497.74 $100.00 $673,915.53 $369.45 $166.79 $675,049.51 • -2502- Check Amt Invoice Comment Total SKINNER, GREG $384.93 Paid Chk# 032964 11/11/2009 SPENCER, RYAN E 101 -42110 -218 Clothing and Uniforms $97.98 11 1109 2009 FITNESS INCENTIVE Total SPENCER, RYAN $97.98 Paid Chk# 032965 11/11/2009 TRUE VALUE, MOUND E 101 - 42110 -210 Operating Supplies $139.48 093009 09 -09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies $10.68 64284 DUCT TAPE E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies $12.73 64952 KEY RING E 101 - 42110 -210 Operating Supplies $9.61 65 213 LG BISQUIT Total TRUE VALUE, MOUND $172.50 Paid Chk# 032966 11/11/2009 WHITE, MARTA R 601 -49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenues $23.28 11 1109 W/S REFUND 5047 EDGEWATER DRIVE Total WHITE, MARTA $23.28 Paid Chk# 032967 11/11/2009 XCEL ENERGY E 602 -49450 -381 Electric Utilities $38.48 29 5233810 10 -09 #51- 9379448 -0 • Total XCEL ENERGY $38.48 10100 Wells Fargo $675,049.51 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 10100 Wells Fargo $497.74 $100.00 $673,915.53 $369.45 $166.79 $675,049.51 • -2502- City Of Mound 11/17/09 11:59 PM Payments Page 1 Current Period: November 2009 Batch Name 111809SUE User Dollar Amt $11,300.62 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $11,300.62 $0.00 In Balance Refer 111809 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES E 101 - 41310 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, RITTER Cash Payment E 101 - 41110 -433 Dues and Subscriptions 09 -01 -09 AUDIT PREPAID $7,719.00 Invoice 133610 11/18/2009 Cash Payment Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7,719.00 Refer 111809 MOUND POST OFFICE 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -322 Postage 11 -09 UTILITY BILLING $154.10 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 $94.14 Invoice 111809 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -322 Postage 11 -09 UTILITY BILLING $154.11 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 E 601 - 49400 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, MOORE Transaction Date 11/17/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $308.21 Refer 111809 SHEILA K TRAINING INCORPO - Cash Payment Cash Payment E 101 - 41310 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, HANSON, $204.65 Invoice 111809 K. Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 *I Cash Payment E 101 - 41310 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, RITTER $204.65 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, SMITH $204.65 • Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, MOORE $94.14 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, MOORE $34.79 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, MOORE $34.79 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 675 - 49425 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, MOORE $40.93 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, FACKLER $204.65 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 101- 43100 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, SKINNER $57.30 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, SKINNER $57.30 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, SKINNER $59.35 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 675- 49425 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, SKINNER $30.70 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 41500 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, PAUSCHE $204.65 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -421 1 0 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, KURTZ $204.65 Invoice 111809 11/1812009 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, $204.65 PEDERSON Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 • Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -434 Conference & Training 11 -03 -09 SUPERVISORS MEETING, COLOTTI $204.65 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 - 2503- 10 Current Period: November 2009 Fund Summary City Of Mount' 11/17/09 11:59 PM Page 2 Payments 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $9,836.14 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $662.87 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 , ......... ... ..... - Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,046.50 Refer 111809 SKIN GREG _ .. ....._... .. ,.. Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE $8.20 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE $8.20 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 2009 CLOTHING ALLOWANCE $8.19 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $24.59 Refer 111809 SPEEDWAY SUPER AMERICA (FIR _ Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -212 Motor Fuels THRU 10 -26 -09 GASOLINE CHARGES $458.22 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 .... ..... .. .:::, Wells Fargo 10100 Total $458.22 Refer 111809 SPEEDWAY SUPER MERICA (PAR _ Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -212 Motor Fuels THRU 10 -26 -09 GASOLINE CHARGES $703.84 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 . , ., Wells Fargo 10100 Total $703.84 Refer 111809 WAYZATA, Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -438 Licenses and Taxes #1604 REPLACEMENT PLATE $7.25 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 P022292 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -438 Licenses and Taxes #1604 REPLACEMENT PLATE $7.25 Invoice 111809 11/18/2009 PO 22292 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 . , ..., .,. Wells Fargo 10100 Total $14.50 Refer 111809 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101 -42115 -381 Electric Utilities 10 -09 #51- 6002835 -9 $25.76 Invoice 296621407 11/18/2009 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $25.76 Current Period: November 2009 Fund Summary City Of Mount' 11/17/09 11:59 PM Page 2 Payments 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $9,836.14 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $662.87 601 WATER FUND $261.64 602 SEWER FUND $263.69 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $204.65 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND $71.63 $11,300.62 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $11,300.62 Total $11,300.62 - 2504 City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 1 Payments Current Period: November 2009 Batch Name 112409SUE User Dollar Amt $351,450.90 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $351,450.90 Refer 112409 3D SPECIALTIES $0.00 In Balance Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply SNOWMOBILING CROSSING SIGNS $29.98 Invoice 431627 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $29.98 Refer 112409 A -1 RENTAL OF LAKE MINNETONK Cash Payment E 285 - 46300 -430 Miscellaneous STRAIGHT BOOM LIFT Invoice 64055 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 112409 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 $130.00 Total $130.00 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $68.80 Invoice 1941576 -A 11/24/2009 Invoice 12113 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $68.80 Invoice 1941576 -B 11/24/2009 E 222 -42260 -325 Pagers -Fire Dept. Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $25.22 Invoice 1941579 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa , 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $25.22 Invoice 1941579 -B 11/24/2009 Total $218.23 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -384 Refuse/Garbage Disposa 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $25.22 Invoice 1941579 -C 11/24/2009 E 670 -49500 -460 Janitorial Services Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $83.39 Invoice 1939049 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 670 - 49500 -440 Other Contractual Servic 10 -09 CURBSIDE RECYCLING $14,280.21 Invoice 1938499 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa 11 -09 WASTE SERVICE $252.18 Invoice 1940008 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/5/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $14,829.04 Refer 112409 AMUNDSON, M. LLP _ Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -256 Tobacco Products For R CIGARETTES $519.39 Invoice 73819 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $519.39 Refer 112409 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -325 Pagers -Fire Dept. BATTERY, BELT CLIP, CASE $123.23 Invoice 12113 11/24/2009 PO 22346 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -325 Pagers -Fire Dept. CASE CRACKED $95.00 Invoice 12161 11/24/2009 P022346 Transaction Date 11/1612009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $218.23 Refer 112409 APOGEE RETAIL, LLC Cash Payment E 670 -49500 -460 Janitorial Services 10 -10 -09 RECYCLE DAY $200.00 Invoice 3934 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo Refer 112409 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 463931004 -A 11/24/2009 -2505- 10100 Total $200.00 $108.66 91 *I 401 City of Mound I* Payments 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 2 Current Period: November 2009 Refer 112409 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS COMPANY Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -221 Equipment. Parts Invoice 22274 -S 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Refer 112409 BELLBOY CORPORATION 10 -27 -09 SINCLAIR INTRUSION ALARM $496.90 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $496.90 -2506- Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -210 Operating Supplies BAGS $25.90 Invoice 82939700 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -255 Misc Merchandise For R MERCHANDISE $66.70 Invoice 82939700 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,404.15 Invoice 51048400 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750 -265 Freight 11 -11 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $18.60 • Invoice 51048400 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $471.30 Invoice 50969800 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,366.00 Invoice 50969800 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight 11 -04 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $46.50 Invoice 50969800 -C 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,222.40 Invoice 50964300 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $96.00 Invoice 50964300 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -210 Operating Supplies BAGS, TOWELS $46.90 Invoice 82912600 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $16.50 Invoice 82912600 -B 11124/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,780.95 Refer 112409 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY Cash Payment E222-42260-210 Operating Supplies COFFEE $35.95 Invoice 825533 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $35.95 Refer 112409 BOLTON AND MENK, INCOR PORA Cash Payment E 401 -46570 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 PUMPHOUSE $2,282.00 RELOCATION Invoice 128944 -A 11/2412009 Project PWO808 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 PROJECT REPORT $40.63 • Invoice 128944 -B 11/24/2009 UPDATE Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 PROJECT REPORT $40.63 UPDATE Invoice 128944 -C 11/24/2009 -2506- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 3 Payments • Current Period: November 2009 _....�_ _.,... . ...._... . _.' A�.., ....,._, ..... �_ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 PROJECT REPORT $40.62 UPDATE Invoice 128944 -D 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 67549425 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 PROJECT REPORT $40.62 UPDATE Invoice 128944 -E 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 675 -49425 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 WCA $156.00 ADMINISTRATION Invoice 128945 11/2412009 Cash Payment G 602 -16325 Fixed Asset - Distribution Sys 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 SINCLAIR $1,103.00 BAYWOOD LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS Invoice 128946 11/24/2009 Project PW0705 Cash Payment E 675 -49425 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 PORT HARRISON $284.00 DRAINAGE STUDE Invoice 128948 11/24/2009 Project PW0704 Cash Payment E 675 -49425 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 SWPPP UPDATE $142.00 Invoice 128949 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 401 -43108 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2008 STREET $10,599.00 RECONSTRUCTION Invoice 128950 11/24/2009 Project PW0801 Cash Payment G 602 -16325 Fixed Asset - Distribution Sys 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2008 LIFT STATION $443.00 RECONSTRUCTION Invoice 128951 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 G 675 -16325 Fixed Asset - Distribution Project PW0804 Sys 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2008 STORM $1,069.50 • DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Invoice 128952 11/24/2009 Project PW0803 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 WELLHEAD $547.00 PROTECTION PLAN Invoice 128953 11/2412009 Cash Payment E 401 43109 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE $27,635.42 RECONSTRUCTION Invoice 128954 11/24/2009 Project PWO902 Cash Payment E 401 -43109 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2009 STREET $24,523.92 RECONSTRUCTION Invoice 128955 11/24/2009 Project PWO901 Cash Payment G 602 -16325 Fixed Asset - Distribution Sys 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2009 LIFT STATION $14,318.00 RECONSTRUCTION Invoice 128956 11/24/2009 Project PW0904 Cash Payment G 675 -16325 Fixed Asset - Distribution Sys 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2009 DRAINAGE $5,378.50 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Invoice 128959 11/24/2009 Project PWO903 Cash Payment E 60249450 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 SANITARY SEWER $750.00 NUMBERING UPDATES Invoice 128960 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 401 -43160 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 STREET LIGHT $355.00 REPLACEMENT Invoice 128961 11/24/2009 Project PWO907 Cash Payment E 401 -43101 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2010 SW ISLAND $29,512.50 AREA Invoice 128962 11/24/2009 Project PW1001 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 WATER SYSTEM $5,984.00 MODELING • Invoice 128963 11/24/2009 -2507- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM • Payments Page 4 Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 401 -43101 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19 -09 THRU 10 -16 -09 2010 MSA $9.028.50 RIDGEWOOD IDLEWOOD HIGHLAND Invoice 128964 11/24/2009 Project PW1002 Cash Payment E 101 -42400 -300 Professional Srvs 09 -19-09 THRU 10 -16-09 2270 LANGDON $303.00 LANE Invoice 128947 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/18/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $134,576.84 Refer 112409 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPP Cash Payment E 285 -46388 -220 Repair / Maint Supply MONUMENT BULBS $405.63 Invoice 900100490 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $405.63 . . ;- ,. .,.. ,,. .. , ,;: Refer 112409 BRAND NETWORKING -.111- 1. -, Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -400 Repairs & Maintenance NETWORK MAINTENANCE $1,347.37 Invoice 16531 11/24/2009 PO 21735 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,347.37 Refer 112409 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS , Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -224 Street Maint Materials 1" WITH FINES CL5 $144.10 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Trans Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total , $144.10 Refer 112409 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREN T • Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -434 Conference & Training RECERTIFICATION INTOLILYZER, SE CK $80.00 Invoice 10095343 11/24/2009 PO 21739 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -434 Conference & Training RECERTIFICATION INTOLILYZER, $80.00 SCHOENHERR Invoice 10096582 11/24/2009 PO 21739 Transaction Date , 1 ` 1/13/200_ 9 " , Wells Fargo 10100 Total $160.00 Refer 112409 CARQUEST OF NAVARRE (P/1,10 3 Cash Payment E 101- 42110 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #850 HUB ASSEMBLY Invoice 6974 - 106147 11/2412009 - $149.61 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #402 CV SHAFT REMFG Invoice 6974 - 106657 11/24/2009 - $83.97 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #605 OIL FILTER Invoice 6974 - 106974 11124/2009 $9.28 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #605 HEATED HEAD Invoice 6974 - 106841 11/24/2009 $27.31 Cash Payment E 101- 42110 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #847 OIL FILTER Invoice 6974 - 107097 11/24/2009 $4.78 Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #1205 TRANS FILTER KIT Invoice 6974 - 107753 11/24/2009 $21.77 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #1205 TRANS FILTER KIT Invoice 6974 - 107809 11/24/2009 $21.20 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #404/ #1205 OIL FILTER Invoice 6974 - 107895 11/24/2009 $31.06 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #4041 #1105 TRANY FLUID 6974- 107880 11/2412009 $208.88 • Invoice Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #404 TRANS FILTER KIT Invoice 6974 - 108208 11/24/2009 $63.58 -2508- City of Mound 11/19109 9:28 PM Page 5 Payments • Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -221 Equipment Parts FUEL LINE Invoice 6974 - 108850 11/24/2009 $1.65 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $155.93 Refer 112409 CENTERPOINT ENE (MINNEG Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5714383 $229.50 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5731601 $64.13 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5731601 $64.13 Invoice 112409 11/2412009 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5731601 $64.14 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5728173 $289.78 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5765631 $90.11 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16-09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5765631 $90.10 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #5762358 $64.10 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -383 Gas Utilities 09 -16 -09 THRU 10 -15 -09 #6093897 $51.57 Invoice 112409 11/2412009 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,007.56 Refer 112409 � .,.,..�. ' TRAL MCGOWAN, lNCORPOR CEN _ Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -227 Chemicals HIGH PRESSURE CYLINDER $12.59 Invoice 21729 11/2412009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 . ...... . .. ....... Wells Fargo 10100 Total $12.59 Refer 1124 09 ..;:,. , ; ,... ... _ COCA COLA BOTTLING - MIDWEST Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa CREDIT —MIX Invoice 0128048814 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 0128048813 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 1116/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 112409 COPY IMAGES, INCORPORATED - Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Invoice 112475 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Invoice 112548 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Invoice 112548 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Invoice 112548 -C 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 281 - 45210 -440 Other Contractual Servic 11 -09 COPIER MAINTENANCE Invoice 112548 -D 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 111009 COVERALL CLEANING CONCEPTS _ Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -460 Janitorial Services 11 -09 CLEANING SERVICE Invoice 7070148735 11/10/2009 - $28.56 $346.10 Total $317.54 $265.01 $15.00 $5.00 $5.00 $5.00 Total $295.01 $1,493.04 -2509- City of Mound Payments 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 6 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $624.06 Refer 112409 DANIMAL DISTRIBUTI lNCORP Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $9.00 Invoice 1120969 11/24/2009 Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $112.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $66.00 Invoice 1120968 11/24/2009 Refer 112409 FIRSTLAB Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $75.00 Refer 112409 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale _ BEER $230.00 Invoice 528387 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,011.36 Invoice 528110 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $933.50 Invoice 527199 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $128.00 • Invoice 526762 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,234.24 Invoice 525323 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,535.45 Invoice 526157 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $130.00 Invoice 526259 11/24/2009 action Date Trans .11-11--- _ 11/16/2009 .:.:.., _._ W Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,202.55 Refer 112409 DOCKMASTERS OF LAKE MINNET Cash Payment E 101- 45200 -400 Repairs & Maintenance MULTIPLE DOCK SECTIONS $518.00 Invoice 201812 -A 11124/2009 Cash Payment E 281 - 45210 -440 Other Contractual Servic MULTIPLE DOCK SECTIONS $6,075.00 Invoice 201812 -B 11/24/2009 ransactw n Dat e 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,593.00 Refer 112409 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #848 REWIRE LIGHTING CONTROLS $1,519.17 Invoice JER110209 -2 11/24/2009 Transa ction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,519.17 _.. . Refer 112409 ESS BROTHERS AND SONS, INCO Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -220 Repair /Maint Supply ASPHALT BLADE, CONCRETE $475.59 Invoice MM5333 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $475.59 Refer 112409 EXTREME BEVERAGE Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $112.00 • Cash Invoice 824905 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $112.00 Refer 112409 FIRSTLAB -2510- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:2a Pa Payments Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -305 Medical Services 10 -09-09 RANDON SCREENING, FACKLER $39.00 Invoice 182825 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $39.00 Refer 112409 FITTEST INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -300 Professional Srvs FIT TEST (38) $1,026.00 Invoice 557 11/2412009 PO22344 Transaction Date 11/1612009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,026.00 Refer 112409 FRANK MADDEN AND ASSOCIATE Cash Payment E 101 - 49999 -430 Miscellaneous 10 -09 LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES $369.40 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/19/2009 g Total Wells Fargo 10100 $369.40 Refer 112409 G & K SERVICES Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -460 Janitorial Services 11 -02 -09 MATS $73.40 Invoice 6877020 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 11 -09 -09 UNIFORMS $15.98 Invoice 6888609 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -210 Operating Supplies 11 -09 -09 MATS $62.75 Invoice 6888609 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 -26 -09 UNIFORMS $19.99 Invoice 6865435 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 -26-09 UNIFORMS $20.79 Invoice 6865435 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 -26 -09 UNIFORMS $26.66 Invoice 6865435 -C 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -230 Shop Materials 10 -26 -09 MATS $58.14 Invoice 6865435 -D 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -230 Shop Materials 10 -26 -09 MATS $58.14 Invoice 6865435 -E 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials 10 -26 -09 MATS $58.14 Invoice 6865435 -F 11/2412009 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 11 -02 -09 UNIFORMS $ 19 . 99 Invoice 6877018 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 11 -02 -09 UNIFORMS $20.79 Invoice 6877018 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 11 -02 -09 UNIFORMS $26.68 Invoice 6877018 -C 11124/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -230 Shop Materials 11 -02 -09 MATS $40.12 Invoice 6877018 -D 11124/2009 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -230 Shop Materials 11 -02 -09 MATS $40.12 Invoice 6877018 -E 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials ' •' 11 -02 -09 MATS $40.12 Invoice 6877018 -F 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -460 Janitorial Services 11 -02 -09 MATS $52.06 Invoice 6877021 11/24/2009 "' Cash Payment E 10145200 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 -19 -09 UNIFORMS $19.78 Invoice 6853913 -A . 11/24/2009 Cash Payment Ij101 -45200 -210 Operating Supplies 10 -19 -09 MATS $76.07' Invoice 6853913 -B 11/24/2009 r� -2511- City of Mound [ Payments 111119/09 9:28 PM Page 8 Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 6877022 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 6877022 -B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -460 Janitorial Services Invoice 6877017 11/24/2009 11 -02 -09 UNIFORMS $19,78 11 -02 -09 MATS $143.89 11 -02 -09 MATS $51.60 Refer 112409 GRAINGERS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -210 Operating Supplies CORD REEL Invoice 9057230493 11/24/2009 PO 21636 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 112409 GRIGGS COOPER AND CO MPANY Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $944.99 $416.02 $416.02 Cash Payment E 60949750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $753.95 Invoice 313426 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $39.90 Invoice 313725 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $56.22 Invoice 313724 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $917.70 313723 11/24/2009 • Invoice Cash Payment E 60949750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $813.77 Invoice 313722 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $71.90 Invoice 317218 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $2,142.72 Invoice 317217 11/24/2009 ransac ti on Dat e 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,796.16 Refer 112409 HEFNER, AL Cash Payment E 28546388 -400 Repairs & Maintenance REKEY PARKING DECK $88.27 Invoice 50234 11/2412009 Transac t t ,, o 11/16 ., /2009 ion Da . Wells Fargo 10100 Total $88.27 Refer 112409 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATIO Cash Payment E 10142110418 Other Rentals INTEREST ON DEPRECIATED RADIOS - $34.02 Invoice 29108036 -01 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101- 42110 -418 Other Rentals 10 -09 RADIO LEASE $1,337.53 Invoice 29108036 11/2412009 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110418 Other Rentals INTEREST ON DEPRECIATED RADIOS - $49.36 Invoice 29098649 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110418 Other Rentals 09 -09 INTEREST ON DEPRECIATED RADIOS - $34.02 Invoice 29098648 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,220.13 Refer 112409 HOCKENBERGS MINNEAPOLIS _ Cash Payment E22242260-210 Operating Supplies CUP DISPENSER, WALL MOUNT $64.00 Invoice 152957 11/24/2009 116/2009 ransaction ate 11,.., • Wells Fargo 10100 Total $64.00 Refer 112409 HOHENSTEINS, INCORPORATED -2512- City of Mound 11/1W09 9 PM Page 9 Payments Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale I voice 502927 11/24/2009 BEER $193.00 n Transaction Date 11/1612009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $193.00 Refer 112409 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP, 1 Invoice 1727614 11/24/2009 Professional Srvs Cash Payment E 101 -42400 -300 Prof 10 -09 MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING $348.75 Invoice 007 - 001 -19 11/24/2009 WINE $1,585.18 Cash Payment G 101 -23216 2911 Cambridge Lane #09 -1 10 -09 2911 CAMBRIDGE LANE #09 -10 $325.50 Invoice 007 - 005 -21 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale Cash Payment G 101 -23217 4969 Islandview Drive #09 -12 10 -09 4969 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE #09 -12 $559.50 Invoice 007 - 005 -21 -B 11/24/2009 11124/2009 Cash Payment G 101-232184831 Shoreline Drive CUP A 10 -09 4831 SHORELINE DRIVE #09 -13 $116.25 Invoice 007 - 005 -21 -C 11/24/2009 $0.00 Invoice 1727617 Cash Payment G 101 -23221 1744 Avocet Lane #09 -15 10 -09 2128 CENTERVIEW LANE #09 -15 $418.50 Invoice 007 - 005 -21 -D 11/24/2009 E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Cash Payment E 101 -42400 -300 Professional Srvs 10 -09 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN $462.10 Invoice 006- 020 -15 11/24/2009 Project 06002 Cash Payment Cash Payment E 401 -46540 -300 Professional Srvs 10 -09 MOUND VISIONS $925.03 Invoice 007 - 024 -18 11124/2009 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/18/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,155.63 Refer 112409 HOME DEPOT /GECF (P/149 _ $245.50 Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -220 Repair /Maint Supply DUMPSTER REPAIRS $24.49 Invoice 112409 11124/2009 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply BOARDS $192.1E Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Refer 112409 JESSEN PRESS INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 101 - 41110 -350 Printing Invoice 19002 11/24/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $216.65 SPRING 2010 NEWSLETTER $1,221.58 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 112409 JOHNS VARIETY AND PETS _ Cash Payment G 101 -22810 X -Mas Donation /Expense HOLIDAY LIGHTS Invoice 683007 11/24/2009 Total $1,221.58 $411.57 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $411.57 Refer 112409 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $814.65 Invoice 1727614 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,585.18 Invoice 1727615 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $497.95 Invoice 1727616 11124/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $0.00 Invoice 1727617 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $762.19 Invoice 1731496 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $2,031.30 Invoice 1731497 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $245.50 Invoice 1731498 11/24/2009 *I -2513- City of Mound . Payments Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $0.00 Invoice 438843 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $0.00 Invoice 738842 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT—WINE -$8.96 Invoice 438845 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale CREDIT—LIQUOR -$7.69 Invoice 438844 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,920.12 Refer 112409 JUBILEEFOODS Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies DISH SOAP $2.68 Invoice 110309 1124/2009 PO 22214 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2.68 Refer 112409 KEEPERS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 101-42110-218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORMS, KURTZ $55.98 Invoice 128380 11124/2009 PO 21744 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $55.98 Refer 112409 KILLMER ELECTRIC COMPANY Cash Payment E 101-43100-400 Repairs & Maintenance 5501 SHORELINE DRIVE REPLACE LIGHT $8,243.00 POLE Invoice 69195 11/24/2009 PO 21591 • Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $8,243.00 Refer 112409 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATI Cash Payment E 101-41110-433 Dues and Subscriptions 4TH QTR LEVY PAYMENT $6,283.32 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,283.32 Refer 112409 LAKER NEWSPAPER Cash Payment E 601-49400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 10-7-092002 CHEVY SILVERAD0250 $123.15 Invoice 949024 11124/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $123.15 Refer 112409 LAKEWPIONEER NEWSPAPER Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 10-10-09 FALL WINE SALE $1,713.82 Invoice 939316-B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 10-22-09 WESTONKA GUIDE $100.00 Invoice 945916-A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 10-24-09 WESTONKA GUIDE $100.00 Invoice 939316-B 1124/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,913.82 Refer 112409 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC Cash Payment E 101-43100-221 Equipment Parts Invoice 8617328 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Aak Refer 112409 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Cash Payment E 101-42110-433 Dues and Subscriptions Invoice 135288 1124/2009 PLOW CHAIN LUBE CORE Wells Fargo 10100 PATROL SUBSCRIPTION, SMITH 11 A 9/09 9:28 PM Page 10 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $28.33 -2514- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 11 Payments Current Period: November 2009 Refer 112409 MAINSTREAM SOLUTIONS Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -400 Repairs & Maintenance 11 -09 SPAM VIRUS FILTERING $37.50 Invoice 1140 - 14880 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -300 Professional Srvs 11 -09 SPAM VIRUS FILTERING $37.50 Invoice 1140 - 14880 -B 11/24/2009 E 609 -49750 -265 Freight Invoice 23086 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $75.00 Refer 112409 MARK Vll DISTRIBUTOR _ E 609 -49750 -265 Freight Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,417.15 Invoice 536336 11/24/2009 E 101 -42115 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 5306402 -02 11/24/2009 PO 21716 Cash Payment E 60949750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $22.00 Invoice 536337 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11116/2009 Refer 112409 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $31.00 Invoice 536338 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,413.09 Invoice 533847 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $69.15 Invoice 533848 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,952.39 Refer 112409 MARLIN'S TRUCKING DE LIVERY Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight Invoice 23064 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight Invoice 23086 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight Invoice 23097 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight Invoice 23120 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Refer 112409 MATRX MEDICAL Cash Payment E 101 -42115 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 5306402 -02 11/24/2009 PO 21716 Cash Payment E 101 -42115 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 5606402 -03 11/24/2009 PO 21716 Cash Payment E 101 -42115 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 9629370 -001 11/24/2009 PO 21706 Transaction Date 11116/2009 Refer 112409 MERTZ, CRAIG M LAW OFFICE Cash Payment E 101 - 41600 -304 Legal Fees Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 10 -29 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $9.60 • 10 -22 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $133.20 10 -26 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE 10 -29 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $21.60 $279.60 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $444.00 MASKS $18.77 MASKS $18.77 ISOLATION GOWNS $577.13 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $614.67 10 -09 PROSECUTION SERVICES $6,609.90 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,609.90 Refer 112409 METRO FIRE _ Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -219 Safety supplies DISC VALVE, MSA COMPONENTS Invoice 36168 11/24/2009 PO 22345 $55.84 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $55.84 Refer 112409 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WASTE _ Cash Payment Invoice 912618 E 602 -49450 -388 Waste Disposal -MCIS 11/24/2009 12 -09 WASTEWATER $50,145.06 -2515- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM • Payments Page 12 Current Period: November 2009 Transaction Date 11/6/20 , 09 . M. 11 .., Wells Fargo 10100 Total $ 50,145. 06 Refer 112409 M/D WEST ASPHALT COR ORPORATIO Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -224 Street Maint Materials 10 -28 -09 FINE MIX Invoice 103047MB 11/24/2009 $565.22 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -224 Street Maint Materials 10 -28 -09 CLASS 7 Invoice 103025MB 11/24/2009 $477.51 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,042.73 Refer 112409 MILLER DUN WIDDIE ARCHITECTU Cash Payment E 401 -46570 -300 Professional Srvs 10 -09 PUMPHOUSE RELOCATION Invoice 15743 11/24/2009 $1,396.23 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Project PW0808 A_- Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,396.23 Refer 11240 9 MINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY A Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -434 Conference & Training PIT TRAINING, RASMUSSON Invoice 629430 -1550 11/24/2009 PO 21738 $220.00 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 ..,. Wells Fargo 10100 Total $220.00 Refer 112409 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTRO Cash Payment E 450 -46388 -300 Professional Srvs TRUE VALUE DISTRICT Invoice VP19360 -F 11/24/2009 $75.00 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 • Wells Fargo 10100 Total $75.00 Refer 112409 MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LA k _ Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -470 Water Samples HARDNESS TESTS Invoice 470494 11/24/2009 $34.00 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $34.00 Refer 112409 MNSPECT - Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -308 Building Inspection Fees 10 -09 BUILDING PERMITS Invoice 3073 11124/2009 $7,133.91 Cash Payment G 101 -20800 Due to Other Governments 10 -09 ELECTRIC SURCHARGE Invoice 3073 11124/2009 -$12.50 Cash Payment R 101 -42000 -32220 Electrical Permit Fee 10 -09 ELECTRIC PERMITS Invoice 3073 11/24/2009 - $371.00 Cash Payment E 101 -42400 -308 Building Inspection Fees 10 -09 RENAL PERMITS Invoice 3074 11/24/2009 $60.00 Transaction Date 11/17/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 112409 MOUND FIRE RELIEF A SSOC /A T/O $6,810.41 Cash Payment E 222-42260 -124 Fire Pens Contrib 11 -09 FIRE RELIEF Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $11,125.00 Transaction Date 11!18/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $11,125.00 Refe 112409 MOUND MARKETPLACE LLC Cash Payment E 609-49750 -412 Building Rentals 12 -09 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $867.00 Transaction Date 11/17/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total . Refer 112409 MOUND, CITY OF $867.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -382 Water Utilities 10 -09 WATER! SEWER Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $33.75 Transaction Date " 11/18/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $33.75 -2516- City of Mound Payments 11119/09 928 PM Page 13 Current Period: November 2009 Refer 112409 OFFICE DEPOT Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -200 Office Supplies USB DRIVE $28.85 Invoice 492033191001 11/2412009 PO 22334 $4.69 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -200 Office Supplies LEGAL PAPER Invoice 492191169001 11124/2009 PO 22336 $12.06 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -200 Office Supplies LEGAL PAPER Invoice 492368993001 11/24/2009 PO 22339 $14.66 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -200 Office Supplies ACCOUNTABILITY BOARDS Invoice 492589803001 11/24/2009 PO 22340 Office Supplies SIGN HOLDER, MAGAZINE RACK $27.55 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -200 Invoice 489840782001 11/24/2009 P022321 Office Supplies STANDUP SIGN HOLDER $10.30 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -200 Invoice 489841459001 11/24/2009 PO 22321 INKJET CARTRIDGE, STAPLER $82.67 Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 494810272001 11/24/2009 PO 22343 $169.78 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -200 Office Supplies VOICE RECORDER Invoice 495395185001 11/24/2009 PO 21740 $9.01 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -200 Office Supplies EXTRA WIDE INS DIV Invoice 495395267001 11/2412009 PO 21740 $29.01 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -200 Office Supplies FILE STORAGE Invoice 496162207001 11/2412009 PO 22216 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $0.92 • Cash Payment E 101 -41110 -200 Invoice 496232264001 -A 11124/2009 P022290 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $26.30 Cash Payment E 101 -41310 -200 Invoice 496232264001 -B 11/24/2009 P022290 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $3.53 Cash Payment E 101 - 41500 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 496232264001 -C 11/24/2009 PO 22290 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $2.00 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -200 Invoice 496232264001 -D 11/24/2009 PO 22290 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $1.54 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 496232264001 -E 11/24/2009 PO 22290 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $14.40 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 496232264001 -F 11/24/2009 P022290 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $0.91 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -200 Invoice 496232264001 -G 11/2412009 PO 22290 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $14.70 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -200 Invoice 496232264001 -H 11/24/2009 PO 22290 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $14.70 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -200 Invoice 492033191001 11/24/2009 PO 22290 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $9.87 Cash Payment E 101 - 41110 -200 Invoice 456025750 -001 -A 11/24/2009 PO 21149 Cash Payment E 101 -41310 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $27.96 Invoice 456025750 -001 -B 11/24/2009 PO 21149 Cash Payment E 101 -41500 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $37.83 Invoice 456025750 -001 -- 11/24/2009 P021149 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $21.38 Invoice 456025750 -001- 11/24/2009 P021149 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $16.48 , Cash Payment E 101 -42400 -200 Invoice 456025750 -001 -E 11/24/2009 PO 21149 -2517- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM • Payments Page 14 Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice 456025750 -001 -F 11/24/2009 PO 21149 .51 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice 456025750 -001- 11/24/2009 PO 21149 $9'86 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice 456025750 -001- 11/24/2009 PO 21149 $14'79 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice 456025750 -001 -1 11/24/2009 PO 21149 $14'79 1/16/2009 a1 12409 t Wells Is Fargo 10100 Total Refer T/S AND SONS PADS WINE MPA CO $632.05 Cash Payment E 609 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 8239790 -A 11/24/2009 $618.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight 11 -02 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE Invoice 8239790 -B 11/24/2009 $8.75 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $626.75 Refer 112409 PHILLIPS WINE AND S PIRITS, INC Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2829855 11/24/2009 $1,902.35 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 2829854 11/24/2009 $422.80 • Invoice Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 2832816 11/24/2009 $224.50 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2832817 11/24/2009 $2,928.65 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 iy Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,478.30 Refer 112409 POWER PLAN CORPORATION Cash Payment E 101 -41920 -500 Capital Outlay FA BUDGETING SOFTWARE Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 PO 22412 $8,000.00 Transaction Date 11/19/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $8,000.00 Refer 112409 QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS .,, : ... ...:. .:... Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 228449 11/24/2009 $2,948.96 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 230816 11/24/2009 $76.14 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 231013 11/24/2009 $739.25 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 231165 11/24/2009 $2,581.86 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total _ Refer 112409 SCHARBER AND SONS OF LONG L $6,346.21 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -221 Equipment Parts STIHL CEMENT SAW Invoice 02- 2015796 -A 11/24/2009 $12.94 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -221 Equipment Parts STIHL CEMENT SAW 02- 2015796 -B 11/24/2009 $12.94 . Invoice Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -221 Equipment Parts STIHL CEMENT SAW Invoice 02- 2015796 -C 11/24/2009 $12.93 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 9 10100 Total $38.81 -2518- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:213 PM Page 15 Payments • Current Period: November 2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $861.82 Refer 112409 STRE/CHER'S Refer 112409 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE _ MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $42.22 Offi Cash Payment E 101 -41110 -200 ice Supplies Invoice 1673574 11/24/2009 Invoice 3127519051 -A 11/24/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $38.00 Cash Payment E 101 -41310 -200 Office Supplies Refer 112409 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE, IN _ Invoice 3127519051 -B 11/24/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $42.22 Cash Payment E 101 -41500 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 10087720 11/24/2009 PO 21732 Invoice 3127519051 -C 11/24/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $31.67 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 3127519051 -D 11/24/2009 P021662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $14.78 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 3127519051 -E 11124/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $10.56 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 3127519051 -F 11/24/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $6.33 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 3127519051 -G 11/24/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $12.66 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 3127519051 -H 11/24/2009 PO 21662 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $12.66 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 3127519051 -1 11/24/2009 PO 21662 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total :,; , $211.10 Refer 112409 STERNE ELECTRIC COMPANY $285.90 • Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -400 Repairs & Maintenance REW IRE STREET LIGHT TIMER Invoice 10337 11/24/2009 43100 Machinery/Equip Repairs REBUILD SMALL MOTOR $20.00 Cash Payment E 101 - -404 Invoice 10333 -A 11/24/2009 Machinery/Equip Repairs REBUILD SMALL MOTOR $20.00 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -404 Invoice 10333 -B 11124/2009 49450 Machinery/Equip Repairs REBUILD SMALL MOTOR $20.00 Cash Payment E 602- -404 Invoice 10333 -C 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -400 Repairs & Maintenance REWIRE STREET LIGHT $515.92 Invoice 10339 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $861.82 Refer 112409 STRE/CHER'S $39.96 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies HALOGEN BULB Invoice 1673574 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $39.96 Refer 112409 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE, IN _ Cash Payment E 101 0-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs TIRES $1,626.94 Invoice 10087720 11/24/2009 PO 21732 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total 1, 6.94 Refer 112409 TAYLOR, J.J. DISTRIBUTING MINN _ Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $175.80 Invoice 1316762 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale , BEER $38.40 . Invoice 1330648 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,136.30 Invoice 1330647 11/24/2009 -2519- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM • Payments Page 16 Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER ' Invoice 1330612 11/24/2009 $3618.55 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 1330614 11/24/2009 $51.00 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 1330613 11/24/2009 $120.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale CREDIT —BEER Invoice 963799 11/24/2009 -$52.55 1/16/2009 Transaction Date 1„ o Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 112409 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN $6,087.50 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 74079 11/24/2009 $560.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 566993 11/24/2009 $1,010.30 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 566992 -A 11/24/2009 $37.75 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 566992 -B 11/24/2009 $30.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 566994 11/24/2009 $0.00 • Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 74158 11/24/2009 $160.00 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 566051 11/24/2009 $7.318.20 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 566052 11/24/2009 $93.35 Transaction ate 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total 1 Refer 12409 TOTAL REGISTER ER SYSTEMS, INC. $9,209.60 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -210 Operating Supplies LABELS FOR REGISTER Invoice 24709 11/24/2009 PO 22450 $63.80 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 112409 TRUAX, TODD $63.80 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -400 Repairs & Maintenance COMP MAINTENANCE Invoice 09 -00066 11/24/2009 PO 21743 $260.00 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total �,., Refer 112409 TRUE VALUE, MOUND _ $260.00 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 10 -09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $50.17 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 10 -09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $89.70 Cash Payment E 285 - 46388 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 10 -09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $13.97 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 10 MISCELLANEOUS Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 -09 SUPPLIES $12.81 Onvoi Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -226 Sign Repair Materials 10 -09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 112409 11/24/2009 $14.92 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 10 -09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $47.97 -2520- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 17 Payments Current Period: November 2009 Refer 112409 VINOCOPIA, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 60949750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $389.42 Machinery/Equip Repairs 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $4.73 Cash Payment E 601-49400-404 E 60949750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11124/2009 E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $10.55 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $9.27 Cash Payment E 601-49400-322 Postage 11/24/2009 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 E 101 - 43100 -460 Janitorial Services 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $2.70 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/2412009 E 601-49400-460 Janitorial Services 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $2.70 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 E 602-49450-460 Janitorial Services 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $2.70 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 E 101 -43100 -223 Building Repair Supplies 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $7.32 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 Supplies E 601-49400-223 Building Repair 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $7.32 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 Supplies E 602-49450-223 Building Repair 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $7.32 Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 E 60249450-230 Shop Materials 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $4.80 Invoice 112409 11/24/2009 $6.94 Cash Payment E 101-41910-220 Repair/Maint Supply 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES Invoice 112409 Cash Payment 11/24/2009 G 101-13100 Due From Other Funds 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $29.84 Invoice 112409 Cash-Payment 11/2412009 E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services 10-09 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $17.61 Invoice 112409 11124/2009 — Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 ., Total , 1 $34 3.34 Refer 112409 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Cash Payment E 101-42110-218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORMS KURTZ $196.12 Invoice 9137 11/24/2009 PO 21742 Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 --." Total $196.12 Refer 112409 VINOCOPIA, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 60949750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $389.42 Invoice 19960-A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 60949750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $208.00 Invoice 19960-B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 11-05-09 DELIVERY CHARGE $12.50 Invoice 19960-C 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 10-01-09 DELIVERY CHARGE $5.00 Invoice 18912-B 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $604.51 Invoice 18912-A 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,219.43 M-for 112409 WACONIA FARM AND HOME SUPP Cash Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply 'd— ' 3 40176 11/24/2009 STRAW BALES FOR HILL $63.75 — Transaction Date 11/13/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $63.75 Refer 112409 WE STSIDE EQUIPMENT 1 01 -2521- City of Mound 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 18 • Payments Current Period: November 2009 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs #308 TIRES $369.57 Invoice 630015 11/24/2009 PO 22289 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $369.57 Refer 112409 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION, LL Cash Payment E 401 -43109 -500 Capital Outlay FA 10 -22 -09 REPLACE CULVERT $1,452.50 Invoice 2646 11/24/2009 Project PW0902 Cash Payment E 401 -43109 -500 Capital Outlay FA 09 -28 -09 DEXTER AND ISLANDVIEW $600.00 Invoice 2645 11/24/2009 Project PW0902 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -400 Repairs & Maintenance 10 -19 -09 THREE POINTS $1,320.00 Invoice 2643 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -400 Repairs & Maintenance 10 -13 -09 DEXTER ROAD $1,000.00 Invoice 2644 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,372.50 Refer 112409 WINE COMPANY _ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $520.00 Invoice 230180 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight 11 -12 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $13.20 Invoice 230180 -B 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/17/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $533.20 Refer 112409 WINE MERCHANTS Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,432.50 Invoice 294755 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $396.00 Invoice 295627 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/6/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,828.50 Refer 112409 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -381 Electric Utilities 10 -09 #51- 4802601 -1 $6,026.66 Invoice 295812191 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/10/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,026.66 Refer 112409 ZWINES USA LLC Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $300.00 Invoice 9026 -A 11/24/2009 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight 11 -03 -09 DELIVERY CHARGE $7.50 Invoice 9026 -B 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $307.50 Refer 112409 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INCOR Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -221 Equipment Parts GUTTER BROOM $423.23 Invoice 0125446 11/24/2009 Transaction Date 11/16/2009 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $423.23 -2522- City of Mound Payments 11/19/09 9:28 PM Page 19 Current Period: November 2009 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $62,314.93 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $13,391.63 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND $6,080.00 285 MOUND HRA $637.87 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $108,310.10 450 Parking Deck 1 $75.00 601 WATER FUND $8,409.89 602 SEWER FUND $69,488.75 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $61,191.90 670 RECYCLING FUND $14,480.21 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND $7,070.62 $351,450.90 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $351,450.90 Total $351,450.90 -2523- • MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 2009 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members present: Mayor Mark Hanus; Councilmembers David Osmek, Ray Salazar, Heidi Gesch, and Greg Skinner Others present: City Attorney John Dean, City Manager Kandis Hanson, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Parks Superintendent Jim Fackler, Finance Director Catherine Pausche, Public Works Director Carlton Moore, Public Works Assistant Vicki Weber, City Engineer Dan Faulkner, Michelle Loma, Amber Gage, Jane Skinner, T.J. Skinner, Marisa Trevino, Julie Thilgen, Ryan Haug, Kyle Beaver, Riley Hanson, Sam Cordie, Mitchell Ebox, Derek Helderane, Ethan Samuelson, Forest Roberts, Josh England, Karissa Harman, Katie Pemberton, Haylee Heuser. Grant Orinstien, Jeff Schermerhorn, Kelly Beeman, Natasha Robinson Consent agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature by the Council. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event it will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. Open meeting • Mayor Hanus called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Hanus recognized the members Mr. Kuehl's High School Government Class that are attending this evening's meeting. 3. Approve agenda Osmek requested moving Item 9 to follow Item 4. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 4. Consent agenda Skinner requested the removal if item 4D, 4E, and 4F from the consent agenda. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to approve the consent agenda as amended. Upon roll call vote, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $473,054.58. B. Approve Pay Request No. 5 from GMH Asphalt Corp. in the amount of $673,915.53 for work completed on the 2009 Street, Utility and Lift Station Improvement Project, PW- 09 -01, PW- 09 -02, PW- 09 -04, and PW- 09 -06. C. Approve permit for a temporary on -sale liquor license for Northwest Tonka Lions • for Festival of Trees to be held November 13, 2009 at Gillespie Center, requesting fee waiver. -2524- Mound City Council Minutes — November 10, 2009 • D. (removed) E. (removed) F. (removed) G. RESOLUTION NO. 09 -90: RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT 4D. Public lands Permit for 2911 Cambridge Lane MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to adopt the following resolution. The following voted in favor: Osmek, Salazar, Hanus and Gesch. The following voted against: Skinner. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 09 -91: RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR 2911 CAMBRIDGE LANE 4E. Variance for Property at 2911 Cambridge Lane MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to adopt the following resolution. The following voted in favor: Osmek, Salazar, Hanus and Gesch. The following voted against: Skinner. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 09 -92: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2911 CAMBRIDGE LANE 4F. Variance for Property at 4969 Island View Drive Skinner stated that approval was given to build the maximum size house on this lot, is knowing there would be a variance needed. He feels too many variances are being given away without hardship, and this should be discussed with the Planning Commission in the future. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to adopt the following resolution. The following voted in favor: Osmek, Salazar, Hanus and Gesch. The following voted against: Skinner. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 09 -93: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LAKESIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4969 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE. 9. (moved to this location with agenda approval) Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. None were offered. 5. 2010 Street Improvement Utilities, and Retaining Wall Proiiect, PW -10 -01 and 10- 02. Dan Faulkner presented the feasibility report for the 2010 Street improvement Project, including projected assessment estimates. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Hanus to adopt the following resolution. Osmek stated that his biggest issue is that 1/3 of the project, as well as the utility portion, is spread out and paid by the taxpayers of the city. He feels that taking this year off due to economic conditions, is in order. Hanus, Salazar and Gesch agree with not going • forward with a street project in 2010. Skinner feels that if this project is not ordered, -2525- I • Mound City Council Minutes — November 10, 2009 some issues need to be discussed and money put in the 2010 budget for temporary overlays, patches, etc. Osmek removed his motion. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Hanus to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 09 -94: RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT AND DECIDING NOT TO PROCEED WITH THE 2010 STREET, UTILITY, AND RETAINING WALL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 6. Policy for Official Conflicts of Interest Hanus stated that he brought this forward because the current policy states, in a nutshell, if you have an issue that will benefit you financially, you have a conflict of interest, and the policy is at the lowest level that the law allows. He feels that a conflict exists if real, perceived, or legal, and when this exists a councilmember should step down. He is bringing a new policy to the Council for consideration, that increases the level of ethics that the Council operates under. This new proposed policy essentially says if the Councilmember or a relative has an interest or perceived interest in an issue before the Council, they step down. It further provides that the other Councilmembers can raise the issue if they feel there is a conflict and it will be discussed and voted on. • Skinner asked about the dual interest. Hanus stated that this means that one has an interest as a councilmember, as well as a citizen and can benefit by voting a certain way. Skinner feels that personal interest covers the dual interest, and doesn't feel the dual interest needs to be in there. John Dean stated that the term dual leaves open an opportunity for the Council to apply it in a broader sense than if you just use the term personal conflict. He stated this is a policy consideration rather than the minimum standards found in the law. Skinner asked if the dual conflict would refer to an employee being on the Council and John Dean stated that is compatibility of offices, which is something totally different than what is being proposed here. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Hanus to adopt the following resolution. John Dean suggested a change in wording for B3 and Osmek and Hanus accepted the change in wording as a friendly amendment. The following voted in favor: Osmek, Salazar, Hanus and Gesch. The following voted against: Skinner. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 09 -95: RESOLUTION SETTING A POLICY FOR DEALING WITH OFFICIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 7. MastereMan and Wayfindina Signage for Auditors Road District Sarah Smith reviewed the proposed wayfinding signage masterplan for Auditors Road District and stated that funding from the TOD grant has been deemed acceptable by Hennepin County. -2526- Mound City Council Minutes — November 10, 2009 • I MOTION by Salazar, seconded by Gesch to approve the Wayfinding Signage Masterplan for the Auditors Road District and authorize Visual Communications to obtain quotes for this signage project. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 8. Approve minutes MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Gesch to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2009 meeting. The following voted in favor: Osmek, Salazar, Hanus and Gesch. The following voted against: None. Skinner abstained from voting because he was absent for a portion of that meeting. Motion carried. 9. (moved to after Item 4) 10. Miscellaneous /Correspondence A. Comments /reports from Councilmembers B. Reports: none C. Minutes: none D. Correspondence: Gillespie Gazette Met Council on housing performance Met Council on 2030 Comp Plan 11. Adjourn MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. • Mayor Mark Hanus Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 4 -2527- Vii► cinr of nnou 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 -1687 PH: (952) 472 -0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com IVA . To: Mayor Hanus and City Council Members From: Dock Program Administration Date: 11/10/09 Re: Dock and Slip Ordinance; Proposed Changes At the November 17, 2009 Docks and Commons Commission meeting staff presented 4 proposed Ordinance changes as summarized below. 1) Mailing Requirements: New wording to define what constitutes a timely mailing. It has specific wording regarding not allowing private postage machines to count as proof of timely mailing. Adapted from State Statute language. 2) Dock Installation without a License: New wording that allows the City the ability to impound dock/etc items installed without a license. 3) Right to Impound Undeclared Watercraft: New wording that allows the City the ability to impound watercraft; specifically watercraft that has not been given permission by licensee to moor at the dock/slip. 4) Public Lands and Public Water Storage and Removal: New wording that allows the City the ability to remove /impound docks /lifts, etc in areas that must have timely removal due to public safety issues. ie: slide area, snowmobile crossings, etc. Note: All proposed changes have been reviewed by the City Attorney. Below is an excerpt from the meeting minutes: Discuss: Ordinance Change. Fackler stated the City went though a recodification of the entire City Code. The dock and slip ordinances were split up. Fackler summarized proposed ehan 4es • included in the packet as it relates to mailing requirements, dock installation:' Filename: Memo -CC; 4 Ordinance Chg Requests 24-09 —ycled er T-2528- pap without a license, right to impound undeclared watercraft and public lands and • public water storage and removal. MOTION by Funk to approve proposed changes as outlined on in the packet. SECOND by Osmek Motion carries unanimously. Filename: Memo -CC; 4 Ordinance Chg Requests; 11 -24-09 -2529- that if they do not remove everything, the City is authorized to have them removed • and the applicant agrees to pay to the City any and all costs incurred by the City in removal and disposal. The applicant also shall agree that if the City removes the dock, the City is authorized to dispose of any materials or parts which are left on public lands or in public waters and the applicant shall forfeit any right or claim to the materials left on the dock site. E. Declaration of Watercraft. At the time of submitting the annual Dock License Application, the applicant will also declare all watercraft that the applicant intends to moor at the dock. Required information for all declared watercraft shall be pursuant to Subsection 438.20 Subd. 1. F. Fees Paid. The annual application fee and license fee shall be that as established the City Code. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District fees, as established by that organization, must also be paid. • Subd. 3. Late Applications A. Abuttina Applicants Late fees will be in effect as established by the City. B. New abutf'no applicants A late fee, as established by the City, will only be assessed if the application and fees are not submitted within 30 days after which an abutting resident moves into the City. C. Nqn- Abutting Applicants Primary Site Holder will not be allowed to retain their nd Priority status and must relinquish their dock site. They may, howd� apply to be a waitlist applicant if the waiting list application and fees are submitted to City Hall by noon on the day preceding the March POSDC meeting. • Dock Ordinance; 11 -19-09 Paae 3 of 3 -2530- procedures as specified in Subsection 438.25 will apply. Storage shall be restricted to dock materials, dismantled docks and dismantled boat lifts on City land designated for dock locations as shown on the approved Dock Location Map and Addendum. Storage shall be done in an orderly, compact, and unobtrusive manner. Storage shall not include watercraft or trailers. In all areas other than Class C Commons (as indicated on the approved Dock Location Map and Addendum), all docks and associated hardware and lifts must be installed in public waters or removed from public lands between June 1" and September 1 s of each year. th City. Subd. 9. Remove! of Docks Followina End of License Upon non- renewal or revocation of a dock license, the Primary Site Holder must completely remove the dock, accessory items and lifts from public waters and public land. Items not removed will be deemed abandoned to the City and will be removed by the City or a designated contractor and all costs of removal and disposal will be the responsibility of the last licensee for that dock site. Subd.10. Compliance with all laws. All licensees shall be responsible for themselves, any Secondary Site Holders, guests and invitees in observing all applicable laws including, with out limitation, those intended to preserve peace, quiet and good order. Conviction for a violation of any law in the course of the use of any dock or slip, will subject the licensee to the enforcement and penalty provisions of this chapter. Subd. Dock Location Map and Addendum Docks shall be located in accordance with the approved Dock Location Map and Addendum. These shall be maintained by the Dock Administration and kept on file in the City Offices. Such Dock Location Map and Addendum shall contain the following information: A. City controlled shoreline on Lake Minnetonka. B. Lineal footage markings for purposes of establishing dock locations. C. Shoreline Classifications and definitions of such. D. Addendum shall include: Site #, shoreline classifications, abutting or non - abutting site, shoreline location name, designation of being a dock site or slip site, Slip Use Area, abutting site addresses. Current restrictions on dock site locations such as one -sided dock and site removal at non- renewal, and any information regarding any variance granted by the LMCD or other permitting agency, shall also be listed. • • �J Dods Oniinanoe; 11 -19-09 -2531- e • E. Access points, and other relevant information as is necessary to review dock locations and to allow the City Council and the Dock Administration to protect the public lands and public water. Subd. Review of Map At least once a year, the Dock Administration will present to the Parks, Open Space and Docks Commission its recommendations for changes to the Doric Location Map and Addendum. This review shall occur between September 1 and December 31 before each new boating season. The POSDC's recommended changes must be considered by the City Council on or before January 15. Final approval of the Dock Location Map and Addendum shall be made by the City Council. At any point in time the City Council may make changes to the Dock Location Map and Addendum. These changes may include, but not limited to, removal or addition of sites or slips. 438.25 Enforcement Subd.1. Failure tg Declare Watercraft. Mooring of an undeclared watercraft will result in the imposition of a civil penalty against the dock license holder as established by the City. The civil penalty will be forgiven if the dock license holder declares the watercraft within 5 business days. if, after such 5 day period, the watercraft is not declared and the watercraft is still moored at the licensed dock the Dock Administration will recommend to the City Manager that the Dock License and any watercraft declarations issued for all watercraft moored at that dock be revoked for the balances of the Dock License year, and that the holder not be eligible to apply for a Dock License for the next following license year. Additionally, no new dock license will be issued following • such revocation until all unpaid civil penalties and any delinquent dock program related fees or penalties have been paid in full. Further, watercraft may be impounded and all associated costs will be the responsibility of the watercraft owner. Subd. 3. Deni_ al. Suspension or Revocation of License A. No license shall be issued to any applicant with past due property taxes, civil penalties related to Dock Program, and any other delinquent fees or penalties related to the Dock Program, municipal utility fees, including but not limited to water and sewer bills, and penalties and interest thereon. If said past due obligations are not paid by April 15"' of the license year, all dock rights will be revoked immediately. B. If the licensee has not maintained a previously licensed dock, the Dock Administration may recommend to the City Manager that their existing license be • revoked, and the licensee's priorities under this section be forfeited for the current year and for the next boating season. DockOrdinanoe; 11 -18-09 -2532- 9 1. The Primary Site Holder does not renew his or her application within • the timeframe listed within this Section. 2. The Secondary Site Holder has participated in the program a minimum of two consecutive full boating seasons on the site not being renewed. The full boating season requirement is met when the secondary site holder is added between January 1" and May 31' of the license year. If both of these criteria have not occurred, the City is not obligated to provide a dock or slip to the Secondary Site Holder. Subd. 7. Public Lands and Public Water Storage and Removal and Reinstallation. A. Docks and lifts or portions thereof FRay-net-beae -ie and accessory items shall be removed from the water or eR public land not later than November 1 if they conflict with the following uses: Slide area Snowmobile crossings Skating rinks Trails Road access Other conditions or circumstances that are determined by the Council to have • an adverse affect on adjacent properties. Deeks iR the areas li eted above shall B. Unless subject to the removal requirements of paragraph (A), docks and lifts R located in channels, protected bays and other areas not generally susceptible to ice flogs or ice heaving- •QeGke in winter months. Such docks and lifts may be partially removed, provided that those sections left in public waters are complete. No poles, posts, stanchions or supports standing alone shall remain in public waters. C. U Dock Ordinance, 11 -19 -09 " - 7 -2533- Dodos and lifts must be brought up to the construction standards outlined in Subsection 438.20 within 4 weeks after the ice goes out in the spring of the year (approximately May 15). If the dock does not meet construction standards, the pursuant to 439.20 Subd. 1. G. Fees Paid. The annual application fee and license fee shall be established in accordance with the provisions of Section 500 of the City Code. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District fees, as established by that organization, must also be paid. 10 A. Abuttina Applicants Late fees will be in effect as established by the City. B. New abutting applicants A late fee, as established by the City, will only be assessed if the application and fees are not submitted within 30 days after which an abutting resident moves into the City. C. Non - Abutting Applicants Site holder will not be allowed to retain their 2" priority status and must relinquish their slip site. They may, however apply to be a waitlist applicant if the waiting list application and fees are submitted to City Hall by noon on the day preceding the March POSDC Meeting. D. Waitlist Applicants They will not retain their position on the waitlist. Subd. 4. Refund of Submitted Fees /Surrender of License. An applicantnicensee who is withdrawing from the program and surrendering the slip license may request a refund of fees paid less an administrative fee, as established by the City, if a request to terminate is made in writing to the Dock Administration. Requests must be received at City offices by /on May 31 or must have the postmark of the United States Post Office by May 31 st of the boating season. Subd. 6. One Appligaon Per individual Resident. The owner of an apartment building, rental home or multiple dwelling shall not apply for slip licenses for his renters or lessees. He or she is entitled to make application for slip lic:enseIor him or herself if he or she is a resident of the City. ` Subd. 6. Wait List Aopl� icants First time wait list applicants beginning position on the wait list shall be by lottery in accordance with such process as the City Council shall Slip Ordinance; 11.19 -09 Page 3 of 8 -2534- Subd. 3. Late Apalications 439.25 Enforcer Subd. 1. Failure to Declare Watercraft Mooring of an undeclared watercraft will result in the imposition of a civil penalty against the holder of the slip license as established by the City. The civil penalty will be forgiven if the slip license holder declares the watercraft within 5 business days. If, after such 5 day period, the watercraft is not declared and the watercraft is still moored at the slip the Dock Administration will recommend to the City Manager that the slip license and any watercraft declarations issued for watercraft moored at that slip site be revoked for the balance of the license year, and that the holder not be eligible to apply for a: license for the text following license year. Additionally, no new license will be issued following such revocation until all unpaid civil penalties and any delinquent dock program related fees or penalties have been paid in full. Further, watercraft may be impounded and all associated costs will be the responsibility of the watercraft owner. Mooring of a declared watercraft that does not meet the Slip Use Area criteria must be removed immediately or the Dock Administration will recommend to the City Manager that the slip license and any watercraft declarations issued for watercraft moored at that slip site be revoked. Further, watercraft may be impounded and all associated costs will be the responsibility of the watercraft owner. U Subd. 2. Undeclared ed Watercraft - Right to Impound. Undeclared moored watercraft not in licensee's name and not ig,v_en permission by licensee to be moored are deemed illwal, and will be impounded by the City. Damage to watercraft during impound /storage will not be the City of Mound resoonsibilh. All associated costs of impound /storage will be the responsibility of the watercraft owner and watercraft must be claimed within 30 days of removal. Unclaimed watercraft after 30 days of removal will be deemed abandoned to the City. • Subd. 3. Denial, Suspension or Revocatron of License A. No license shall be issued to any applicant with past due property taxes, civil penalties related to Dock Program, and any other delinquent fees or penalties related to the Dock Program, municipal utility fees, including but not limited to water and sewer bills, and penalties and interest thereon. If said past due obligations are not paid by April 15 of the license year, all slip rights will be revoked immediately. B. The license will be revoked or suspended by the Dock Administration for non - compliance with any of the requirements of this chapter. Subd. 4. No„ tices. All notices of revocation, suspension, non - renewal, or denial herein required shall be in writing by first class, certified mail, or by personal service, directed to the licensee at the address given on the application. Subd. S. Appeal. (1). To City Manager. The licensee may appeal the notice to the City Manager at any time within 10 days of the date of receipt by serving a written notice of appeal on the City Clerk. Upon such notice of appeal, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee will conduct a hearing on the matter at a date and time reasonably convenient to the holder, but in no event later than 20 days following the date the notice of appeal is served on the City Clerk. If following the hearing, the City Manager, or designee, finds that the licensee was in violation of the provisions of this section the City Manager or designee may revoke the license of the slip license holder for the current license year, • Slip ordinance; 11 -19-09 Page 7 of 8 -2535- • • Minnesota Lawful Gambling LG240B Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo 7/09 Page 1 of 2 No fee ORGANIZATION INFORMATION , Organization name Previous gambling permit number K tt --Wrs or- Co1-kM15u5 - C_ouozc%t. laoos 042,5 Type of nonprofit organization. Check (4) one. ❑ Fraternal ❑ Religious ❑ Veterans ❑ Other nonprofit organization Mailing address City State /Zip Code County 6005 LoR-l rJCa pm tvG (4 O ton)0 Mr1 WE NE PInl ATTACH A COPY OF ONE' OF THE FOLLOWING FOR PROOF OF NONPROFIT STATUS * Do not attach a sales tax exempt status or federal ID employer number as they are not proof of nonprofit status. _ Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 180 State Office Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651 - 296 -2803 Internal Revenue Service - IRS income tax exemption [501(c)] letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization officer contact the IRS at 877 - 829 -5500. _Internal Revenue Service - Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization (charter) If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both of the following: a. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a group ruling, and b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate. Internal Revenue Service - proof previously submitted to Gambing Control Board If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the Internal Revenue Service, no attachment is required. EXCLUDED BfNGO ACTIVITY 1. _No �! Yes Has your organization held a bingo event in the current alendar year? If yes, list the dates when bingo was conducted VVZ� "{ /e`t , 03ml09 O!k0 . "hi/ 2. The proposed bingo event for which we are applying will be: one of four or fewer bingo events held this year. Dates 01/23 i A0 03 ►a Iy/�g �o OR _conducted up to 12 consecutive days in connection with a: _county fair. Dates civic celebration. Dates Minnesota state fair. Dates 3. Person in charge of bingo event J04 KR„45003I Daytime phone a52 - 4'12- 55910 4. Name of premises where bingo will be conducted Out LAO of rHe LA VE 5. Premises street address Z 3 Ss CADM#11ELC_ oul. VA 6. City MOaN 0 If township, name of township County �ktENN E P r N Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. Otherwise, bingo hard cards, bingo paper, and bingo number selection devices must be purchased from a distributor licensed by the Gambling Control Board. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on List of Licensed Distributors. Or call 651- 639 -4076. Be sure to complete page 2 -2536- LG240B Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo Page 2 of 2 7/09 Chief Executive Officer's Signature The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Chief executive officer's signature 1 Phone number Q57_-472. Name (please print) Jim Ka.A Dat Local Unit of Government.Acknowledgment and Approval If the gambling premises is within city limits, the city must sign this application. On behalf of the city, l approve this application for Print city name excluded bingo activity at the premises located within the city's jurisdiction. Signature of city personnel receiving application Title Date If the gambling premises is located in a township, only the county is required to sign this apptication. For the county: On behalf of the county, / approve Print county name this application for excluded bingo activity at the premises located within the county's jurisdiction. Signature of county personnel receiving application Title Date / / For the township: On behalf of the township, (Township signature is not required) / acknowledge that the organization is applying for Print township name excluded bingo activity within the township limits. A township has no statutory authority to approve or Signature of township official acknowledging application deny an application (Minn. Stat. 349.166, Subd. 2). Title Date / / Mail Application and Attachment(s) Send the application and proof of nonprofit You will receive a document from the Gambling Control Board with status to: your excluded permit number for the gambling activity. Your Gambling Control Board organization must keep its bingo records for 3 -1/2 years. Suite 300 South 1711 W. County Rd. B Questions? Contact the Gambling Control Board at 651 - 639 -4000. Roseville, MN 55113 This form will be made available in alternative format (i.e. large print, Or, you may fax it to 651 - 639 -4032. Braille) upon request. Data Privacy Notice: The information requested on this form (and any attachments) will be used by the Gambling Control Board (Board) to determine your qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activities in Minnesota. You have the right to refuse to supply the information requested; however, if you refuse to supply this information, the Board may not be able to determine your qualifications and, as a consequence, may refuse to issue you an authorization. If you supply the information requested, the Board will be able to process your application. Your name and your organization's name and address will be public information when received by the Board. All the other information will be private data until the Board issues your authorization and the information then becomes public. If the Board does not issue you an authorization, all information provided remains private, with the exception of your name and your organization's name and address which will remain public. Private data about you is available to: Board members, Board staff whose work requires access to the information; Minnesota's Department of Public Safety, Attorney General; Commissioners of Administration, Finance, and Revenue; Legislative Auditor, national and international gambling regulatory agencies; anyone pursuant to court order; other individuals and agencies that are specifically authorized by state or federal law to have access to the information, individuals and agencies for which law or legal order authorizes a new use or sharing of information after this Notice was given; and anyone with your consent. *I • -2537- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 • (952) 472 -3190 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Comm. Dev. Director Date: November 18, 2009 Re: 1 -Year Extension for City Approvals for Woodlyn Ridge Major Subdivision. Summary. Brian, Benson, who owns the property at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard, which was subject to preliminary plat -major subdivision (11- lots), land use (PDA- CUP) and water resource permit application(s) and were approved by the City Council on January 22, 2008, has submitted a written request for an additional 1- year extension regarding the City's approvals. Members may recall that a 1 -year extension for the subdivision and land use approvals was executed by the City Council on November 25, 2008 and provides for a current expiration date of January 22, 2010. l ie Comments. • Copies of the official resolutions have been included. • A summary of the timelines regarding zoning approval expiration(s) has also been prepared. Specifically, City Code Chapter 330.30, Subd. 9 includes provisions which govern the extension of the 1 -year provision for preliminary plats. There are provisions in this section which allow the City to recalculate park dedication or other related financial guarantees. • There appear to be no expirations for PDA -CUP or water resource permit applications. • Staff previously contacted the MCWD in 2008 regarding the water resource permit which was issued for stormwater and erosion control. They renew and /or offer extensions on a case -by -case basis following receipt of an applicant request. • No wetland permit was issued, however, the wetland delineation report was administratively approved on behalf of the City of Mound in October 2007 and is valid for a 3 -year period. -2538- MINUTE EXCERPTS • MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION November 17, 2009 BOARD OF APPEALS Woodlyn Ridge — Request for extension of approvals Smith introduced the request. Brian Benson (640 Park St E, Wayzata) explained why an extension would make a difference. They are featuring a more reasonable product with lots at a lower price. r' • -2539- • CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION #09- A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1 -YEAR EXTENSION FOR CITY APPROVALS FOR WOODLYN RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 6301 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the City of Mound adopted the following resolutions on January 22, 2008 for the Woodlyn Ridge residential development for the property at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard: Resolution No. 08 -15 Major subdivision /preliminary plat Resolution No. 08 -16 Conditional use permit — planned development area (CUP -PDA) Resolution No. 08 -17 Water resource permit • ;and WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 330.30, Subd. 9 includes provisions that govern the extension of the 1 -year provision for preliminary plats which includes submittal of an application a minimum of 45 days in advance of the expiration of the preliminary plat and formal review by the Planning Commission prior to consideration and action by the City Council; and WHEREAS, at its November 25, 2008 meeting, the City Council, extended the approvals for Woodlyn Ridge for one (1) year until January 22, 2010 following review and a recommendation for approval from Staff and the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the property owner, Brian Benson, on or around October 13, 2009, submitted a request for an additional 1 -year extension of the City approvals for the Woodlyn Ridge development project; and WHEREAS, there are provisions in City Code Chapter 330, Subd. 9 which allows the City to recalculate park dedication or other related financial guarantees; and WHEREAS, there are no expirations for City approvals of CUP, PDA and water resource permit(s) in the Mound City Code; and U 1 -2540- WHEREAS, if approved, the, 1 -year extension would run until January 22, 2011; and WHEREAS, as required by City Code Chapter 330, Subd. 9, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its November 17, 2009 meeting who unanimously voted to recommend City Council approval of the 1 -year extension request as recommended by Staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound as follows: The approvals granted by the City of Mound for the Woodlyn Ridge residential subdivision of the property at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard as contained in Resolution No. 08 -15, Resolution No. 08 -16 and 08 -17 including all conditions are officially extended until January 22, 2011. 2. Park dedication fees for the project shall be based on Pay 2008 Taxable Market Value from Hennepin County for land ($250,000.00) which was in effect at time of January 22, 2008 preliminary plat approval. Payment of utility fees shall be at the current approved rates at the time of final plat. 3. Any future extension request shall follow the procedures as set forth in City Code Chapter 330.30, Subd. 9. 4. The extension request(s) are hereby approved for the following described property on the attached Exhibit A . The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this 24 day of November 2009 and seconded by Mayor Mark Hanus Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 2 • 01 -2541- 10 Exhibit A Legal Description Lots 2, 4, and the East Half of Lot 4, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the record plat thereof. 3 -2542- �3 OctoberA 2009 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN. 55364 Attn: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Subj: Request for a Second Extension of the Woodlyn Ridge Mound City Council Approvals of The Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Approval, the Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development Area (PDA), and the Water Resource Application for Storm Water And Erosion Control Ref: a) Resolution- 08 -15(P Plat) b) Resolution- 08 -16 (CUP) c) Resolution- 08 -17 (Water Resource) d) Woodlyn Ridge letter of October 6, 2008 *I 1. The purpose of this letter into request a second one year extension to the approvals previously granted for the Woodlyn Ridge Development. By references a) through c), the Mound City Council approved the Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat, the Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development Area (PDA), and the water resource application for storm water and erosion control for the 11 lot single family subdivision known as • Woodlyn Ridge on January 22, 2008; these approvals were to expire on January 22, 2009 but were extended for one year in response to the extension request of reference d). 2. The rationale for this second extension request follows: a. Residential market conditions- Since the approval of the first extension, several marketing efforts have been completed, albeit with no success. Over 100 builders, local, regional, and national, have been contacted but to date the development does not have a builder commitment. New color marketing brochures have been developed and distributed and lot/package pricing has been adjusted to reflect completed home packages that are competitive with other similar developments. Based on the recent Fall Parade of Homes, there may be some slight improvement in the market for home packages in the $325,000 to $450,000 range but additional foreclosures may negate this slight upswing. b. Development and Builder Loans- The credit market has not improved at all in the last year and may have even tightened to some extent especially for builders and home buyers. The ability of the builders to obtain financing for "spec" homes is especially critical in new developments since lot sales are heavily dependent upon a model in the development. 3. The strategy is to continue to market the development to builders by direct contact and updated artwork and brochures, and assess the market after the Spring Parade of Home in 2010. By that time it is possible that available lot inventories will have decreased even • -2543- further and builder credit issues will have eased. Completion of the final construction • plans leading to Final Plat can be completed in 2 -3 weeks and the development work is. estimated at only 6 -8 weeks thus if a builder commitment can be obtained next spring or even late next summer the development project could be completed by late fall 2010. Extension of the three subject approvals to January 22, 2011 is requested. Your cooperation is sincerely appreciated. Brian Benson, Woodlyn Ridge Developer 140 -2544- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 08-114 A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1 -YEAR EXTENSION FOR CITY APPROVALS FOR WOODLYN RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 6301 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the City of Mound adopted the following resolutions on January 22, 2008 for the Woodlyn Ridge residential development for the property at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard: Resolution No. 08 -15 Major subdivision /preliminary plat Resolution No. 08 -16 Conditional use permit — planned development area (CUP -PDA) Resolution No. 08 -17 Water resource permit ; and WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 330.30, Subd. 9 includes provisions that govern the extension of the 1 -year provision for preliminary plats which includes submittal of an application a minimum of 45 days in advance of the expiration of the preliminary plat and formal review by the Planning Commission prior to consideration /action by the City Council. WHEREAS, there are provisions in City Code Chapter 330, Subd. 9 which allows the City to recalculate park dedication or other related financial guarantees; and WHEREAS, there are no expirations for City approvals of CUP, PDA and water resource permit(s) in the Mound City Code; and WHEREAS, the property owner, Brian Benson, on or around October 6, 2008, submitted a request for a 1 -year extension of the City approvals for the Woodlyn Ridge development project; and WHEREAS, if approved, the 1 -year extension would run until January 22, 2010; and WHEREAS, as required by City Code Chapter 330, Subd. 9, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its November 17, 2008 meeting who unanimously voted to recommend City Council approval of the 1 -year extension request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound as follows: 1. The approvals granted by the City of Mound for the Woodlyn Ridge residential subdivision of the property at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard contained in Resolution No. 08- 15, Resolution No. 08 -16 and 08 -17 including all conditions are officially extended until January 22, 2010. 2. Park dedication fees for the project shall be based on Pay 2008 Taxable Market Value . from Hennepin County for land ($250,000.00) which was in effect at time of January 22, 2008 preliminary plat approval. Payment of utility fees shall be at the current approved rates at the time of final plat. 3. Any future extension request shall follow the procedures as set forth in City Code Chapter 330.30, Subd. 9. rm • 1 01 -2545- • 4. The extension request(s) are hereby approved for the following described property: Resolution No. 08 -114 Lots 2, 4, and the East Half of Lot 4, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the record plat thereof. Adopted by the City Council this 25 day of November 2008 Mayor Mark Hanus Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk I* -2546- October 6, 2008 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN. 55364 Attn: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Subj: Request for an Extension of the Woodlyn Ridge Mound City Council Approvals of the Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Approval, the Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development Area .(PDA), and the Water Resource Application for Storm Water and Erosion Control Ref: a) Resolution- 08 -15(P Plat) b) Resolution- 08-16 (CUP) c) Resolution- 08 -17 (Water Resource) 1. By references a)_through...c),. the .Mound City Council _approved .the..Major Subdivision. Preliminary Plat, the Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development Area (PDA), and the water resource application for storm water and erosion control for the 11 lot single family subdivision known as Woodlyn Ridge on January 22, 2008; these approvals expire on January 22, 2009. The purpose of this letter is to request a one year extension to these approvals to January 22, 2010. 2. The rationale for this extension request follows: a. Residential market conditions- At the time. of the original approval earlier this year the residential market was in fact weak but there was some level of activity that warranted proceeding with the project. Marketing efforts began immediately upon preliminary plat approval including contact with a host of builders and real estate agents in my office and other offices. These efforts have proven to be unsuccessful due to the rapid deterioration in the residential market after the January approval and the concurrent inability of current homeowners to sell their homes to allow for a new lot/new build purchase. b. Available credit- Compounding the extremely slow residential sales market is the recent financial and credit market collapse essentially closing the available credit avenues to builders as the bank regulators attempt to fully understand bank loan risk positions on both land developments and new construction /existing home mortgages. 3. It is hoped that these market and financial conditions will ease by next summer °sp, , development construction and model construction can commence, in the interim marketing and lot sales efforts will continue. Extension of the three subject approvals to January 22, 2010 is requested. Your cooperation is sincerely appreciated. Brian Benson, Woodlyn Ridge Developer -2547- it 01 • ZONING APPROVAL EXPIRATIONS • Preliminary Plat (330.30) Subd. g. The sub - divider may request a one -year time extension at least 45 days prior to the expiration of the preliminary plat as approved by the City Council. This request shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and a recommendation forwarded to the City Council addressing such items as potential conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan or specific area plans, potential conflicts with policy changes, changing transportation conditions, sidewalk policies or applicable changes to any City ordinances. The City staff may re- compute park dedication fees and other financial guarantees as listed in Subsection 340.75 to reflect current cost estimates unless street, utility, grading, or other substantial construction has begun. These revised costs shall be included in the time extension resolution. CUP No Expiration 1f turned down cannot be resubmitted for 1 year (350.525 Subd 3 g} PDA No Expiration Variance (350.530 Subd 2) • E. Whenever within one year after granting a variance or appeal, the use as permitted by the variance or appeal shall not have been completed or utilized, then such variance or appeal shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time In which to complete or to utilize the use has been granted by the City Council. Such extension shall be requested in writing and filed with the Building official at least thirty (30) days before the expiration of the original variance or appeal. There shall be no charge for the filing of such petition. The request for extension shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance or appeal. Such petition shall be presented to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council for a decision. All variances are limited to one extension. Further requests for extension shall be considered a new application subject to the provisions of Subsection 350.530, Subd. 2. Wetland Permits (350.1120) Subd. 5. Time of Permit A permittee shall begin the work authorized by the Permit within sixty (60) days from the date of issuance of the Permit unless a different date for the commencement of work is set forth in the Permit The permittee shall complete the work authorized by the Permit within the time limits specified in the Permit, which in no event shall exceed more than twelve (12) months from the date of issuance. The permittee shall notify the Building official at least twenty -four (24) hours prior to commencement of work. • Should the work not be commenced as specified herein, the Permit shall become void. -2548- A. Permit Extensions If, prior to the date established for',00mnneacxiaientof work, the permittee makes written request to the City Manager or his designated agent for an extension of time to commence the work, setting forth the reasons for the required extension, the administrator, may grant such extension. • B. Permit Renewals A permit, which has become void, may be renewed at the discretion of the City Council upon payment of a renewal fee. If the City Council does not grant such renewal, a Permit for such work may be granted only upon compliance with the procedures herein established for an original application. Grading /Erosion /Sedimentation Control {375:10} No Expiration MCWD Stormwater /Erosion Control Permits are valid for one -year from the date of issuance. Permits are renewable if there hasn't been a lapse in coverage and usually without any issues. 0 1 • -2549- • CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION N6.08-16 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MAJOR SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE PROPOSED WOODLYN RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 6301 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD ..... ..... _ -_ -. -.._ -- WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Plat Application for the proposed Wood lyn Ridge residential development on November 29, 2007; and WHEREAS, the applicant previously submitted a sketch plan for this proposed residential development, as permitted by the City's Subdivision Ordinance, which was informally reviewed by • Staff, the Planning Commission at its October.8, 2007 meeting, and the City Council at its October 23, 2007 meeting; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located on the south side of Lynwood Boulevard in the area between Westedge Boulevard and Robin Lane, near the western edge of Mound; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to subdivide the 4.17 -acre property into 11 residential lots for single - family detached homes; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to create one new public street, Woodlyn Ridge Court, as part of the subdivision, which would have a 50 -foot right -of -way and access Lynwood Boulevard . (CSAH 15) on the north side of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan guides this land for Low Density Residential, which allows single - family detached and attached housing types within the density of one (1) to six (6) units per acre, and the proposed subdivision would be 2.6 units per acre, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use and density guidance; and WHEREAS, the property is located in the R -1 (Single - Family Residential) zoning district, which has a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet or maximum density of 4.4 units per acre, and the proposed subdivision would be 2.6 units per acre, which does not exceed the maximum density permitted in the R -1 zoning district; and • -2550- Resolution No. 08-15 - WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the proposed Woodlyn Ridge Major Subdivision- Preliminary Plat, land use and related applications at its January 14 meeting and recommends that the City Council approve the Major Subdivision /Prelim i nary Plat Application for Woodlyn Ridge subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on January 22, 2008, held a public hearing for review and consideration of the Woodlyn Ridge major subdivision — preliminary plat in accordance with City Code Chapter 330 (Platting and Subdivision Regulations.) NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: 1. The Major Subdivision- Preliminary Plat Application for the proposed Woodlyn Ridge 11- unit residential development is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. Preliminary Plat of Woodlyn Ridge shall be consistent with Preliminary Plat exhibit dated 11/28/07 that was prepared by Otto Associates with the exception of modifications required by other conditions of this resolution. b. Submission of a certified copy of the resolution that vacated the half of that portion of Butternut Road adjacent to this property in 2001 and subsequent transfer of the vacated parcel to this plat prior to filing a Final Plat application for Woodlyn Ridge. c. Preliminary Plat shall be modified to incorporate the swale area within the • backyards of Lots 7, 8 and 9 into the drainage & utility easements for these three lots. d. Preliminary Plat shall be modified to add a trail easement within the proposed drainage & utility easements along CSAH 15 to accommodate a future county trail. e. Preliminary Plat shall be modified to show a 15 foot drainage and utility easement on the east side of Lot 6. f. Drainage and utility easements, as required by the City Engineer, shall be provided and submitted in a form so as to allow for recording at Hennepin County and shall be subject to review and approval by the City. g. Preliminary Plat shall be modified to reflect revisions to the wetland buffer that result from the applicant's anticipated changes to the proposed retaining wall. h. The applicant shall be responsible for preparation, execution and recording of a Wetland Buffer Declaration the foam and content of which shall be subject to review and acceptance by the City of Mound. 0 -2551- 10 Resoludon No. 08 -15 Utility Plan shall be modified to provide a gravity sanitary sewer system rather than.a forcemain system to meet City Engineer's recommendations outlined in Proposed Woodlyn Ridge Preliminary Review memo dated December 13, 2007, including adequate drainage & utility easement adjustments to accommodate the shifting of the sanitary sewer line. j. Payment of all required utility fees at the current approved rates prior to release of the final plat: Water Trunk Area Charge (WTAC) - $2,000 /unit, Sewer Trunk Area Charge (STAG) - $2,000 /unit. Payment of water service connection fee - $240 1unit, and sewer service connection $240 /unit fee as part of building permit. Payment of SAC fees as part of the building permit. k. Payment of any City fees associated with review of the Preliminary Plat Application or related land use permitting. I. Park dedication requirement shall be fulfilled by cash payment in lieu of land in accordance with City Code. m. Any and /or all conditions included in the official resolution approving the PDA -CUP for the project. n. Approval of the Water Resource Permit for the project including satisfaction of any • and /or all conditions. o. The lots shall have non -lot of record status. p. Applicant shall be responsible for providing all existing /proposed legal description information in electronic form to City of Mound. q. Structures, with the exception of retaining walls, shall not be built into the required front, side and rear yards. r., The homes shall have at least 840 square feet of area, not including any garage. s. Structures, roadways, driveways and parking areas must be located outside of the wetland buffer. t. A hazardous material inventory and demolition. permit will be needed prior to the demolition of the existing house per MPCA requirements and City policy (if applicable.) u. of new water and sewer service must be completed prior to release of the Resolution or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as a cash deposit, letter of credit or performance bond, to cover the cost of utility service connections prior to the release of the Resolution for recording. U� -2552- Resolution N.01 v. Any curb, gutter and streets which are disturbed because of construction including • but not limited to installation of the water service, sewer service and small utilities, shall be replaced. w. An approved Hennepin County permit will be required for-any construction taking place within CSAH 15 right -of -way. x. Locations of water and sewer services need to be approved by Mound Public Works Department. y. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution(s) with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met and all fees have been paid. z. No building permits will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution(s) and easement(s) has been provided to the City by the applicant. aa. No future approval of any development plans a nd /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the major su ivision pre I — T mmary p a Is ap rp over -- - -- bb. The applicant-submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit applications, when appropriate. cc. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all public agency • permits including the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. dd. No work is authorized or approved on public property. Applicant is advised that additional permitting may be needed in the event construction or other related activities are undertaken on public -owned land and is contingent upon the specific improvements proposed to be constructed. ee. The applicant shall be responsible for submittal of the Final Plat in accordance with the established timeframes in the City Code. ff. An agreement between the City and Developer to allow for early construction start(s) for up to two (2) homes is prepared and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Council. 2. The Major Subdivision - Preliminary Plat Application is hereby approved for the subject property as depicted on the attached Exhibit A . Adopted by the City Council this 22 "d day of January 2008 /s/ Mark Hanus Mayor Mark Hanus /s/ Bonnie Ritter Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk rI -2553- Resolufion No. 08-15 Exhibit A Legal Description Lots 2, 4, and the East Half of Lot 4, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the record plat thereof. 6 -2554- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 08-16 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) FORA PLANNED. DEVELOPMENT AREA (PDA) FOR THE PROPOSED WOODLYN RIDGE RESIDENTIAL _ __.._..._.. ..... _____DEVEL.OPMENT.AT_ 6301_LYNWOOD BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the applicant, the B. Benson Group, is requesting approval of a Planned Development Area (PDA) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in accordance with City Code Chapter 350.460 for the proposed Woodlyn Ridge residential development at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the rp u . ose of the PDA -CUP process is to provide a method by which parcels of land in • P the Residential Use Districts having unusual building characteristics due to subsoil conditions, topographic conditions, elevation of water table, unique environmental considerations, or because of the parcel's unusual shape or location in relationship to lakes, trees or other natural resources requires more unique and controlled platting techniques to protect and promote the quality of life in the City; and WHEREAS, the applicant previously submitted a sketch plan for this proposed residential development, as allowed by the City's Subdivision Ordinance, which was informally reviewed by Staff, the Planning Commission at its October 8, 2007 meeting, and the City Council at its October 23, 2007 meeting; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located on the south side of Lynwood Boulevard in the area between Westedge Boulevard and Robin Lane, near the western edge of Mound; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to subdivide the 4.17 -acre property into 11 residential lots for single - family detached homes; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to create one new public street, Woodlyn Ridge Court, as part of the subdivision, which would have a 50 -foot right -of -way and access Lynwood Boulevard (CSAH -15) on the north side of the subject property; and • It', Resolution No. 08-16 HEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan guides this land for Low Density Residential, which •^ allows single - family detached and attached housing types within the density of one (1) to six (6) units per.acre, and the proposed subdivision would be 2:6 units per acre, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use and density guidance; and WHEREAS, the property is located in the R -1 (Single - Family Residential) zoning district, which has a minimum lot area of 10 square feet or maximum density of 4.4 units per acre, and the proposed subdivision would be 2.6 units per acre, which does not exceed the maximum density permitted in the R -1 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the R -1 (Single - Family Residential) zoning. district has the following minimurn requirements: • Minimum Lot Area 10,000 sq ft • Minimum Lot Width 60 ft • Minimum Lot Depth 80 ft . - - - -- Minimum- Fr-ontYard- Setback- - -_- ----.._.---- 30_ ft___...-=---..----.._._ __.__.__— _ .... _ ...... — :_.__._.__. • Minimum Side Yard Setback loft • Minimum Rear Yard Setback 15 ft Minimum lot frontage on an improved public street shall be 60 ft, except that lots fronting on a cul- de -sac shall be 60 ft at the front building setback line; and WHEREAS, all of the proposed lots meet the minimum lot area, lot width, lot depth, lot frontage and rear yard setback requirements; and WHEREAS, the applicant has indicated that the purpose of the PDA -CUP request is to enable site design flexibility and variety for an unusual site due to its irregular shape, the resulting lot geometries, the site's topography, the location of the traveled versus platted centerline of the adjacent CSAH 15 roadway, and the fact that this project is an infill residential development bounded on three (3) sides by existing residential development and on the fourth side by a County Road. Additionally, during construction of CSAH 15, the platted centerline was not adhered to resulting in a traveled centerline that is located south of the platted centerline and therefore crowds the northern property line. of the proposed development site; and WHEREAS, as part of the PDA -CUP, the applicant is proposing smaller front yard setbacks of 25 ft versus the R -1 minimum requirement of 30 ft and alternating side yard setbacks of six (6) ft on one side and ten (10) ft on the other side versus the R -1 minimum requirement of 10 ft; and WHEREAS, as part of the PDA -CUP, the applicant is also proposing smaller corner side yard setbacks of 20 ft for Lots 1 & 11 versus the minimum corner side yard setback requirement of 30 ft as measured from CSAH 15 right -of -way; and WHEREAS, maximum hardcover surfaces allowed in residential zoning districts is 30% of the lot area; and • -2556- Resolution No. 08-16 WHEREAS,. as part of the PDA -CUP, the applicant is proposing a variety of hardcover percentages by lot that range from 22% on the largest lot to 35% on the smallest lots, however, the cumulative hardcover for all lots would meet the 30% maximum requirement; and WHEREAS, as part of the PDA -CUP, flexibility from the fence regulations in the City Code which restricts the height of fences for retaining walls to no more than 42 inches and permit a fence up to 48 inches to be placed on the top of the retaining wall(s) as recommended by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the proposed Woodlyn Ridge major subdivision /preliminary plat, land use and related permit applications at its January 14t meeting and recommends to the Council to approve the PDA -CUP Application for Wood lyn Ridge subject to conditions; and WHEREAS the City Council held a public hearing for review of the PDA -CUP application in accordance with the City Code at its January 22, 2008 meeting. L ` ._ NOW THEREFORE, BE "IT RESOLVED bytlie Council _City o irrnes The Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development Area Application for the proposed Woodlyn Ridge 11 -unit residential development is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. The 30% maximum hardcover percentage shall be maintained by the eleven (11) • lots in total. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to verify and maintain documentation regarding the status of the hardcover calculations. The applicant shall submit a development site plan that visually communicates the maximum hardcover percentages allowed for each individual lot as part of the Final Plat application submittal. b. The proposed retaining wall(s), which shall be located on private property and shall not be the responsibility of the City, will need to be designed and stamped by a licensed structural.engineer in the State of Minnesota as is required for wall structures exceeding four (4) feet in height. c. Modifications to the proposed retaining wall including a two- tiered wall and placement of the wall(s) are subject to review and approval by the City of Mound. Applicant is advised that in the event the retaining wall or portion thereof is located within the wetland or buffer area(s), additional permitting may be required. d. Any retaining wall over four (4) feet in height shall require a fence or railing to be constructed along the top of the wall and shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. e. A fence up to 48 inches in height on top of the retaining wall(s) is hereby approved as part of the PDA -CUP. Payment of any City fees associated with review of the PDA -CUP. 0, � -2997- Resolution No. 08-18 g. Approval of the Water Resource Permit including any and /or all conditions referenced in the official resolution. h. Approval of the Preliminary Plat including any and /or all conditions referenced in the official resolution. i. The proposed private retaining wall(s), portions of which are proposed to be- higher than four (4) feet in height, are approved to be constructed within the side, front and rear yards of Lot 6 and Lot 7 as part of the PDA -CUP. 2. The PDA =CUP Application is hereby approved for the subject property as depicted on the attached Exhibit A . Adopted by the City Council this 22 day of January 2008 /sl Mark Hanus _ ._.._ .. _ .... _ ....._ _ . Mayor Mark Han-us.... /s/ Bonnie Ritter Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk f " -2558- , , Resolution No. 08 -16 Exhibit A Proposed Legal Description Lots 2, 4, and the East Half of Lot 4, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE,. Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the record plat thereof.. 0.1 • -2559- 11 CITY OF MOUND' RESOLUTION #08 -17 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WATER RESOURCE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR STORMWATER AND EROSION CONTROL FOR THE WOODLYN RIDGE SUBDIVISION AT _..._._..S301-- LYNWOOD _.90ULEVARD___._...__...__. ...... WHEREAS, permitting responsibilities for stormwater (MCWD Rule N) and erosion control (Rule were transferred from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to the City of Mound on August 22, 2002 following approval of the Mound Surface Water Management Plan by the MCWD Board of Managers; and • WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of a stormwater and erosion control permit associated with a proposed new residential subdivision at 6301 Lynwood Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located on the south side of Lynwood Boulevard in the area between Westedge Boulevard and Robin Lane, near the western edge of Mound; and WHEREAS, the grading and utility plans were reviewed by the City Engineer and Director of Public Works in accordance with the Mound Surface Water Management Plan, City Code Chapter 375, and MCWD Rule N and MCWD Rule D and deemed satisfactory; and WHEREAS, Staff has recommended approval of the water resource permit application for stormwater and erosion control subject to conditions. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: The water resource application for stormwater and erosion control is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. Grading Plan shall be modified improve the functioning and placement of the swale in the backyards of Lots 7, 8 and 9 as recommended by City Engineer in Proposed Woodlyn Ridge Preliminary Review memo dated December 13, 2007. U -2560- Resolution No: 0 8-17 b. Applicant shall work with the City Engineer to resolve issues with the proposed public access to the stormwater pond located in rear yards of Lots 5 and 6 prior to submitting a Final Plat application for Woodlyn Ridge as recommended by City Engineer in Proposed Woodlyn Ridge Preliminary Review memo dated December 13, 2007. c. Proposed siit fence shall generally follow constant contours. When this is not possible, the silt fence should be broken and hooked upslope to slow the flow while still allowing overflow. *I d. Additional silt fence shall be provided around the south side .of Lots 5 & 6 to slow flow and contain sediment at the top of the hill. Bioroll or silt fence should be provided on Lot 6 south of the building pad (midway down the hill) to form a grade break and slow storm water runoff. e. Temporary ditch checks shall be provided in the swales at the lot lines. f. Temporary erosion control blanket is required on all slopes steeper than 4:1. g. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of MCWD Rule N, MCWD Rule D, City Code Chapters 375, and the Mound Surface Water Management Plan. 2. The water resource permit application is hereby approved for the subject property as . depicted on the attached Exhibit A . Adopted by the City Council this 22 day of January 2008 /s/ Mark Hanus Mayor Mark Hanus /s/ Bonnie Ritter Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 2 40 � -25- -2561- Resolution No. 0 8-17 • Exhibit A Proposed Legal Description Lots 2, 4, and the East Half of Lot 4, Block 11, MOUND TERRACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the record plat thereof. • • -2562- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -3190 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Comm. Dev. Director Date: November 18, 2009 Re: Variance Extension Request for Property at 2933 Cambridge Lane Summary. As the Planning Commission may recall, the City Council, at its December 9, 2008 meeting, approved a variance application to allow a reduced front setback for a new home to be constructed at 2933 Cambridge Lane which is owned by Kester and Lisa Bachelor. According to City Code 350.530, Subd. 2 (E), the variance will expire and become null and void one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350:530, Subd. 2 (E). Specifically, this subsection reads as follows: E. Whenever within one year after granting a variance or appeal, the use as permitted by the variance or appeal shall not have been completed or utilized, then such variance or appeal shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete or to utilize the use has been granted by the City Council. Such extension shall be requested in writing and filed with the Building Official at least thirty (30) days before the expiration of the original variance or appeal. There shall be no charge for the filing of such petition. The request for extension shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance or appeal. Such petition shall be presented to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council for a decision. All variances are limited to one extension. Further requests for extension shall be considered a new application subject to the provisions of Subsection 350.530, Subd. 2. • Details regarding the extension request were provided in an email submitted by the owner on November 5, 2009 which has been included as an attachment. • The "new" recodified City Code, which was approved by the City Council on October 27, 2009, does not include a 1 -year expiration clause for variances, however, the "new" code is not yet in effect as publication of the ordinance summary has not yet been undertaken. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation. 'The request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its November 17, 2009 meeting and was recommended for approval as recommended by Staff. Resolution. A draft resolution for review and consideration by the City Council has been included as an attachment. Attachment • Resolution No. 08 -127 r� • • -2563- MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION November 17, 2009 OLD / NEW BUSINESS a. Review of property owner request to extend variance for new house at 2933 Cambridge Lane Staff presented a review of the request and indicated that Kester Batchelor, owner of the property, was present at the meeting. MOTION by Ward, seconded by Glister, to approve Staffs recommendation. MOTION carried unanimously. 10 • ' J f -2564- RESOLUTION # 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND APPROVING A 1 -YEAR EXTENSION FOR VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY AT 2933 CAMBRIDGE LANE P &Z CASE #09- WHEREAS, a variance was approved for the property located at 2933 Cambridge Lane on December 9, 2008 to allow construction of a new single - family dwelling following adoption of Resolution No. 08 -127 including all conditions; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 08 -127 was recorded at Hennepin Council and a recorded copy is on file at Mound City Hall; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 350.530, Subd. 2 (E) states that whenever within one (1) year after granting a variance, the use as permitted by the variance has not been completed or utilized, the variance becomes null and void unless a petition for an extension has been submitted at least 30 days in advance of the expiration of the variance and also requires review by the Planning Commission prior to approval by the City Council; and • WHEREAS, details regarding the extension request are contained in the letter of • request from the applicant, which was received on November 5, 2009 via email. In summary, due to unforeseen circumstances, the applicant had to obtain alternate building contractor services for the construction project; and WHEREAS, the variance extension req uest. was. reviewed by the Planning Commission at its November 17, 2009 meeting who voted to recommend City Council approval of the 1 -year variance extension request as recommended by Staff. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted November 24, 2009 Mark Hanus, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk • -2565- Page 1 of 1 Sarah Smith From: • Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 8:38 PM To: sarahsmith @cityofmound.com Cc: Subject: Request to extend variance for new house at 2933 Cambridge Lane Mound Please accept this letter as a request to extend the variance approved for the property at 2933 Cambridge Lane Mound MN by the Mound City Council on December 2008 to allow the construction of a new family home. Since the permission of the original variance, our intended contractor unfortunately became a subject of the recent economic downturn and I have been informed was rendered unable to continue in business. After this time, my wife and I had the good fortune to be blessed by the birth of our first child Charles Batchelor (Charlie). As my wife was placed on bed rest for a significant amount of her pregnancy, we had a focus other than that of searching for a replacement contractor. However, during this time we have had our plans further developed and we hope better prepared for their submission for consideration by the Planning Council. We have now identified and instructed a new contractor who is currently in the process of gathering the required information to put in our planning permission request. We expect this submission to occur if not in the coming month, at the very latest by the end of the calendar year. This unfortunately may leave us short by a few weeks in fully utilizing the previously permitted variance and therefore are seeking an additional extension of the variance should the planning permission not be granted in the next thirty days. My wife and I are longing to start our build and are looking forward to being able to join your community • and raising our new addition (Charlie) up in Mound — especially as our new house will be so close to the park. We apologize for this additional burden to the Planning Commission and the City Council and hope that you find the above statement an indication of our good faith to complete and utilize the variance that was kindly permitted to us by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Lisa and Kester Batchelor • -2566- i iii►►i�i iii iiiii � ►i ►i► i i►i �� Doc No T4624089 Certified, filed and /or recorded on 3113/09 9:00 AM Office of the Registrar of Title' • Hennepin County, Minnesota Michael H. Cunniff, Registrar of Titles Jill L. Alverson, County Auditor and Treasurer Deputy 43 Pkg ID 521023 Doc Name: Resolution Document Recording Fee $46.00 Attested Copy or Duplicate $2.00 Original Document Total. $48.00 Existing Certs New Certs 1214396 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 08 -127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2933 CAMBRIDGE LANE P & Z CASE # 08 -15 PID # 24- 117 -24-42 -0007 WHEREAS, the applicant, Vladimir Sivriver, has submitted a request for a 10 foot front yard setback variance on behalf of the property owner, Kester Batchelor, in order to construct a house and attached garage; and WHEREAS, the property is located just south of the intersection of Cambridge Lane and Afton Road. This existing lot of record was originally platted as part of the Wychwood Subdivision. The zoning is R -1A, Single Family Residential; and WHEREAS, the applicant proposes the following development standards for this existing lot of record: Required Proposed /Existing Variance Lot Area 6,000 sq. ft. 8,004 sq. ft. - Lot Width 40 feet 80 feet - Lot Depth 80 feet 100 feet - Front Yard Setback 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet Rear Yard Setback 15 feet 26 feet - Side Yard Setback 6 feet 7/8 feet - OHWL Setback 50 feet 80+ feet - Hardcover (maximum 40 %) 3,202 sq. ft. 3,077 sq. ft. - ;and • i -2567- • Resolution No. 08 -127 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve a 10 -foot front setback variance to allow the construction of a house and garage, as requested by the applicant, based on the following findings of fact: a. The applicant has placed the house in a manner which attempts to maintain a similar building alignment to the surrounding properties located on each side of the subject property. b. The house has been placed to balance its front to back location on the lot. C. Keeping the house closer to the front property line minimizes impact and disruption on the lakeside of the property which includes slope and bluff conditions. d. With the exception of the requested variance, no other deviations from the code are being created. • e. The side loaded attached garage is 1 -story and therefore does not create a "canyon -like" condition along the street. f. The attached garage portion of the house does not include a basement. g. A front setback of 8 feet is allowed for a side- loaded detached garage on a lakeside lot. However, if the garage is attached to the house, the entire structure, including the garage portion, must be set back 20 feet. The Council acknowledges that further study is necessary to determine if this difference in treatment is justified from a land use standpoint. h. The conditions of City Code Chapter 350.530 are being met. 2. The variance is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. The garage shall be no more than one story in height. b. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance request. C. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance application is approved. • -2568- Resolution No. 08 -127 d. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. e. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all permits. f. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all public agency permits including the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. g. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution(s) with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. h. No building permits will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution(s) has been provided to the City unless an escrow deposit of sufficient amount is on file with the City. i. No building permits will be issued until any and /or all fees owed to the City have been paid. 1 r u j. All runoff must not be directed towards the neighbor's property and • accommodated on site. k. Preconstruction site inspection must be completed. I. All utility locations must be confirmed with Public Works prior to construction. m. Structures shall not be built into the required front, side and rear yards. Foundation survey is required if a proposed building is within 5 feet of the required minimum front/side /rear setbacks. n. Any recommended changes -from the City Council and Staff including the City Attorney. 3. This variance is approved for the following legally described property: LOTS 7 AND 8, BLOCK 34, WYCHWOOD Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mound this 9 day of December, 2008. /s/ Mark Hanus Mayor Mark Hanus /s/ Bonnie Ritter Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 3 • -2569- 10 I* • Executive Summary Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. ®® TO: Mound City Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Jeff Miller, Consulting City Planner DATE: November 19, 2009 SUBJECT: PC Case 09 -16, 1890 Shorewood Lane, Front Yard Setback Variance for Garage The Planning Commission reviewed this case at their November 17'' meeting where a motion for approval of the front yard setback variance to add an attached garage was made, and seconded, with a 7 -1 vote to recommend approval to the City Council. Staff had recommended approval of the requested variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The location, configuration and topography of the existing garage and driveway cause safety concerns for the property owner. The existing driveway has a steep incline that prevents safe use of the driveway in the winter. Since the existing garage is a narrow two - car garage, the driveway space is needed for parking purposes. It is unsafe to park cars on the existing driveway when there is snow and ice as they can slide into the street. By removing the existing garage and driveway and constructing a new garage in the proposed new location, the applicant is able to eliminate the unsafe driveway situation and construct a larger garage to adequately accommodate parking within the garage. 2. The basis for the prior variance to the required minimum front yard setback granted in 1977 for the existing garage, which was the location of the existing house on the lot, the house's perpendicular position to the lot lines, the lot's narrowness, and the lot's small size, meets criteria A of the City's variance ordinance, Section 350.530. 3. Since it appears that the existing house structure is located at approximately 23 feet from the front property line, the 20 -foot minimum front yard setback would eliminate any adequate space for a garage on the lot and deprive the applicant of the right to have a garage on this lot, which meets criteria B of the City's variance ordinance. 4. The variance request meets criteria C of the City's variance ordinance since the applicant has very recently purchased the property and, therefore, the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. 5. The variance request meets criteria D of the City's variance ordinance since the lot requires a variance in order for literally any garage structure to be built. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax(612)338 -6838 -2570- 6. The applicant is proposing a garage that is 22 -24 feet in width. (Two stalls would be 24 • feet and one stall would be 22 feet.) Since standard two -car garage dimension for depth is 20 -24 feet, the proposed garage structure is meeting criteria E because the variance requested falls within this standard range thereby minimizing the variance. 7. The variance request meets criteria F of the City's variance ordinance since it would not be detrimental to this ordinance or to property in the same zone. The adjacent property to the south has an existing garage structure which is closer to the front property line and street than the proposed garage. The two properties directly to the north appear to have existing garages placed similarly close to the front property line and street. 8. The lot is currently non - conforming with respect to the percentage of hardcover / impervious surface; it currently has 40.3% hardcover, which exceeds the 40% maximum hardcover allowed for a lot of record. The removal of the existing attached garage and driveway and relocation of the proposed new attached garage will reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property to 37.5% and bring the lot into conformance with the maximum hardcover requirement. It should be noted that at the Planning Commission meeting the applicant agreed to revise their garage plan to reduce the depth of the garage in order to meet the minimum driveway length of 18 feet at the closest point between the face of the garage and the street curb. Consequently, the applicant submitted a revised survey with a sketch plan that shows the • depth of the garage reduced sufficiently to provide the 18 -foot driveway, which meets condition #1 of the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of this variance. The larger portion of the garage was reduced from 24 feet to 23 feet in depth and the smaller portion was reduced from 22 feet to 21 feet 6 inches. • 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax(612)338 -6838 -2571- • RESOLUTION # 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1890 SHOREWOOD LANE P &Z CASE #09 =16 PID # 18- 117 -23 -23 -0027 WHEREAS, the 'sting ached garage is located along the southwest portion of the house at approxima feet from the front property line according to the survey submitted by the app nt; and WHEREAS, the submitted survey contains a note (lower left hand corner) stating "Also shown on this survey is part of Shorewood Lane vacated by the City of Mound on June 26, 1979 and recorded with Hennepin County as Document No. A 4519252 "; and WHEREAS, the discrepancy between the approved setback variance in 1977 and the actual setback shown on the submitted survey is related to this right -of -way vacation that occurred in 1979 subsequent to the variance approval; and WHEREAS, the location, configuration, size and site topography of the existing garage and driveway cause safety concerns for the property owner, particularly the small size of the garage and steep slope of the driveway; and WHEREAS, the applicant's proposed relocation of a new attached garage is designed to eliminate the unsafe driveway situation and provide a larger garage to adequately accommodate parking of vehicles within the garage; and • -2572- WHEREAS, City Code Section 350.530 Subd 1 outlines the criteria for granting variances in the City of Mound and generally states that a variance to the provisions of • the Zoning Ordinance may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those areas where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of his or her land; and WHEREAS, City policy requires that abutting property owners are notified of variance requests by mailed noticeand members-of-the-Council are.advised.that this activity was completed on or about November 13, 2009; and WHEREAS, the applicants originally proposed a new garage that would be located along the northwest portion of the house 7 ft from the front property line at its closest point, which requires approval of a 13 ft variance from the minimum front yard setback; and WHEREAS, a condition of the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval at their meeting on November 17, 2009 was that the depth of the proposed garage be reduced to provide adequate driveway space to meet the City's minimum parking space length of 18 ft at the closest point betwee garage face and the curb, and WHEREAS, the applicants subsequentl m'tted a vised survey with a sketch plan, dated November 18, 2009 that sho depth o the garage reduced sufficiently to provide the 18 ft driveway a mee ndition #1 of the Planning Commission's recommendation for appro s 'ante; and WHEREAS, the exisTWstructure meets all of the minimum setback requirements for a lot in the R -1A zoning district as would the proposed new attached garage; and WHEREAS, the existing at -grade stone patio encroaches on the minimum shoreland setback of 50 ft, however, it qualifies as a water - oriented accessory structure which is allowed to have a minimum shoreland setback of ten (10) feet rather than 50 feet, provided that it is not greater than 250 square feet in area and does not exceed 30 inches above grade at any point, which it does not; and WHEREAS, Staff has reviewed the application and recommended approval of the variance with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application at their meeting on November 17, 2009 and has recommended approval of the variance for this existing lot of record with the following findings of fact: 1. The location, configuration and topography of the existing garage and driveway • cause safety concerns for the property owner. The existing driveway has a steep -2573- incline that prevents safe use of the driveway in the winter. Since the existing • garage is a narrow two -car garage, the driveway space is needed for parking purposes. It is unsafe to park cars on the existing driveway when there is snow and ice as they can slide into the street. By removing the existing garage and driveway and constructing a new garage in the proposed new location, the applicant is able to eliminate the unsafe driveway situation and construct a larger garage to adequately accommodate parking within the garage. 2. The basis for the prior variance to the required minimum front yard setback granted in 1977 for the existing garage, which was the location of the existing house on the lot, the house's perpendicular position to the lot lines, the lot's narrowness, and the lot's small size, meets criteria A of the City's variance ordinance, Section 350.530. 3. Since it appears that the existing house structure is located at approx. 23 feet from the front property line, the 20 feet minimum front yard setback would eliminate any adequate space for a garage on the lot and deprive the applicant of the right to have a garage on this lot, which meets criteria B of the City's variance ordinance. 4. The variance request meets criteria C res of t it riance ordinance since the applicant has very recently purchased pr pe d, therefore, the special conditions or circumstances do not u o e actions of the applicant. 5. The variance request meets lot requires a variance in org Pity's variance ordinance since the garage structure to be built. 6. The applicant is proposZ(ould at is 22 -24 feet in width. (Two stalls would be 24 feet and Qince a 22 feet.) Since standard two -car garage dimension for feet, the proposed garage structure is meeting criteria E becau requested falls within this standard range thereby minimizing the v 7. The variance request meets criteria F of the City's variance ordinance since it would not be detrimental to this ordinance or to property in the same zone. The adjacent property to the south has an existing garage structure which is closer to the front property line and street than the proposed garage. The two properties directly to the north appear to have existing garages placed similarly close to the front property line and street. 8. The lot is currently non- conforming with respect to the percentage of hard cover / impervious surface; it currently has 40.3% hard cover which exceeds the 40% maximum hard cover allowed for a lot of record. The removal of the existing attached garage and driveway and relocation of the proposed new attached garage will reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property to 37.5% and bring the lot into conformance with the maximum hard cover requirement. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve a front yard setback variance of 12 feet to allow construction of an attached garage to be located 8 feet from the front property line at its closest point, as requested by the applicant with the following conditions: -2574- 1. The depth of the garage addition is reduced to accommodate vehicle parking in • the driveway in front of the garage so as not to extend beyond the curb line with a minimum depth of at least 18 feet at its closest point. 2. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance request. 3. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance application is approved. 4. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 5. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all permits. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers vote r�the The following Councilmembers Adopted November 24, 2009 Mark Hanus, Mayor Attest: City Clerk 01 01 - 2575 10 Building Permit Survey P,Vamd ftir. Danberry Company S �c q yz .r�S 494 I $7 - f: h 1Qa. l� nand V t*levau. 2.�l.t: ,fihorWwond Lane Lsmd. i FaUnd Uon Mmvuman:t Fame 0 0=0 Waft679 Gevdtlon Fklat)ng H&daaver C Jcr_Neflp' »e,,,`_.(MZ h , E*Whq House/Stoop a Fled- 1,4 11? Concrete Pat% +196 4 Retainthp. Wall 0,W shot 4OWvd by dear) 909 aitm bwus Drlw G Path 921 llirdeHaln Gnndacolsinq^ 86 d 72 Proposed Stoup. do :Stays 3,571" Lot Area AM9 Percent Hardcover- :4amr P asetl Herdteusr QgadadwA tse, 6A €xdstlryg Hduga less go/Ve to be —6ved� 1,4 11? Desk +196 Concrete Patio A Retdt.? ft Wd (Yas that cavaad by deaRa 2D0 8 1tumino ue DrIvs N$r" d 72 Proposed Stoup. do :Stays Proposed Pattie _!S2 «5'327 Lot Area 6,N69 percent Hardcover 37.58 Lega Deserintian 6 9444&d by ,- A Lot; 22 and f'ha Southo$terfy half, front and rear, of Lot 21,, BJcick 3, Sk ADY NO06 POWT 1M" Also shown on this sgrvey is part of Shorewood Lana' vaaoled by the City of Hound on dung 206 1 and recorded with Hennepin County os Documeht No, A 9.4192,x:2 SCAM 20 a 1 as itj 1 inch - go feet Hearings based an ass3r rW daturm I hereby aert that this cgr ,/''�Q w Jab Humber; 710t $ CHOB .+`s fG M d 7 ta re su e rrrsy as B 72 prepared try me W ands rlty dart :suparVlsfarr slid timt l am a dal eglstered Land Surviynr bnder an L _ Ar rt � lows df the,5tota" of Min ta. Sur*Y Ootot '10 -96 -09 /� /� Drawing Name danbery- Lp2 -B3-SP dwg INC. Dmwn byr lic8 P B Sahobarg Reaaians ' 11-0 -08 (Pfap• reriafgas) 743- 97z -sz2 1' 807 Co. Rd. 7J sE Dote: 1�OlJ ff , 9 ltegisl ation hto: 147W 11-116-09 (ro -rJia 9W"*) www:Sd+oborgLarYd2agr Delaniy MH 55-W r - 7 -2576- i ,take Minnetonka Top Of Water - : 92 &17 (PW MOW on 10- 26 -09): amw. Cbntaur__ t--edge of water MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION November 17, 2009 BOARD OF APPEALS PLANNING CASE NO. 09-16 VARIANCE FOR FRONT SETBACK 1890 SHOREWOOD LANE SANDRA & LEO BULLOCK Planner Rita Trapp introduced the planning case. In general, staff is comfortable with what is being proposed. However, it is requested that the main garage portion (left 2 stalls) be reduced in depth to increase the dimension to the street to a minimum of 18 feet. The steepness of the driveway will be eliminated with the new design. Leo Bullock (1890 Shorewood Lane) indicated he accommodate the 18 -foot minimum setback to the Jeff Danberry (Contractor) reiterated that Doug Kaiser (1880 Shorewood Lane) Shorewood Lane. He didn't see thaW ng to cut back the depth to the depth is not a problem. that he loses all his view of .pness was a problem. Skinner asked what he mea y ser indicated that the view from his kitchen and kitchen eating area ing but garage wall. MOTION by Paulsen, seco Vd Stevens, to approve Staff's recommendation with a minimum of 18 feet from cur e cl osest point. MOTION carried. Voting for: Claywell, Skinner, Ward, Stevens, Michael, Peters, Paulsen Voting against: Glister Planning Commissioner Glister stated that the project could be reworked. 01 -2577- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 • (952) 472 -3190 PLANNING REPORT City of Mound Planning and Building Department TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Jeff Miller, Staff Planning Consultant DATE: November 12, 2009 MEETING DATE: November 17, 2009 REQUEST: Variance to Front Yard Setback — Construction of New Attached Garage OWNER/APPLICANT: Leo and Sandra Bullock g PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 09 -16 HKGi FILE NUMBER: 09 -05 LOCATION: 1890 Shorewood Lane PID: 1 8- 117 -23 -23 -0027 ZONING: Single Family Residential (R -1A) District COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential • BACKGROUND Leo and Sandra Bullock have submitted an application requesting approval of a variance from the minimum front yard setback to allow the addition of a new attached garage to their home located at 1890 Shorewood Lane. This lot, which currently contains a single - family house with an attached garage, has shoreline frontage on Lake Minnetonka along its rear lot line (northeast). The existing attached garage does not meet the minimum front yard setback of 20 ft and was granted a prior variance in 1977 to a previous property owner. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing attached garage, which is located at the southwest corner of the house, and replace it with a new garage at the northwest corner of the house, also along the front property line. The proposed attached garage would be located, at its closest point, 7.0 ft from the front property line, which requires approval of a variance from the required minimum 20 ft. setback from the front property line. The applicant has submitted an updated lot surrey, which is dated November 12, 2009, that shows the attached garage (to be removed), and the proposed attached garageng house, existing IU -2578- Subd. 1. Criteria for Grantinc Variances A variance to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of his land. No use variances may be issued. A variance may be granted only in the event that the following circumstances exist: A. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners control. B. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. C. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. D. That granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. E. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. F The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Ordinance or to property in the same zone. 60 -DAY PROCESS Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days unless an extension is executed. The variance application submitted November 4, 2009 was deemed to be complete on November 12, 2009. NOTIFICATION City policy requires that abutting property owners are notified of variance requests by mailed notice. Members of the Planning Commission are advised that this activity was completed on or about November 13, 2009. *I CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to applicable City departments for review and comment. All written comments received to date have been summarized below: 9 -2579- • City Engineer, Dan Faulkner The new garage will be entered from the f as opposed to the side - loaded existing rout There will be adequate room, as the applicant indicates, for vehicles to observe street traffic before pulling out into Shorewood Lane. Also, the Hennepin . County Property Info website shows the lot size as 8,221 sq. ft. rather than 8,869 sq. ft. as shown on the variance application. Public Works, Ray Hanson • 0 Building Official Dan Menth Police Chief Kurtz DISCUSSION Staff is concerned about the distance between the proposed new garage face and street, which applicant is showing as 17'6 ". This distance should meet the City's minimum depth for a parking space which is 18' to Prevent any encroachment of parked cars into the public right -of -way and potential issues with snowplowing and snow storage. No comments. Building permit . required including the submittal of all required information. No comments or objections. 1. The location, configuration and topography of this property's existin driveway cause safety concerns for the roe 9 garage and has a steep incline (approximately 4'6" rise over 23 ft) that p events e ri use of the driveway in the winter. Since the existin g garage is a narrow two-car garage, parking the driveway space is needed for the existing driveway when thereis snow purposes. and ice l as s they a can slide intos on street. By removing the existing garage and driveway and constructing a new garage in the proposed new location, unsafe driveway situation and construct ala applicant er is able to eliminate the accommodate parking within the garage. The prop sed new garage is desi ned with a dropped floor of approximately four (4) feet in the area of the existing steep driveway. 6 -2580- 2. Since the existing. house structure is located at approx. 23 ft from the front property line, the R -1A requirement of a 20 ft minimum front yard setback essentially eliminates any adequate space for a garage on the lot. The required minimum setback from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka as well as the lack of a feasible access to the rear of the house makes the placement of a garage at the rear of the house unfeasible. 3. The existing attached garage was granted a variance to the required minimum front yard setback in 1977. Per Resolution No. 77 -532, the requested setback from the front property line was 4'8" (4.7 ft) or a 5.3 ft variance, which means the minimum setback.at thaf time must have Men 1 U n. I ne. updatecl survey, dated November 12, 2009, submitted by the applicant shows the existing garage located at 8.7 ft from the front property line at its closest point. The "note" at the bottom of the updated survey states "Also shown on this survey is part of Shorewood Lane vacated by the City of Mound on June 26, 1979 and recorded with. Hennepin County as Document No. A 4519252 ". Since this right -of -way vacation, which appears to be approximately 5 ft, occurred after the 1977 variance, it is a contributor to the discrepancy between the variance granted and the existing front yard setback shown on the updated survey. 4. The proposed new garage is shown as 24 ft in depth (front -to -back) for two stalls and 22 ft in depth for one stall, which falls within the standard range of 20' -24' depth for a two -car garage. In addition, the applicant is proposing to recess a portion of the garage (two ft recess) and construct a different roofline on this portion of the garage, which will provide for articulation of the face of the garage as it faces the street. This proposed garage frontage, along with improvements to the new and relocated front entry to the house will improve the aesthetic value of the house and was designed to be consistent with other upgraded homes in the neighborhood. 5, The adjacent property to the south has an existing garage structure which is closer to the front property line and street than the proposed garage for the subject property. The two properties directly to the north also appear to have existing garages placed similarly close to the front property line and street, 6. The lot is currently non - conforming with respect to the percentage of hard cover / impervious surface. Section 350.645 requires that impervious surface coverage of lots of record in residential zones shall not exceed 40 percent of the lot area. The applicant submitted a hardcover calculation as part of the updated Certificate of Survey, dated November 12, 2009. This hardcover calculation shows the lot's existing hardcover at 40.3% and proposed hardcover at 37.5 %. The removal of the existing attached garage and driveway and relocation of the proposed new attached garage will reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property to 37.5% and bring the lot into conformance with the maximum hard cover requirement. Modification of the hardcover on the site for conformance A9 -2581- • with the current regulations is not part of the requested variance" and is to be addressed as a separate matter by the applicant in cooperation with Staff . 7. The Public Works Department has concerns about adequate parkin depth in the driveway between the garage and the street as the subject area is les than the City's standard parking stall size of 9' x 18'. The site plan and narrative submitted as part of the variance application indicate that the distance between the proposed new garage face and the street would be 17'6" at the closest point between the garage and the street. RECOMMENDATION aNN►wa.I. or the vii rian ce o :II" (1.0 setback) to the required R -1A minimum front yard setback for the addition of an attached garage to replace an existing attached garage for the property located at 1890 Shorewood Lane, subject to the following conditions: 1. The depth of the garage addition is reduced to accommodate vehicle parking in the driveway in front of the garage so as not to extend beyond the curb line with a minimum depth of at least 18 FT at its closest point. 2. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance request. 16 6 3. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance application is approved. 4. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal o the building permit application. f 5. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all permits. In recommending approval of the requested variance, Staff offers the following findings of fact: g 1. The location, configuration and topography of the existing garage and driveway cause safety concems for the property owner. The existing driveway has a steep incline that prevents safe use of the driveway in the winter. Since the existing garage is a narrow two -car garage, the driveway space is needed for parking purposes. It is unsafe to park cars on the existing driveway when there is snow and ice as they can slide into the street. By removing the existing garage and driveway and constructing a new garage in the 9 proposed new location, the applicant is able to, eliminate the unsafe driveway situation and construct a larger garage to adequately accommodate parking within the garage. E-2582- 2. The basis for the prior variance to the required minimum front yard setback granted in 1977 for the. existing garage, which was the location of the existing house on the lot, the house's perpendicular position to the lot lines, the lot's narrowness, and the lot's small size, meets criteria A of the City's variance ordinance, Section 350.530. 3. Since it appears that the existing house structure is located at approx. 23 ft from the front property line, the 20 ft minimum front yard setback would eliminate any adequate space for a garage on the lot and deprive.the applicant of the right-to have a yaraye an this lot, whfqh M 11: Pf thp . ordinance.. 4. The variance request meets criteria C of the City's variance ordinance since the applicant has very recently purchased the property and, therefore, the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. 5. The'variance request meets criteria D of the City's variance ordinance since the lot requires a variance in order for literally any garage structure to be built. 6. The applicant is proposing a garage that is 22 -24' in width (two stalls would be 24 ft and one stall would be 22 ft): Since standard two -car garage dimension for depth is 20' -24', the proposed garage structure is meeting criteria E because the variance requested falls within this standard range thereby minimizing the variance. 7. The variance request meets criteria F of the City's variance ordinance since it would not be detrimental to this ordinance or to property in the same zone. The adjacent property to the south has an existing garage structure which is closer to the front property line and street than the proposed garage. The two properties directly to the north appear to have existing garages placed similarly close to the front property line and street. 8. The lot is currently non - conforming with respect to the percentage of hard cover / impervious surface, it currently has 40.3% hard cover which exceeds the 40% maximum hard cover allowed for a lot of record. The removal of the existing attached garage and driveway and relocation of the proposed new attached garage will reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property to 37.5% and bring the lot into conformance with the maximum hard cover requirement. ae - 2583 - ti .W[�9 T72 A WCV A►Ov APPlication Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of 'applic Case No. City Council Date ;USJ8CT 'ROPERTY EGAL ESC. 10PERTY O R 'PLICANT OTHER AN (NER) g� VARIANCE :APPLICATION Subdivision , * PID Name. Email kddress . 120 M�M 4!T& Block 0 R2 R3 B1 B2 B3 (Circle one) �. M07 S Name Email Address Phone Home Work Has an application ever. be made for - zoning, variance, conditional use condi `cir this properly'? Yes ( No ( ). If yes, fist da ofa n actiopermit, or other zoning Procedure . and provide copies of resolutions.. �s) PP ken, resolution number(s) I )etaiied Garr' P uNvaou uunsuuCtlon or alteration (size, number of stories, nce information 909) Page 4 of 6 of use, etc.). 6-2584- Case No. 3. Do the existing. stryctures comply. with all area eight, bulk, and setback regulations for the-zoning district in which it is located? 'Yes ( ) No (r�if no, specify each non- conforming use (describe reason for variance requept i.e - '�t ! Q setback,'iot:.area, etc.): T- f r D V r � c ari ©t't /c- u a rI' � 6v► G -�' t�G r+ a � . _ Hardcover. WY - f sq ft : Y sq ft --- sq ft 4. Does the;present u e of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes( No( )_ Mno,.specify each non - conforming user 5. Which unique.physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of.the uses permitted in that-zoning district.? ( too narrow (�pography { ) soil (o small ( ) drainage O eAsting situation ( ) too shallow. ( ) shape O other. specify Please describe: . C I Variance Information (102009)• Page.5 of 6. - 2585-- �--- - - -_._ - - - -- -- : SET - S : :I REMURED REQUESTED A lARIMCE ........_._ _.__ . _ . (or e)mng) Front Yard: .(N S E W) ft. ft. 3 ft Side Yard: ( N S E W) . L ft ft ft. Side Yard: (N S E W - ( ft. Rear Yard: (N S E W) ft -- ft ft. Lakeside: (N S E W j ft • Z- fL ft (N S E W) """ ft. .... ---- Street Frontal: ft 7. fL ft Lot Size: Q 00d sq ft sq ft '` sq ft Hardcover. WY - f sq ft : Y sq ft --- sq ft 4. Does the;present u e of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes( No( )_ Mno,.specify each non - conforming user 5. Which unique.physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of.the uses permitted in that-zoning district.? ( too narrow (�pography { ) soil (o small ( ) drainage O eAsting situation ( ) too shallow. ( ) shape O other. specify Please describe: . C I Variance Information (102009)• Page.5 of 6. - 2585-- �--- - - -_._ - - - -- -- 10 Case No. 0� l f. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land . after the.zoning ordihance was adopted (1982)? Yes (v-fNo O.' If yes, explain: 8. Are the conditions of t ards_hip for which you variance peculiar only to the property described'in this petition? Yes (: , No'( ). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? Ov- 9. Comments: I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be �ubrriltted•herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the variance information provided:. I consent to the entry in or upon the. premises described in this application by any authorized - off"rl of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law: Owner's Signature G Date plicant s Signature Date Variance Information (1/6/2008) Page 6 of 6 - 25'86- The owners of a property described as Lot 22 and Southeasterly half, front and rear of lot 21 block 3 Shadywood point have applied for a street front variance for a front load is garage addition that at its closest point is 7' from the lot line and 17.6' from the street. And furthest point is 9' from the lot line and 19.6' from the street. It is a lot of record. A previous variance was granted on the same property for a previous owner to be 4.8' from the lot line for a side load garage in 1977. This vote was unanimous. We are improving this to 7'. The basis for the prior variance was the position of the existing house on the lot, the fact that the house is not perpendic to the lot lines, the narrow lot (67.5') and the small caused by prior garage construction further poses safety issues with old driveway. There literally is no other position on the lot for the 3 car garage that what we are proposing. The only difference is we are a front load. The length of driveway between the curb and the garage doors still gives us adequate room to back out of the garage and view the street for traffic before backing out into the street. The design we are proposing improves the hardcover by 326 sq ft (4.16% to 36.14 %). We are in compliance on existing lake setbacks, heights, and new side setbacks (6' and 7.6') and we are not in the flood plane. The main issue for the new owners is a steep existing driveway that has a 4.6' rise in 23'. The existing garage is a very small 2 car with a dangerous driveway and inefficient use of hardcover. Cars cannot park on the existing drive when there is snow and ice as they will slide into the street. We have designed a 3 car garage that has a dropped floor of approx. 4'. The space from the garage door to the curb has adequate parking for even large cars at its shortest point even and pickups at its longest. The existing front entry is also steep and dangerous. The front entry will be moved to an area of the home that has a lower floor elevation (approx. 24" drop.). The new plan will not have an adverse effect on traffic and traffic safety. The new plan is compatible with other garages in the neighborhood. The new plan elevation greatly increases the aesthetic value of the home and is consistent with other upgraded homes in the neighborhood. We have purchased this formerly vacant property with of intention of totally rehabbing it for our retirement home. Thank you Leo and Sandy Bullock to -2587- su ltding 10 I• • rv ......... . �ca0pl►? �� !mf�Dt+ �11: A Lat, Arm 1~0 Mme' per• �sa±'4c �` �11: per• �sa±'4c �` �11: *I *I W Cl -2589- • 7-A- J, + C)) .4 J_ -4 .. PON. '_� Imt- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 411 111 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i- _a- j U gs (59v" GENERAL CUNTRACTOriS JEFF DANBERkY Flit. BOX 245 • SPRING PARK, MININESOTA 55384 • N _ i Q N Ul� t t e IL N 0 ' ph t . , _ :: _ J. _._ -. -. ..,_.. ..��"`—_ _`-- t ""�'� "• -� _ ....,\:«.r_adY wA' _T....i -`•' LYI�a= '^!'�_._... -. __ _. -. ..._.. -. _..5p3 Y_ � 1 . F -. l7CdVCt'{7#I. �w�JlY lflii I�Ph7 ._•, __•___ _. _ t ____.. .. JEFF DANBER�Y -- Pty, - o_pkg4 - .MINNESOTA s. - _ ,5PR11VGPARI GENERAL CONTRACTORS JEFF DANBERRY fa BOX 245 SPRING PARk, MINNESOTA 55384 X J r• . - I - - -!_ 4 - �-- f'- •j- � �. _ - i - rte_ r + - t �_.J_ �.• 4401 T L - r >i t P F � JEFF DANSE sr -. SsU OX 245 & SPR - PARK, MINNESOTA 553 O O N, Ul C0 W i F O O N I* 16 77 - 532 11 -22 -77 RESOLUTION NO. 77 - 532 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNiNG COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO APPROVE A - STREET FRONT VARIANCE AS REQUESTED WHEREAS, owners of property described as Lot22 and Southeasterly half, front and rear of Lot 21, Block 3, Shadywood Point have applied for a street front variance of 5.3 feet, and WHEREAS, property is zoned A -2, 6,000 sq. ft. single family dwelling -and said property has 6,400 sq. ft. and WHEREAS, requested 5.3 ft. front yard variance would allow the construc- tion of a garage on said property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MOUND, M 1 tINESOTA: That Council concurs with Planning Commission recommend- ation and does hereby grant the request for a street front variance of 5.3 feet for the purpose of erecting a garage. on property that will be within 4 ft 8 inches of lot line. Adopted by Council this 22nd day of November, 1977. 0 '7 C% -2594- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Date: November 19, 2009 Re: Staff Review/Recommendation of Tax Forfeit Parcel at 3101 Tuxedo Boulevard Summary The City of Mound received notice from Hennepin County to classify a tax - forfeit property at 3101 Tuxedo Boulevard as Conservation / Non - Conservation Classification, and a determination if the tax forfeited property should be released for public auction, release for auction to adjacent property owners or retained for public use conveyance or nonpublic sale to the City of Mound. Discussion 1. Zoning is R -1 Single - Family Residential. A copy of the R -1 regulations has been 401 attached. 2. No survey is on file in the Planning Department. According to the Hennepin County website, the lot is approximately 19,691 SF. This information is deemed accurate but not precise. Recommendation Staff recommends the City Council classify this property as Non - Conservation and authorize its release for public auction. A draft resolution has been prepared for consideration and action by the City Council. • -2595- CITY OF MOUND • RESOLUTION NO. 09- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE RELEASE OF TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY: 19- 117 -23 -34 -0063 WHEREAS, Hennepin County is seeking a determination as to whether the above tax forfeited property should be released for public auction, released for auction to adjacent property owners or retained for public use conveyance or nonpublic sale to the City of Mound, WHEREAS, City Staff has reviewed this request and approves the classification of the 1316 CNC List classifying this parcel as Non - Conservation and has determined that the above tax forfeited property should be released for public auction. WHEREAS, the City Council considered this request at their meeting of November 24, 2009, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, to approve the classification of the 1419 CNC List classifying this parcel as Non - Conservation and approve release of the above tax forfeited property for public auction. lie Adopted by the City Council this 24 day of November 2009. Mayor Mark Hanus Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk U -2596- This information sheet only summarizes a portion of the requirements outlined in the City of Mound Zoning Ordinance. For further information, contact the City of Mound Planning Department at 952 - 472 -0607. . General Zoning Information Sheet • R -1 Zoning District Single Family Residential PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS — Lot Area, Lot Width, and Setback Requirements Minimum Lot Area .................... ............................... .......................10,000 Square Feet Minimum Lot Width .......................................................... ............................... 60 Feet FrontYard Setback ........................................................ ............................... 30 Feet SideYard Setback ........................................:.................. .............................10 Feet Rear Yard Setback .......................................................... .............................15 Feet MinimumLot Depth ........................................................... .............................80 Feet Lakeshore / Ordinary High Water Setback ............................. .............................50 Feet Minimum Floor Area Requirement ............................ ............................840 Square Feet *Minimum lot frontage on an improved public street shall be 60 feet, except that lots fronting on a cul -de -sac shall be 60 feet at the front building setback line. Applicable side or rear yard setbacks apply to lot lines abutting fire lanes, alleys or unimproved street right -of -ways. Building Height. The vertical distance to be measured from the average grade of a building line to the top, to • the cornice of a flat roof, to the deck line of a mansard roof, to a point on the roof directly above the highest wall of a shed roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, to the mean distance of the highest gable on a pitched or hip roof. No building hereafter erected shall exceed two and one half (2 -1/2) stories or thirty-five (35) feet in height. LOTS OF RECORD, Special Provisions Corner Lots Lot width Minimum side yard setback 40 - 50 feet 10 feet 50 — 80 feet 20 feet 81 feet or more 30 feet AiriP Ynrri Rpm iirPmPnts — ThP renuired side vard setback shall be a minimum of 10 feet. Lot width Minimum setback on 1 side yard 40 — 79 feet 6 feet 80 —100 feet 8 feet 101 feet or more 10 feet Front Yard — Except as regulated in Section 350.440, Subd. 6 of the City Code, the front yard setback chnil him haspri nn the Int riPnth ac fnilnws- Lot depth Minimum front yard setback 60 feet or less 20 feet 61 — 80 feet 24 feet 81 feet or more 30 feet r1 2006 -2597- HARDCOVER REQUIREMENTS Impervious surface coverage of lots shall not exceed 30 percent of the lot area. On existing lots of record`', impervious coverage may be permitted by a maximum of 40 percent • providing that techniques are utilized as identified in Section 350:1225, Subd. 6.13.1. Impervious cover is any surface impervious or resistant to the free flow of water or surface moisture, including all buildings, driveways and parking areas whether paved or not, tennis courts, sidewalks, patios and swimming pools. Open decks (1/4" minimum opening between boards) shall not be counted in impervious cover calculations. DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS (GARAGES /SHEDS) — Lot Coverage and Setback Requirements An accessory building shall be considered to be an integral part of the principal structure unless it is.five (5) feet or more from the principal structure or use and providing that the structure exceeds 120 square feet. 1. Area and Size Requirements (see hardcover requirements on page 1) A. Accessory buildings shall not exceed a total gross floor area of 3,000 square feet or 15% of the total lot area whichever is less. B. Each individual accessory building shall not exceed 1,200 square feet of gross floor area. C. The total number of accessory buildings for lots measuring 10,000 square feet or less shall be two (2). On lots exceeding 10,000 square feet, accessory buildings shall be limited to a total of three (3). 2. Front Yard Setback. All accessory buildings shall meet thte same front yard setback requirements as the principal building, except for lakeshore and through lots. For detached garages on a lakeshore or through lots, a minimum twenty (20) foot front. yard setback is required if the garage door(s) open to the street; an eight (8) foot front yard setback is required if the garage door(s) - open to the side lot line. •3. Side Yard Setback. A detached accessory building may be located within four (4) feet of the side lot line in the rear yard with a minimum of a six (6) foot setback in side yard location. On through and lakeshore lots, a detached accessory building may be located within four (4) feet of the side lot line in the front yard. Whenever a garage is designed with the doors facing a side lot line, the minimum distance between the doors and the side lot line shall be twenty (20) feet. 4. Rear Setback. A detached accessory building may bey located within four (4) feet of the rear lot line. 5. Lakeshore Setback. Detached accessory buildings must maintain a 50 foot setback from the ordinary high water. DECKS See separate deck handout for more information. Front and Sides .......................... ...........................Same as Accessory Building Setbacks Rear................................................................................. .............................10 feet 17, ELEVATION REQUIREMENTS Ordinary High Water Flood Elevation Lowest Floor Elevation LAKE MINNETONKA 929.4 MCWD 931.5 CITY 931 933 DUTCH LAKE 939.2 940 942 LAKE LANGDON 932.1 935 937 2006 -2598- 0 el -2599- 3101 TUXEDO BOULEVARD Hennepin County Taxpayer Services • A -600 Government Center www.hennepin.us Minneapolis MN 55487 -0060 October 5, 2009 BY CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED BONNIE RITTER CITY CLERK CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND MN 55354 RE: Conservation /Non- Conservation Classification List # 1493 C/NC The lands as described on Conservation/Non- Conservation Classification List # 1493 C /NC, were classified as either conservation lands or non - conservation lands, as is appropriate, by the County Auditor's Administrative Review Board. Enclosed is a copy of County Auditor's Directive No. 2009 -34 providing for the classification of the lands, under authority granted in accordance to Minnesota Statute 282.135 by the Board of Hennepin County Commissioners. As required under M.S. 282.01, the department requests that your city officials review Conservation /Non- Conservation List # 1493 C /NC. When municipal review has been completed, the department will require a certified copy of a municipal resolution that resolves and approves parcels for public auction, for auction to adjacent owners, or requests • public use conveyance or nonpublic sale to your city. See enclosed Exhibit A, an outline for suggested points that should be covered in your municipal resolution. Please be advised that the sale of the lands shall be deemed to be approved pursuant to M S 282 01 Subd 1 if the city council fails to respond to this classification notice within sixty (60) days of receipt of cerdfled mail The deadline for responding will be December 7, 2009. Please contact Terry Schuhler, Property Tax Services unit leader, at (612)596- 6527(voice mail), should you need further assistance or clarification. Sincerely, Jill L. Alverson, Director Taxpayer Services Department Je ey L. Strand, Supervisor Tax - Forfeit and Property Revenue Section JLA:JLS:tls Enclosures • An Equal Opportunity Employer —2600— Recycled Paper EXHIBIT A Outline of Suggested Points to Cover in a Governmental Su6dWsi6a Resolution for Tax - Forfeited Lands Municipal officials should approve rove the classification as Conservation and/or Non - Conservation land. • P The parcels should be formally recommended for public auction approval, for adjacent owner auction approval if Minnesota Statutes, section 282.01, Subd. 7a for unbuildable vacant lots is applicable, or for requesting a conveyance for an authorized public use to your governmental subdivision, or for requesting a nonpublic sale to your governmental subdivision. Upon receipt of a written application from a city or a governmental subdivision within 60 days of the classification by the county, a parcel may be withheld from auction for a time period not to exceed six months, in accordance with Minnesota Statues, section 282.01, Subd. 1. A city or governmental subdivision must pay maintenance costs incurred by the county during the six -month period during which the land is withheld from auction, provided the property is not offered for public sale after the end of the six -month period. The written application should be in the form of a municipal resolution requesting acquisition and the reason for the six - month hold. In accordance with M.S. 282.01, Subd. lb, procedures on targeted neighborhood lands were made uniform and consistent throughout the state. Effective for deeds issued on or after August 1, 2001 the recommendation of the County Board is required for applications for conveyance of targeted neighborhood tax- forfeited lands to be acquired for redevelopment as productive taxable property. Further, deeds of conveyance issued under paragraph (a) of Minnesota Statutes, section 282.01, Subd. 1b. are not conditioned on continued use of the property. as stated in the • application. Each parcel should be verified as to the amount and type of special assessments shown as certified to the county before forfeiture. These special assessments were canceled at forfeiture by operation of law. A percentage of the amount of the cancelled special assessments will be paid from any tax- forfeited land sales proceeds. Should any portion remain unpaid municipalities have the ability to reassess the unpaid balance against the property, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, section 429.071. However, please keep in mind that the tax- forfeiture process serves as a "cleansing" process to effectuate return of properties to productive taxpaying status. ■ The amount and type of special assessments levied after the forfeiture should be certified to this office. These "new certified" special assessments are added to the minimum bid appraised value used in the auction. The "new certified" special assessments are to be paid from any tax- forfeited land sales proceeds. Each parcel should be reviewed for special status, such as public waterfront, wetland, peat lands and marketable timber resource issues, or any potential public nuisance or special zoning conditions or restrictions. The statutory citations are shown in County Auditor's Directive No. 2009 -34, a copy of which is enclosed. Any information supplied by the municipalities may be helpful in the successful disposition of the lands. ` -OVER- • -2601- STATR We ask your assistance in determining if any parcels on List # 1493 C/NC have wells. If any of the parcels W W the list have wells, please request a Minnesota De artment of Health Well Disclosure Certificate from on • department. have el noted above, please provide available information about parcels such as zoning, known this special municipal ormation soil conditions, known environmental contamination, or sp al restrictions. Such inf P marketing the properties in order to facilitate its return to a tax may assist the county in managing and productive status. If you request conveyance to your governmental subdivision, please submit a properly completed form PT962.RAR, titled, "AM lication b a Governmental Subdivision for Conve ance of Tax Forfeited Lands for an Authorized Public Use" for each parcel requested. Minnesota Department of Revenue requires form PT962.RAR. It must be executed and notarized by authorized persons and the document should be on legal size paper. Please call Property Tax Services Unit at (612) 348 -3734 if you need more blank forms, or it is located on the Department of Revenue website at the following address: http: / /www. taxes. state. mn. us/ proptax /propinfo/stdeed/statedeed htm . Conveyance to a governmental subdivision for a public purpose is subject to the re recommend d io of r equires County Board. The Hennepin County Board's Tax - Forfeited Land Policy, Resolution that a specific public purpose be identified in the request. A copy of the resolution is enclosed. In our experience, the Minnesota Department of Revenue of the generic phrase ft has been identified pu blic land es" on the requests for state deeds. Rather, the specific pub purpose t should be stated on the municipal application. "Open Space" alone is not acceptable to the Department of Revenue. -2602- 1493 Conservation/Non- Conservation List Property ID Number Target Previous Owner Special Property Address Area Date of Judgment Land Value Market Assessments Legal Tenants Property Type C/NC Yes / No Date of Forfeiture Building Value Value Before Forfeiture Description Vacant (as of 10 /05/09) (85) City of Mound 19 117 23 34 0063 No KIRK J BESSE 53,000 146,000 4,025.57 Occu pied Single Famil 3101 TUXEDO BLVD 04/12/02 93,000 Non - Conservation 07/23/09 LOT 1 AND LOTS 19 AND 20 EX ST BLOCK 005 "PEMBROKE" 23 • Office of the County Auditor No. 2009 -34 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota COUNTY AUDITOR'S DIRECTIVE (Classification of Tax - Forfeited Land) To all persons interested in the lands hereinafter described: Whereas, pursuant to legal authority as provided under Minnesota Statutes, Section 282.135, Jill L. Alverson, the Director of Taxpayer Services Department, acting in the capacity of County Auditor- Treasurer, had the matter hereinafter described come before Deputy County Auditor Jeffrey L. Strand, Administrative Supervisor, and Deputy County Auditor Scott Loomer, Property Tax Manager, for administrative review; and Whereas, pursuant to the application or request for change of status of tax - forfeited land described more fully below, the undersigned Deputy County Auditor finds as follows: • 1. That the Hennepin County Auditor hereby certifies the Conservation or Non - Conservation status and authorizes the public sale of the Non - Conservation classified parcel of land on Conservation /Non- Conservation Classification List 1493 C /NC, on file with the Hennepin County Auditor. 2. Further, except where Conservation classification status is noted on said Fist, the Hennepin County Auditor certifies that the parcel therein has been viewed and complies with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 85.012; 92.461; 282.01, Subd. 8; 282.018, Subd. 1; and 282.018, Subd. 2, and other statutes that require the withholding of tax - forfeited land from sale; and that the Hennepin County Auditor hereby requests approval, where appropriate and necessary, from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for the sale of tax - forfeited land listed on Conservation /Non- Conservation Classification List 1493 C /NC. Jill L. Alverson, County Auditor October 2, 2009 (OFFICIAL SEAL) 0 JefFFey L. Strand, Deputy Ot 1U, 6:u�t�itii "�:�� [i�b�`•'r'�t'•� v�:t. "yt.+; Rp;y'•,Y;:l� ��.`�':�� �ry CpPP b � -2604- R ESOLUTIOh 40. The following t °esblution was offered by Commissioner Johnso'n,.seconded by Commis5ioner..Kretner: WIlEREAS, n�mre�'ous requesU are received For sale or conveyance of Lax Forfeited land to Mtmicip and other .g.overnmental subdivisioh.s -of the: State; -2605- 8E IT RESOLti /�D that i t is the general policy of the Hennepin County Board to encourage the return of tax forfeited 1andd withi the couh to private ownership and' the tax rolls, provided thoat gbvernmental subdivisions arp hot discouraged from acquiring - 1•ands to be used for conservation, recreati orr or other purposes 15 detailed in this resol uti'on . 5E rrt.RL-SOLVED that tax•fdrTeited land will be conveyed to governmental subd i Vi s i ons Without monetary consi deratibn if: it Tha land.lt.to be used. fa-r parks, wetTands, flood cohti , trailways, bpeh §pace; S treets i rbads s rights of may and .public -accest , or 2t the land is V�Iu6d hi the receipt of appficat3on. at i1,000 or1ess per parcel at r_[M - ent values, dr an equivalent value as .indexed .at ten percerit • per annum herEaFtel , regardless of Publ us•e bl p urpos-e, and BE IT RESOLVED, t11ut except as otherwise provided in this resolution, tax - Forfeited land, will not' be conveyed to 'governmental subdivisions unless the current appraised value is paid,•_ and 8E IT RESOLVED that an appl i ca,tinn shat 1. be. require -d to request_ a conVeyalice. without payment or • a' to 1 �. and. the apWl i cat on shall '62. 3ccbmpani ed by a •resQ1 uti on Cf PVef Mog, body sppcify.ih-• `tiie. public purpose or intended Iiu6lic use ,for Mifth the tax fbi f�ittd land is being' acquired, An application will not be confiide�ed unless received at least ten days •prior to the first publication—of tht Noti of public saie of the subject property; and 8E IT RESO'LVED'that the acquisition of - tax.forTei'ted land by a governmental subdivision (ex�e�t Housing and Redevel- opme.iit Authorities and other' governmental subdivisions'of th.e• state. expressly authorized' by law,tb resell, lease- oi- transf,r prroparty) for resale shall n6t be e by the Board DE IT RESOLVED 'that the pljr - chase price be paid over a three -year period commencing on date of sale if. the governmental subdivision has budget or,•levy limit H i.iiat do hct permit cash purchase. Interest shal•1 be payable at the rate prescribed by lacy for Sales to the public of s1mMr property, and BE IT that municipalities are urged to judiciously- exe'rCiSe tliei'r l egitimate rights of disapproval of dal p_ and cl ass's fi cati on of tax forfeited . 1land' i-'n the contest of this resolutiorn', and i A fiZESOLUTi0h The following 7 esblution was offered by Commissioner Johnson, -seconded by CommisSioner..Kremer: iJliEREAS, nUM-al - otis requests are ieceived foi sale or conveyance or Lax Forfeited Land to municipalities and other .g.overnmental s State' ubdivisioh.s of the $E IT RE50L�' D that it is the q.e.neraI ;pali the, Hennepin County Board to encourage the return of tax forfeited lands within the couhty to private' ownership and' the tax ro•l is , provided th -at governmental subdivisions are hot discouraged from acquiring lands to be used for conservation, recreati ors, or other purposes as detailed in this resol:uti -on . OE rT.RESOL•VED that tax• fb'r eited land Will be conveyed to governmental subdi visions without monetary consideratibn if: It The land jt to be tined. fa-YA parks, Wetlands, flood cohti traiItg6ys, o e;I space; s traetg � roads 1 ri ght� of way and .publ access , or E1 the land is valued t the Fbceipt of appficat - at $1,000 or - less per parpel at C11Y1 °ens values, dr an equiQalent value as .induced at ten pei.cerit Per arintinl hLreaFtpt f regai^dl�ss Of public us Vii" purpose, and V BE IT RESOLVED, that except as otlierviise provided in this. resolution, tax forfeited Iand wi.11 not` be conveyed to governmental subdivisions unless the current apps ai�seo value is paid .. and gE I.T RESOLVED that an appl i ca.tl-bn shall. be. requi real to request_ a cohveyanzQ- wi thotzt Payment 6r sa j ah.d , the appl i cat on. shat 1 - 6e- accompahi ed 'by a .i~esol 0 on �f the g)Vef ning. body tpfcify.ili the- public purpose intended Public use.Jbr- Mirth the taX forfeited lalid is being accyuired.' An application wi -11 not be con.fldet:ed unless received at least ten clays -prior -to the first publication of the hDtitE o - f public sale of the subject property; and RE IT RESO -LVEb` that the acclu.isi ti on of-tax .forfei.ted land 6y a governmehtal subdivi57on (except Housing and Redevel- opmeiit Abi ho'rities and other* governmental subdivisions -of th=e state, expressly authorized' by law resell, lease- oi trarnsf�r p.roperty) for resalR shall n6,t be approved by the Board tiE IT RESOLVED that the purchase price be paid over a three -year period conm�encing on date .of sale if. the gover'nmen'tal sL$dlvision has budget or levy limi La Lions i.hat do h6t permit cash purchase. In.terE'st shall be. payable' at the rate prescri bed by l avq for Sales to the public of . slmi l'ar property, and RE IT RESOLVED that imrnici pal Iti are urged to judi.ciously tl►efr legitimate rights of disapproval of dale and classification bf tax forfeited. l a nd' i n the conteXt of this resol ti an*, and -2606- ` pesol ut.iom, =Ko.' S : 8 - 6j2 corn-cr nued . • .. tE IT rCSDLVCD that pursuant to author{ty of Minn Esota Statutes, Section 282.03' this board will fin reasonabl e conditions on.sal es to the public 'to limit the ute of the parcels sold and to. Iinii -t amount bf public expendi,ture, tha - t may- b -e made 'tot-`t - Henefit of the parcels when such action will encourage municipal approval of sale, and BE IT .RESOQUi t -hat ff applications are concurrently filed by a .gove•rnme'ntal subdivision and a` repurchaser to' purcivase and repurchase respectively the same . tax forfeited land the CaUnty Board will consider; I. The public interest to be served by acqui5 tio.n by the' gbvernrh�ntal subdivision, 2. The public i n te'rest to be s e.rve-d by repurchase. 3. The hardship Lo be sUffered by the repurchaser if the repurchase'.'a.pplicatiofr is' not approved. 4 . The circumstances rel afl ng to fu rfei tore . ; BE IT RESOLVED that on a showing of uriasual circumstances or hardship the Board of-Commissioners may, by specific resolut.ion, approve, a variance of these ' pr o4islohs— Br•IT 'kESOLVED that Resolution No. 01 -3 -125 is hereby rescinded: Commissioner Krenier.offered "a friendly amendment to the second resolving .clause., the second parag to insert the wIIrd "market'! between "current" aid "values" and after the Words "at ten p�rcen't" to strike "per anhum hereafter" and insert therefor "January Ist annually. Coinmittioner Johnson accepted the - FH eridly amendment and no .objections. were vo i ced Camini&sioner Kremer moved to add the follbwing sentence to the fourth resolving clause: Each application and RBA' involving a parcel' wi th a market _ °val - ue in excess of ti shall include the following: the acreage. of the p1'o.perty f current ioni rig �u*ri tnt us'a. and waterfront, if any. The, motion - was seconded by CoMmi ssioher "Robb.- and approved unaniinoutly. Commissioner .kobb offered a friendly amefidment to the first line of the tecohd resolving clause,..after the word. "conv'pyPad" to add the' words "for publ ttse or purpose." Con1missi`bner Jof nsan accepted ti,e friendly amendment•.and ha obji�cti -ons Were voiced. The q.uesLion was bn the adoption of.the resolution, a amended, and Ehere were seven YEAS and - no NAYS as follovls COtJN7Y •bE H- E>ih�Epli� . nARD OF COUNTY COh1M YEA NAY OTREft Jeff Spai X Randy 'Johnson X Richard. E. KremeY X E. F_ aobb, Jr. X 5 Sarn S_ Sivanich K Nancy Ol kon X John E. Derus., Chai rman -- -2607- rI ZoLM 262.1 A6R innesata Department of Revenue .ile All Correspondence Application by a- Governmental Subdivision for Conveyance of ' Tau- Forfeited Lands for an Authorized Public Use (Minneaota Statutes, Section 282.01.,-Subdivisions. la dirougli 1s) (Note: If the governmental subdivision has purchased the property., use PT Form .80) In Hennepin County rte of governmental subdivision (applicant): fling address of applicant: 'e requested property was forfeited to the State: (month). (day,) (year) ?gal description of property (include the name of the city/town in which the property is located): cribe the intended public ute to be made of the property (be specific, including statute or special law :rences, if relevant): r the need for the property (be specific,: e,g.,'wliy this property instead of some other property7): eck the appropriate box: There are one or more wells on this property F] There. are no wells on this property A Wetland:Certification Form Must Be Attached To This Application im application to: MN Department of Revenue* Property Tax DivisioneMail Sta_ 2608 _:. Paul, MN 55146 -3340 0 STATE OF- MINNESOTA ) County of Hennepin a being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he /she is the authorized representative of'the applicant nRmtfd herein, that he /she has read said .application and knows the • contents thereof, and tlid"the matters stated th4rein are true and correct. Name Title Subscribed and sworn: io before nelhis day of 20, Notary Public, County, Minn: - My commission expires RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY BOARD UPON APPLICATION The County Do ard of Hennepin County, Minnesota, through its County Auditor, •Pursuantio Minnesota Statutes 282.135, and Hennepin County Resolution No. 95- 8- 55681, has reviewed the application of the City of ..dated , for the conveyance for an authorized public .use of certain tax - forfeited land described therein. The county board recommends -that this applicatioh be: rejected granted Signature at •Directoi Date of:,Taapager . 5e3 cep = DepaxxmeiLt / (for County Board) CERTIFICATION OF COUNTY AUDITOR OR LAND COMMISSIONER I have taken the necessary steps required by Minnesota Statutes to prepare the herein described tax - forfeited land for conveyance for an authorized public use. Signature of County Auditor or Land Commissioner Date OFFICE OF THE COM3vffSSIONER'OF REVENUE St. Paul; Kinn., 26, Upon due consideration of this application, it is ordered that it is hereby: rejected granted Commi of Revenue. �1 7 By -2609- 10 Date: October 6, 2009 Request to Approve Tax - Forfeit Parcel for Public Auction Routing and Comment Form r �.r Directions: Please review and return to Vicki by October 19, 2009 Property Address: 3101 Tuxedo Blvd, PID 19- 117 -23-34 -0063 Description: The above property has been taken by Hennepin County as tax - forfeit. As required under M.S. 282.01, the County requests City Officials review Conservation/Non- Conservation List #1493 C /NC. The County requires a resolution from the City that resolves and approves parcels for public auction, auction to adjacent owners, or request public use conveyance or non - public sale to the City. Public Hearing: No Parks Commission Date: No City Council Date: Oct 27, 2009 City Staff I* L J ❑ Sarah Smith, Community Development Director ❑ Carlton Moore, Public Works Director ❑ Greg Skinner, Public Works Superintendent ❑ Jim Fackler, Parks Superintendent 1u&_ Uld&2, COMMENTS: -2610- 5341 Maywood Road City of • • Mound, MN 55364 • (952) 472 -0614 Planning , • Building Department MEMORANDUM To: Kandis Hanson, Carlton Moore, and Greg Skinner From: Ray Hanson, Engineering /Planning Technician Date: November 18, 2009 Re: Security Fencing Quotes for the Public Works Facility The following is a breakdown of the quotes I requested from three different fence companies. My recommendation is to award a contract to Century Fence to remove and install 365' of new 10' high fence with wire and to consider having them also put fence and wire on the top of the building. I would also recommend the City of Mound salvage the existing 6' fence and wire and install in our bone yard across the street. I do not believe repairing the existing fence does any good. Contractor Repair existing 6' fence and re- string barbed wire Remove and install 365' of new 10' high fence with 3 strand barbed wire Install 60' of 6' high fence w/ 3 strand barbed wire on top of p/w Building Town & Country Fence $1,300.00 $10,200.00 $1,915.00 Midwest Fence $1,400.00 $15,000.00 $2,200.00 Century Fence $1,290.00 $8,362.00 $1,292.00 61 • - 2611 - 10 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Hanus and City Council From: Administrative Code Committee Date: November 19, 2009 Subject: Proposed Language Changes to the Administrative Code The Administrative Code Committee met with non -union administrative staff recently to discuss the Administrative Code. Proposed changes were discussed and voted on by this work group. On November 17, 2009 a meeting was held with the Personnel Committee to discuss the proposed changes. Listed below are proposed language changes, which, if approved will go into effect January 1, 2010: SECTON 14A.1 Monthly Contribution to the Plan Current Language: All non -union employees shall contribute in accordance with the following schedule (see schedule p. 11 in the Administrative Code, 4/8/08) Ali non -union employees with less than $3,000 in severance from accrued vacation and /or comp time shall receive such monies in a severance check. • All non -union employees who have over $3,000 in severance from accrued vacation and /or comp time shall receive $3,000 in a severance check and the remaining amount shall be contributed to the plan. Proposed Language change: All Non -union employees shall contribute in accordance with the following schedule: 0 -5 years of service 4% 6+ years of service 2% Remove the two paragraphs below from Section 14A and add to Section 18 — Severance (see Section 18 for proposed language changes) All non -union employees with less than $3,000 in severance from accrued vacation and/or comp time shall receive such monies in a severance. All Non -union employees who have over $3,000 in severance from accrued vacation and /or comp time shall receive $3,000 in a severance check and the remaining amount shall be contributed to the plan. -2612- _ - SECTION 14A.5 Contribution at Retirement or Termination Current Language: • At the time of retirement or termination, the employee shall contribute 100% of sick leave portion of severance pay calculated according to section 18.1 to the Plan. Proposed Language Change: At the time of retirement or termination, the employee shall contribute 100% of sick leave portion of severance pay calculated according to Section 18.1 in the Administrative Code to the Health Care Savings Plan. In the event the employee is involuntarily laid -off, the employee shall receive 100% of sick leave portion of severance pay calculated according to Section 18.1 in the Administrative Code in the form of payment, subject to taxes. SECTION 14A.6 Severance Pay upon Death of an Active Employee Proposed Language (new section) No contributions to the Health Care Savings Plan are permitted by MSRS after the death of an employee. Therefore, any pay related to hours worked, accrued vacation and comp time, and the sick portion of severance pay calculated according to section 18.1 of the plan, will be paid according to the payment method in effect during the last full pay period in which the employee was paid, which is in the form of a direct deposit to the financial institutions(s) on record. SECTION 17.3 — Sick Leave Current Language: Sick leave may be used for an employee's own illness, physical examination, dental care, injury, maternity care, outpatient or inpatient treatment for mental illness, alcoholism, or drug abuse. Employees may also use sick leave for the serious illness, injury or other health care of members in their immediate family. "Immediate family member" here is defined as employee's mother, father, siblings, spouse, children, step - children, grandchildren, grandparents, and spouse's mother, father, siblings, children, • grandparents and grandchildren. Proposed Language Change: Sick leave may be used for an employee's own health care that includes but is not limited to illness, physical examination, dental care, injury, maternity care, outpatient or inpatient treatment for mental illness, alcoholism, or drug abuse. Employees may also use sick leave for the serious illness, injury or other health care of members in their immediate family. "Immediate family member" here is defined as employee's mother, father, siblings, spouse, children, step - children, grandchildren, grandparents, and spouse's mother, father, siblings, children, grandparents and grandchildren. SECTION 18.2a — Severance Proposed Language Addition: All Non -union employees shall receive 100% of their accrued vacation and /or comp time in payment at the time of retirement or termination. In the event an employee is involuntarily laid -off, the employee shall receive all of their accrued vacation and /or comp time in form of a payment, subject to taxes. Upon the death of an employee, any pay related to hours worked, accrued vacation and comp time, and the sick portion of severance pay calculated according to section 18.1 of the plan, will be paid according to the payment method in effect as of the last pay period in the form of a direct deposit to the financial institutions(s) on record. -- - 2613 - SECTION 19 — Funeral Leave • Current Language: Funeral leave for immediate family, not to exceed three (3) days will be allowed by the City Manager. If more than three (3) days are required, the employee may choose to deduct the extra days over three (3) from either vacation or accumulated sick leave. Immediate family is defined as mother, father, siblings, spouse, children, grandparents, and spouse's mother, father, siblings, children, grandparents, and grandchildren. Proposed Language Change: Funeral leave for immediate family, not to exceed three (3) days will be allowed by the City Manager. If more than three (3) days are required, the employee may choose to deduct the extra days over three (3) from either vacation or accumulated sick leave. Immediate family is defined as mother, father, siblings, spouse, children, grandparents, and spouse's mother, father, siblings, children, grandparents, and grandchildren. One (1) day will be granted for funeral deaths involving: aunts, uncle, nieces, nephews, and spouse's aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews. �e • -2614- AL 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD • MOUND, MN 55364 -1 687 MEMORANDUM DATE: November 18, 2009 TO: Mayor Hanus and City Council FROM: Catherine Pausche, Finance Director Kandis Hanson, City Manager SUBJECT: Utility Rate Increases for 2010 Background PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com In 2008, Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.291, subd. 4, was amended to include a requirement for public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people. The new rule obligates those cities to • adopt a water rate structure that encourages conservation (i.e., a tiered rate structure). In addition, the City of Mound has bonded significantly in recent years to fund infrastructure upgrades necessary to properly serve its residents. Municipal water and sewer systems are more complex than the typical person might understand. Proper maintenance of the City's infrastructure is critical to prevent water main breaks and sewer back -ups. Years of deferred maintenance commanded comprehensive improvements to the streets, water system, sewer system and to the management of uncontrolled storm water. Many utility improvements took place as components of the annual street project. Vital water infrastructure upgrades included the new Chateau Lane water tower, Harrison Bay watermain crossing, and two new pump houses, all of which were funded though the Water Fund. The Sanitary Sewer Fund is refurbishing two to three of Mound's thirty-one lift stations per year. Also, the City is required by the Metropolitan Council to reduce the groundwater infiltration into the city's sewers to reduce the amount of treated sewage at the treatment plant. The sanitary sewer projects also address residential sewer back -ups and overflows which can end up in the storm sewer system and potentially flow into the lake. Storm water projects, funded by the Storm Water Fund, are also increasing in number as the City works to reduce the phosphorus and sulfur draining into Lake Minnetonka, another mandate, as • well as to solve neighborhood flooding problems. These projects solve drainage problems, create storm water ponds and clean outfalls that go directly into the lake. printed on recycled paper -2615- • Most infrastructure improvements are depreciated over 25 years, while lift stations are depreciated over 10 years, reflective of the respective life spans of the improvements that have been done. All components of the City's infrastructure had exceeded their life spans, obligating the City to attend to their replacement and fund the improvements through the usual means. The table below summarizes our investments in infrastructure from 2004 through 2008: Infrastructure Investments Total $ 2004-2008 Invested Utility Replacement/Repairs Associated with Street Projects: Storm Sewer 1,813,567 Water 4,628,055 Sanitary Sewer 786,531 Subtotal 7,228,153 Chateau Lane Water Tower 1,253,325 Standpipe Rehab/Well & Pump House Repair/ Replacement/Generators /SCADA 1,948,160 • Lift Station Improvements /1 & I Analysis /Generators 1,494,246 Street Reconstruction Program 9,803,114 TOTAL INVESTMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE 21,726,998 A `Key Financial Strategies' plan was prepared by Ehlers and Associates, financial advisor to the City, in 2005 and was updated by them in 2007. It recommended steady rate increases for water and sewer be applied annually to keep up with the capital expenditures and associated debt service. Additionally, excerpts from the 2008 management letter from the auditors highlight significant decreases in cash in the enterprise funds over the past few years and the auditors stress the need to review and increase rates to keep up with expenditures. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Council adopt the recommended utility rate increases and tiered water rate structure presented in the following table. LJ __ -2616- SewerRates MINIMUM UP TO 10,000 Residential Commercial OVER 10,000 (cost per 1,000) 3.83 3.87 Quarterly Monthly 2009 2010 Water Rates (gallons) (gallons) 10.80 • Base Rate 54.60 54.60 10.18 15.00 Tier 1 1-5,000 1 -2,000 3.05 3.51 Tier 2 5,001 - 25,000 2,001- 15,000 3.05 4.04 Tier 3 25,001+ 15,001+ 3.05 4.64 SewerRates MINIMUM UP TO 10,000 61.74 62.36 OVER 10,000 (cost per 1,000) 3.83 3.87 Storm Water Rates HOUSEHOLD /MONTH =1/5 REF 2.16 4.00 REF = Residential Equivalent Factor 10.80 20.00 Retail /Commercial /Industrial/ per acre 54.60 54.60 Church /Schools /Institutional Use per acre 13.56 13.56 Multi- Family per acre 32.56 32.56 Recycling Rates (Residential Only) 4.25 4.25 The water rates have always included a service charge (base rate) and a volume based charge. Service charges are meant to cover fixed costs (capital improvements) and the volume charge is • more often used for operation and maintenance costs. The service charge needs to increase more significantly to help fund the infrastructure improvements that were described above. In addition, a one -time fund transfer between the Water Fund and the Sewer Fund will be considered at the time of the 2009 annual audit to transfer some of the Sewer Fund reserves to the Water Fund to help alleviate cash flow issues and to allow for a more gradual increase to the water rates. The City will communicate with all utility customers and explain the need for the increases in the winter newsletter to be published in February. At the same time, customers will receive the information that encourages water conservation per the DNR's mandate. Formal adoption of the utility rates will take place at the December 8`" Council meeting when the 2010 Budget and Fee Schedule are adopted. Please let Catherine know if you have any questions at (952) 472 -0633. • - -2617- Sau rce 1 1 f �. • Conservation Rates Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.291, was amended in 2008 to include a requirement for public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people to adopt a water rate structure that encourages conservation: Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.291, subd. 4. Conservation rate structure required. (a) For the purposes of this section, 'conservation rate structure" means a rate structure that encourages conservation and may include increasing block rates, seasonal rates, time of use rates, individualized goal rates, or excess use rates. The rate structure must consider each residential unit as an individual user in multiple - family dwellings. (b) To encourage conservation, a public water supplier serving more than 1,000 people in the metropolitan area, as defined in section 473.121, subdivision 2, shall use a conservation rate structure by January 1, 2010. All remaining public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people shall use a conservation rate structure by January 1, 2013. (c) A public water supplier without the proper measuring equipment to track the amount of water used by its users, as of the effective date of this act, is exempt from this subdivision and the conservation rate structure requirement under subdivision 3, paragraph (c): In addition, Minnesota Statues, section 103G.291, was further amended to read: Subd. 3. Water supply plans; demand reduction. (c) Public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people must employ water use demand reduction measures includinga conservation rate structure, as defined in subdivision 4, paragraph (a), unless exempted under subdivision 4 paragraph (c) before requesting approval from the commissioner of health under section 144.383, paragraph (a), to construct a public water supply well or requesting an increase in the authorized volume of appropriation. Demand reduction measures must include evaluation of conservation rate structures and a public education program that may include a toilet and showerhead retrofit program. • Public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 residents will need to adopt a conservation rate structure before requesting well construction approval for a public water supply well or before requesting an increase in permitted volume for their water appropriation permit. Examples of Conservation Rates: Below are examples of rate structures that encourage conservation. Many variations and combinations of these examples are possible. NOTE: Rate structures often include a service charge (base rate) and a volume based charge. Service charges may cover fixed costs (capital improvements) and the volume charge is often for operation and maintenance costs. Volume charges usually use units of 1,000 gallons or 100 cubic feet (748 gallons). Increasing Block Rates Cost per unit increases as water use increases within specified "blocks" or volumes. The increase in cost between each block should be significant enough (25% or more and 50 between the last two steps) to encourage conservation Example: 0 -6,000 gallons = $2.50/1000 gallons. 6,000- 12,000 gallons = $3.15/1000 gallons. 12,000- 24,000 gallons = $4.00/1000 gallons. Above 24,000 gallons = $6.00/1000 gallons. Seasonal Rates The rate per unit increases in the summer to encourage the efficient use of water during peak demand periods caused by outdoor water uses. Seasonal rates can take the form of a surcharge added to the normal rate or a separate fee schedule for winter and summer periods. Example: Surcharge method - $1.00 /1000 gallons is added on top of the regular fee schedule for all • water use between May 1 and October 1. Page 1 - 2618 Conservation Rates Page 2 Time of Use Rates Water rates are higher at times of the day when water use demands are high. This rate requires specialized meters that can monitor water use during specified segments of time, for instance, every 15 minutes. Example: Water rates are reduced by $0.75 for customers that agree not to use water for certain purposes or over a set volume of water during certain times of the day or periods of high water demands. Individualized Goal Rate (Water Bud eta Rate) A rate with tailored allocations developed for each customer. The rates increase as the allocation is used or exceeded by the customer. The allocation is generally based upon winter or January use. Example: A family of four used 6,200 gallons in January. Summer use is higher than January use so a factor is applied to determine a summer allocation (1.5 x 6,200 gallons = 9,300 gallons). 0 -6,000 gallons = $2.50/1000 gallons. 6,000 -9,300 gallons = $2.75/1000 gallons. 9,300 - 18,600 gallons = $4.00/1000 gallons. (Allocation is exceeded.) Above 18,600 gallons = $6.00/1000 gallons. Excess Use Rates Cost per unit increases greatly above an established level in order to trigger a strong price signal that discourages excessive use. This rate is similar to an increasing block rate but with much higher charges for the larger volume blocks. Example: 0 -6,000 gallons = $2.50/1000 gallons 6,000- 12,000 gallons = $3.15/1000 gallons 12,000- 24,000 gallons = $5.00 11000 gallons (Excessive Use Rate) Above 24,000 gallons = $7.50/1000 gallons (Excessive Use Rate) Multiple— Family Dwellings: Total water use in a multiple - family dwelling, which has only one water meter for the entire dwelling, may exceed that of a single - family dwelling. The statute does not require individual water meters for each residential unit within a multiple - family dwelling; however, the required conservation rate at which the multiple - family dwelling's water use is billed must consider the number of residential units within that multiple - family dwelling. Example: A four -plex uses a total of 18,000 gallons per month or approximately 4,500 gallons per residential unit. Water use for each residential unit falls within the first block (0 -6,000 gallons) of the above Excess Use Rate example. A rate of $2.50/1000 gallons would apply up to a total use of 24,000 gallons for the multiple - family dwelling. Thereafter, the rate increases according to the rate schedule, always considering each residential unit as an individual user. Non - conservation rate examples: Declining (Decreasing) Block Rates The cost per unit of water (cubic foot or gallon) decreases as the water use increases beyond the basic block. This rate structure provides no incentive to conserve because the cost of water per unit decreases with increased use. Flat Rates A set fee allows the use of an indefinite amount of water. This rate structure is used where water is unmetered and provides no incentive to conserve water because cost is unrelated to volume used. Uniform Rates The cost per unit is the same regardless of the volume used. This rate structure is considered conservation neutral. *I Service Charge Base Rate) that includes a Minimum Water Volume The inclusion of a minimum volume of water in the service charge (base rate) discourages conservation especially if the minimum volume exceeds average customer usage. • Conservation Rates 10- 13- 08.pdf - 2619 City of Mound Utility Bill Samples Current Bills vs. Proposed Bills RESIDENTIAL T Charge Current Amount Proposed Amount Current Usa a Amount Proposed Amount Current Usa a Amount Proposed Amount Current Proposed Current Proposed Current Proposed Current Proposed For 91- 1 1022042 -02 -0 Usage Amount Amount Usage Amount Amount Usage Amount Amount Usage Amount Amount Prev Bal 100.24 124.64 124.64 Usage Receipt 100.24 124.84 124.64 165.14 165.14 178.90 213.30 275.22 Service WR1 WATER RES 10.18 15.00 0 25.43 32.55 5 40.68 52.70 10 55.93 72.85 178.90 213.30 275.22 Service SRI SEWER RES 61.74 62.36 0 61.74 62.36 5 61.74 62.36 10 15 71.18 93.00 20 86.43 113.15 25 101.68 136.35 30 Service STORM WTR RES 6.48 12.00 6.48 12.00 6.48 12.00 80.89 81.70 15 100.04 101.04 20 119.19 120.38 25 138.34 139.72 30 Service STREET LIGHT 7.50 12.00 7.50 12.00 7.50 12.00 6.48 12.00 6.48 12.00 6.48 12.00 6.48 12.00 Service RC1 RECYCL QTR 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 7.50 12.00 7.50 12.00 7.50 12.00 7.50 12.00 Service SF ST TEST FEE 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 12.75 Cur Charges 100.24 115.70 115.49 133.25 130.74 153.40 1.59 165.14 1.59 192.89 1.59 1.59 Total Change in Bill 15.46 17.76 22.66 199.54 232.38 233.94 271.87 268.34 314.41 Percent Change g a in Bill 15.42% ° 15.38 k 17.33% 27.75 ° 32.84 37 93 46.07 /0 16.46% ° 16.21 /0 17.17% City of Mound Utility Bill Samples Current Bills vs. Proposed Bills COMMERCIAL Type Charge Current Amount Proposed Amount Current Usa a Amount Proposed Amount Current Usage Amount Proposed Amount Current Proposed Current Proposed Current Proposed Current Proposed I or94- 42259009 -01 -7 Usage Amount Amount Usage Amount Amount Usage Amount Amount sage Amount Amount Usage N Prev Bat 0') Receipt 45.67 63.80 56.69 276.60 97.03 235.05 N Service WC1 WATER COM 45.67 3.39 5.00 63.80 0 18.64 24.11 33.89 276.60 235.05 293.45 Service SC1 SEWER COM 20.58 20.79 0 28.24 28.52 5 5 47.39 44.26 47.86 10 46.09 60.38 14 61.34 82.97 19 82.69 115.45 26 119.29 171.13 38 Service STORM WTR COM 15.18 15.18 12.61 12.61 12.61 12.61 10 62.71 63.34 14 81.86 82.68 19 108.67 109.76 26 154.63 156.18 38 Service STREET LIGHT MO 2.50 4.00 2.50 4.00 2.50 4.00 45.86 45.86 45.86 45.86 56.24 56.24 13.27 13.27 Service SF ST TEST FEE 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 2.50 0.53 4.00 2.50 4.00 2.50 4.00 2.50 4.00 Surcharg. STATE TAX 0.23 0.23 1.28 1.28 2.29 2.29 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 Cur Charges 42.41 45.73 63.80 71.05 99.21 111.55 3.11 160.80 3.11 177.22 4.14 4.14 5.68 5.68 8.20 8.20 Total Change in Bill 3.32 7.25 12.34 196.23 220.18 256.31 291.66 298.42 353.31 Percent Change in Bill 7.82% 11.37% o 12.44 /0 16.42 ° 23.95 35.35 10.21% 12.20 °k 13.79% 18.39% .39% N N RESIDENTIAL usage (in 000's # of readings gallons) @ usage % of Total 0 865 6% T1 1 -5 1936 13% 6 -10 3190 22% 11 -15 3400 24% T2 16 -20 2193 15% 21 -25 1277 9% 26 -30 615 4% 31-40 491 3% 41 -50 182 1 % 51 -75 161 1% T3 76 -100 41 0% 101 -150 15 0% 151 -200 0 0% 200+ 6 0% 14372 100% • Total 19% • Total 70% > Total 11% COMMERCIAL usage (in 000's # of readings nallnns) 0 usaae % of Total 0 238 15% T1 1 -2 303 19% 3 -10 439 27% T2 11 -15 156 10% 16 -20 100 6% 21 -25 66 4% 26 -30 49 3% 31-40 89 5% 41 -50 69 4% T3 51 -75 61 4% 76 -100 13 1 % 101 -150 28 2% 151 -200 5 0% 200+ 4 0% 14,372 readings / 4 Quarters = 3,593 Residential Accounts • Total 33% • Total 37% > Total 30% 1 bzu - I uu /o 1,620 readings / 12 months = 135 Commercial Accounts Note: Multifamily dwellings will take into account the number of units to determine the tier, so the percentage in Tiers 1 &2 will rise and Tier 3 should decrease • • CITY OF MOUND - UTILITY FUNDS - FUND BALANCE HISTORY N O) N N • 11/18/2009 OTHER NET Unrestricted NET ASSETS OPERATING OPERATING REVENUES INCOME NET ASSETS Net Assets Year January 1st REVENUES EXPENSES (EXPENSES) L! OSS) December 31st December 31st 2003 2,278,325 613,653 (590,322) (29,282) (5,951) 2,272,374 1,694,575 W 2004 2,272,374 624,087 (572,075) (49,906) 2,106 2,274,480 2,459,344 A T 2005 2,274,480 664,400 (634,541) (26,284) 3,575 2,278,055 3,631,233 E 2006 2,278,055 730,754 (758,797) (131,355) (159,398) 2,118,657 1,733,994 R 2007 2,118,657 873,412 (899,302) (218,222) (244,112) 1,874,545 558,607 F 2008 1,874,545 890,770 (1,049,222) (321,773) (480,225) 1,394,320 304,345 U N 2009 Projected 1,394,320 950,000 (1,016,072) (357,850) (423,922) 970,398 0 2010 Budget 970,398 1,200,000 (1,254,903) (443,700) (498,603) 471,795 2011 Projected 471,795 471,795 2003 3,921,735 1,142,893 (1,045,174) (3,599) 94,120 4,015,855 1,360,179 S 2004 4,015,855 1,261,953 (1,064,856) 8,273 205,370 4,221,225 1,622,473 E w 2005 4,221,225 1,275,722 (1,121,323) 33,307 187,706 4,408,931 1,687,357 E 2006 4,408,931 1,319,761 (1,235,632) 53,264 137,393 4,546,324 1,673,352 R 2007 4,546,324 1,377,136 (1,453,146) 69,175 (6,835) 4,539,489 2,379,852 F 2008 4,539,489 1,411,833 (1,335,043) (3,293) 73,497 4,612,986 1,253,307 u N 2009 Projected 4,612,986 1,425,000 (1,429,507) (56,264) (60,771) 4,552,215 D 2010 Budget 4,552,215 1,439,250 (1,518,638) (126,750) (206,138) 4,346,077 2011 Projected 4,346,077 - 4,346,077 2003 174,899 117,662 (22,521) (36,237) 58,904 233,803 175,509 s T 2004 233,803 129,194 (46,365) (38,845) 43,984 277,787 901,154 O 2005 277,787 153,442 (27,121) (26,633) 99,688 377,475 859,755 R M 2006 377,475 155,099 (64,524) (15,536) 75,039 452,514 970,083 2007 452,514 151,694 (61,370) (12,495) 77,829 530,343 986,597 W A 2008 530,343 151,826 (117,948) 41,799 75,677 606,020 (177,217) T 2009 Projected 606,020 151,826 (194,162) (100,479) (142,815) 463,205 E R 2010 Budget 463,205 231,314 (239,812) (106,200) (114,698) 348,507 2011 Projected 348,507 - 348,507 N O) N N • 11/18/2009 Mo und, "' '' Cite of Mound Plani�in�; and Bruldir (952) 472-3190 Dc �artsncnt EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: November 17, 2009 SUBJECT: Variance (front setback) for deck to porch enclosure project OWNER/TAXPAYER: Sophia Resources LLC, Bruce and Judith McKeeman PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 09 -15 LOCATION: 1744 Avocet Lane ZONING: R -1A SFR SUMMARY At its November 17, 2009 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance • application variance application from Bruce and Judith McKeeman, owners of the property at 1744 Avocet Lane, for a reduced front setback of 18.7 feet for a deck -to- porch enclosure project which is currently underway on the subject property so as to maintain the same building line as the existing house. A 20 -FT front setback is required. PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the project are contained in Planning Report No. 09 -15 which has been included as an attachment. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OVERVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION Staff reported that it did not support the deck to porch enclosure request as there is an alternative to modify the structure to meet the 20 FT setback and still accomplish the intended task (all season porch). Details regarding the Planning Commission's consideration and discussion of the application are included in the (draft) November 17, 2009 meeting minutes. Following its review, the Planning Commission voted five (5) in favor and three (3) opposed to recommend City Council approval of the variance. The following findings of fact recommending variance approval offered by Planning Commission members in support of the variance are contained in the 11/17 PC meeting minutes and can generally summarized as follows: • -2623- • 1. The deck to porch conversion is a continuation of a straight line 2. Modification of the porch without the variance renders the involved area -unusable. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS • Due to differing recommendations from Staff and the Planning Commission, a draft resolution is not being included with the Executive Summary report. • The Planning Commission's review included discussion that the hardcover correction work needs to be done in a timely manner. City Council discussion about an appropriate timeframe is encouraged. 10 -2624- MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION Nov �e�- 17- - -29fl9 _ __- - - - -: BOARD OF APPEALS PLANNING CASE NO. 09 -15A VARIANCE FOR FRONT SETBACK 1744 AVOCET LANE BRUCE & JUDY McKEEMAN Smith introduced the case and reviewed the history of the parcel. Included in the discussion was an explanation of the hardcover issue. In response to Michael's question, Smith indicated that the nonconforming condition is the setback. The deck is already there but changing to an enclosed porch increases the bulk. Bruce McKeeman (1744 Avocet Lane) indicated t int ion to redo their driveway with impervious pavers to correct the hardcove ue. A v nce for the original deck was approved in the 90's; a building permit for er /lower deck was issued in 2002. They request approval for stability a fr t corner, as well as aesthetics of the neighborhood. Bob Pierce (1741 Bluebird calculations on the building neighborhood issues. omissions from the hardcover requests and also cited other Smith reviewed a docume o urveyor Mark Gronberg explaining the hardcover calculations and also discuss taff's analysis which includes the inclusion of approximately 86 SF of additional hardcover. Mr. Pierce expressed doubt regarding the owner's proposed driveway alterations. Smith explained the City's policy regarding pervious paver design and installation procedures including the engineering and certification which are required in that process. Claywell asked about the value of stability of the structure. It was commented that the stability would not be compromised. MOTION by Michael, seconded by Peters, to approve the variance request. Discussion Michael felt the unusable leftover deck is not a great improvement for the neighborhood to see. Peters agreed and added that, as long as the deck line is already there, it's not 1 01 • -2625- Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 2009 unreasonable. Ile Skinner said hardship s not there and it could be redesigned to fit. p g Stevens asked for and received clarification that the owner built the existing load bearing wall in 2002. MOTION carried. Voting for: Peters, Stevens, Claywell, Ward, Michael Voting against: Paulsen, Skinner, Glister Chair Michael offered the findings of fact in favor the variance: - continuation of a straight/same line; and - modification of the deck/porch area creates useless space. -2626- 5341 Maywood Road City of Mound Mound, MN 55364 Planning and Building • (952) 472 -0604 PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: November 12, 2009 SUBJECT: Variance (front setback) for deck to porch enclosure project OWNER/TAXPAYER: Sophia Resources LLC, Bruce and Judith McKeeman PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 09 -15 LOCATION: 1744 Avocet Lane ZONING: R -1A SFR REQUEST: The Planning Commission will review a variance application from Bruce and Judith McKeeman, owners of the property at 1744 Avocet Lane,.for a reduced • front setback of 18.7 feet for a deck -to -porch enclosure project which is currently underway on the subject property so as to maintain the same building line as the existing house. A 20 -FT front setback is required. BACKGROUND /SITE CONDITIONS • The subject property includes a single - family home, constructed in 1920, which fronts Avocet Lane on the west side. A variance was issued in 1994 to allow construction of a deck on the south side of the property subject to conditions. Copy attached. The applicants purchased the property in August 2000 (Source: Hennepin County website). Since that time, various alterations and /or improvements have been undertaken on the property related to the house and deck which can be generally described as follows: June 2002 construction of upper and lower decks (south side) June 2003 bedroom addition (upper deck area) July 2009 deck/porch addition; also open deck (south side) Aug 2009 roofing /shingle /porch area(s) Sept 2009 enclosure of existing deck to all season porch (subject to conditions) • 1 -2627- _ -- REVIEW PROCEDURE • Variance. City Code Section 350:530. Subd. 1 outlines the criteria for granting variances in the City of Mound. The, excerpts are provided below: Subd. 1. Criteria for Granting Variances A variance to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of his land. No use variances may be issued. A variance may be granted only in the event that the following circumstances exist: A. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of property since enactment of this ordinance have no control. B. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. C. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result • from the actions of the applicant. D. That granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this . Ordinance to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. E. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. F The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Ordinance or to property in the same zone. TIMELINE FOR AGENCY ACTION State Statute requires approval and /or denial of land use applications within 60 days unless the City executes an extension. The variance application was submitted and deemed to be complete on or around October 22, 2009. CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW. Copies of the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to all applicable City departments and agencies for review and comment. All written comments received to date have been summarized below: • 2 -2628- City Engineer Dan Faulkner • No comment. and Enginee echniclan Kay Hanson • Hardcover calculation sheet submitted by Coffin & Gronberg on 10/22 based on updated survey and field conditions shows property is over by 254 SF and is under review in cooperation with Coffin & Gronberg. Per applicant, driveway will be modified and replaced with accepted pervious product to bring subject site within hardcover allowance. Hardcover sheet showing "post construction" improvements required and subject to. City review and acceptance. Preparation of form by surveyor is recommended. HKGI Consultant Planner Jeff Miller • The variance is being minimized because it does not extend beyond the existing nonconforming condition on the west side. However, adapting the enclosure of the porch to meet the 20 FT setback doesn't seem to present a significant architectural or financial hardship.. DISCUSSION: Building Permit No. 2009 -00458 was issued for the deck enclosure (porch conversion) project on September 11, 2009 subject to conditions including modification of the west wall for conformity with the 20 -FT front setback with verification to be done by MnSpect and Planning and Engineering • Tech Ray Hanson and post construction hardcover allowance to be under the 40 percent allowance which is to be confirmed by Ray Hanson (copy attached). The hardcover calculation sheet submitted by the owner with the application showed the property under the 40 percent allowance by 14 SF. • New improvements and /or additions (unless eligible for setback reductions or qualify as encroachments) which maintain the same building line as the existing structure on the west side cannot be accomplished without a variance as the house is nonconforming from the front property line along Avocet Lane. • The 1994 variance acknowledged the front setback nonconformity for the existing house and deck in order to rebuild and slightly modify the deck which included a "cut -out" in the SW corner. Based on discussions with the owner, the "cut -out" as originally constructed, was not as severe as shown on the approved variance exhibit. • As previously mentioned, a building permit (No. 15610) was issued on May 17, 2002 which allowed the construction of an upper deck and replacement/modification of the existing lower deck which maintained the same building line as the house but did not meet the required 20 -FT front • -2629- _ __ setback and also filled -in the original "cut -out" area approved with the • 1994 variance. A final inspection of the deck(s) was done by the former Building Official on September 3, 2002 which accepted the improvements. pern - Ailt o p plans _. _ the file, Staff is not able to find a site plan or any other pertinent information with regard to the improvements which were constructed under this permit and therefore discussed this matter with the City Attorney who advised that the constructed improvements could be viewed as grandfathered activities as they received building permit approval and final inspection approval. • Detached decks less than 30 inches do not require a building permit but must be located a minimum of 2 feet from any lot line (except lakeshore). Staff's review of the deck on the west side of the house, as depicted on the updated survey (dated October 22, 2009 and revised November 2, 2009) and the deck on the east (rear) side of the house finds them to be consistent with the criteria for detached decks. • Stairs are encroachments in setback area(s) as long as they are located within 2 feet from lot line(s). On -grade steps and stairs, subject to certain criteria as specified in City Code Chapter 350.310, do not qualify as a "structure" and therefore do not require an established setback; also retaining walls. • Based on new survey /hardcover calculation sheets prepared by Gronberg and Associates, hardcover on the property exceeds the 40 percent allowance but will be modified by the owner to be consistent with this requirement as proposed addition /conversion projects approved.with building permits this summer indicated property was consistent with this allowance. The submittal of "post construction" hardcover calculations to confirm conformity with the 40 percent allowance was a requirement with the building permit. • Temporary walls in the subject area of the porch (west side) have been put up due to seasonal issues. • Applicant has indicated that the variance is needed to maintain the same building line for the porch enclosure project so as to utilize the west wall which is load bearing and would also eliminate the construction of a false wall "stepped" which also renders the front portion of existing deck area unusable. • The proposed porch conversion project does not extend beyond the existing nonconforming setback on the west side and would maintain the same building line. U 4 -2630- SITE INSPECTION Planning Commission members are encouraged to visit the site prior to the • meeting. RECOMMENDATION At this time, Staff does not support the variance and recommends the Planning Commission recommend denial based on the following findings of fact: A. Hardship is not being demonstrated as the west wall of the porch enclosure can be constructed in a conforming location. B. The applicant can accomplish the intended project (al/ season porch) without a variance. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW Variance applications require approval by the City Council. A tentative City Council date is Tuesday, November 24, 2009 in the event a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission. -2631 VE a Y a � VARIANCE • —cmr MOUND SEP 2 8 2009 APPLICATION _ _. -534 1 _ a n� ©uro Phone 952- 472 -0600 FAX 952- 472 -0620 Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. _ Planning Commission Date Case No. o'j City Council Date lie Plaaca tuna nr mint Innihl.. SUBJECT Address / 74� ,61oez Lp, PROPERTY / f Lot / �' Qrac'Y Idll/ 1��'�/ a Block LEGAL . DESC. Subdivision r G� -, e4,w PID # /-?- ��" �, y � © ©7 Plat # ZONING DISTRICT R -1 R -1A R -2 R -3 B -1 B -2 B -3 PROPERTY Name Address 1 OWNER APPLICANT Name (IF OTHER THAN Address OWNER) Phone Home Work Fax 1. 1 IG1.0 GLII G1NN1".1QLIVII CVCI uCC11 Ilt C lul Lulling, variance, conanionai use permit, or otner zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No ). H yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 2: Detailed description of proppo construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): • Variance Information (6/9/2008) Page 4 of 4 OA -2632- Case No. fit' l 3. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes ( ) No 9. If no, specify each non - conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): > . G 17"d?w 5yOee6Tet Y / iS /� ) / G�CCl�'195� A SETBACKS Front Yard: (NSEW) Side Yard: (NSEW) Side Yard: (NSEW) Rear Yard: (NSEW) Lakeside: (NSEW) (NSEW) Street Frontage: Lot Size: Hardcover: REQUIRED REQUESTED VA IAANNCC� See (or existing) � } ft. ft. %4 ft. ft. ft• ft• ft. ft. ft. ft. 0 sq ft sq ft sq ft • ___ sq ft — sq ft sq ft 4. Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes-A, No ( ). If no, specify each non - conforming use: 5. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) too narrow ( ) too small ( ) too shallow Please describe: ( ) topography () drainage ( ) shape , 4��l /� J ( ) soil ,j existing situation ( ) other: specify ��yq l r 7/),t! d✓' ib YW ' e j �.iO✓.s� S' .�.e X02 �.+ c G� t ?`,hti' kive e Variance Information (6/9/2008) Page 5 of 5 -2633- _ __ 10 Case No, q' j �) — 6. Was the hardsh d escrib ed above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), NoV. If yes, explain: 7. Was the hardship created by any other man -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes V, No ( ). ff yes, explain: eaq /0&/ ds(/ 4&11 8. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes), No ( ). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? I • 9. Comments: 4r I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the variance information provided. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Owner's Signature : %%G ��'�" Lofg �Date � Applicant's Sig Date ! o /� • Variance Inform (6/9/2008) Page 6 of 6 nn -2634- 10/22/2009 13:48 FAX 952 473 4435 GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES Q002 CULAT IONS HAjmnQOVER CA.L -w- -E 8 SURFAEV" V FO G PROPERTY ADDESS: 174-4- OWNER'S -NAME: � 72)00 -# / rC X It" I-OT AREA $0. FT . . X. 30% (for all lots) ................ ............... —.— .� LOT AREA 6 0 40 SQ. FT. X 40% (for Lots of Record) .............................. - E)d&Ung I& of Record may have 40 j;qr0ent coverage provkq0d:thkttpchnjquft are uliked, as outlined In Zoning Ordinance Section 360:1225, Subd. 6.8,1 (See back), A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. LENGTH WIDTH 9Q FT HOUSE x 70•z TOTAL HOUSE..................... ............................... DETACHED BUILDINGS X 7 * Ct-e"" V (GARAGEISHED) X. TOTAL DISTACHED I3UILDINGS-f,i'-' ........... ........ DRIVEWAY, PARKING x = 735 •AREAS, SIDEWA.4K.S, X t&kt dlkli&WAY, Eft ............... ....... ................ DECKS open docks (119 min. x R opening between boards) with a pervious surla;e under are nog X.• counted as hardoo X TOTAL DECK ........................................................ _ AL OTHER W TOT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOTAL HARDCOVER! IMPERVIOUS SURFACE .................................................... 2 6 70 UNDER OVER indicate difference) ...... .............................................................. X F /" C'Fo 7 5-f Ale 2S4 .s',' ;f It -ti, 71 '0z, . L CF N"fA- reo� A0 'el ' 00 1 g.< 4"/ 40.4 tr'e,r . PREPARED BY DATE le -2zP-gR -2635- n _,.-A ^Aiinam,% - -- - - -------------- CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BRUCE E. &JUDITH K. MCKEEMAN IN LOTS 12, 15, 16 & 17, BLOCK 9, DREAMWOOD HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I / / 411 �i /w m�41 /g o , a Z ZU 592 SANITARY MANHOLE > 411 ct�Q g co rk- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 -1687 PERMIT NO.: 2009-00458 DATE ISSUED: 09/1M009 1744 AVOCET LA LEGAL DESC PERMIT TYPE PROPERTY TYPE CONSTRUCTION TYPE VALUATION : DREAMWOOD : LOT 0 BLOCK 009 BUILDING SINGLE FAMILY, DETACHED PORCH/SUN ROOM : $ 17,500.00 NOTE: FOR INSPECTIONS CALL MNSPECT AT 952 -442 -7520. NEW WEST. WALL MUST MEET REQUIRED 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK VERIFICATION WILL BE DONE DURING BUILDING OFFICIAL FRAMING INSPECTION. APPLICANT TO REQUEST FRAMING INSPECTION WITH BOTH MNSPECT AND RAY HANSON 472 -0614. POST CONSTRUCTION HARDCOVER MUST BE UNDER THE 40% ALLOWANCE. PERMrr HOLDER MUST REQUEST A POST CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION WITH RAY HANSON TO CONFIRM HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS. APPLICANT MCKEEMAN, BRUCE & JUDITH 1744 AVOCET LA MOUND, MN 55364- 1 OWNER MCKEEMAN, BRUCE & JUDITH 1744 AVOCET LA MOUND, MN 55364 AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days, or if construction or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days at any time after work is commenced. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and city ordinances governing this type of vork will be complied with whether specified herein, violated -or cancel the provisions of any other state or local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. Applicant Date OL^D AD A TT: DL'DhdTTQ DL'r%TTTDUr% 1;, BUILDING PERMIT FEE 101 -32210 335.30 STATE SUR, VALUE/BLDG 101 -20800 8.75 PLAN REVIEW FEE 101 -34104 217.95 TOTAL 562.00 PAID WITH CHECK # 3585 -2637 - - M WnDV n"r=D'rU A AT T1RQ!'D MUT\ A Dr%NM • *I 00) I CAULKING AND FLASHING AT ALL EXTERIOR OPENINGS Q� rl 0- - J 0 YIN ov- o L T)I Must post address on construction site visible from road, REVIEWED SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE- WM-1 CODE AND FIELD INSPEC DUH M DA LOCATED IN THE AMA ACCESSM LACH SLEEPING ROOM AND SHALL BE W-CONMCTED. FOR ALL INSPECTIONS CALL 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE AND GIVE PORMIT MUNIRFTj • 9 . CO • A 4 Sly, er . tJ � .. S ,w -Co eRt CD N Ii �• v Q f t � F9 L- r i f chi • f] 1 N i s � r n ' v � F9 L- r i f chi • f] 1 N i Iiz kAX �� . / _-- .' / O ` 1 � � i �- ` ' -- / Ot / m C IO r sal'' lk " V A I i . f' _ c ,N I � || li /t --- ;`o \ . A Td \ ' - - /~. ~ � ` / co / m q1 qolL�L ?A�r. ' 2--z qOJO DO q03 iz) o�-) qolL�L ?A�r. ' V . � 4r tS CSnA)_ dIr • C c J Lt} (D N i ` 11 '' tf�.L- Wr " �y LV k LL. Ao pt i • 5 X2647- CAP d7 f p 0 IJ 10 � 4e, 3 �6,rpz,e 1 *7 7W -2648- --.- I DI.IIIUII IV I c1 1 1111116 .NN............. . 5341 Maywood Road,-Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952 - 472 -0607 FAX 952 - 472 -0679 Property Address PID # - - - m� Business Name/Tenant �J`lG,� C/C�Jd'l�I/rl ' Owner- Contractor T enant • s: -- --n- OWNER Name _E Address /7 e b City /State2ip Phone r F Cell ' CONTRACTOR Company Name License # Address city State Tip Contact Person . Phone Fax Call ARCHITECT Name AND /OR Phone Fax Cell ENGINEER DESCRIBE WORK: e, 10 Ot VALUATION OF WORK: $ VALUE APPROVED $ are required for electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilating or air conditioning. Permits become null and void If work or construction ° • jparate permits authorized is not oommenoed•within 180 days, or if work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days at any time after work is commenced. Time Limits on Building Completion. The exterior of a structure or portion of a structure, located in a residential zoning district, must be completed in c with dty plans within 180 days after ft data of permit issuance. Seeding, sodding or other planted ground cover must be viable accordance within 240 days of permit issuance or by July 15 if the 240 days expire between November 1 and May 15. Construction materials, including piles of dirt, sand and sod must not be left in the open more than 60 days after construction is completed or a certificate of occupancy has been issued. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be compiled with whether specified herein or not The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local law regulating constiuotion or the performance of construction. 1 agree to pay all plan review fees even H i choose not to proceed with the work 1 certify all taxes and City fees owed in con nectlon with . this property are current. See reverse side for an important statement resardin_a Indian_ Mounds. PRINT APPLICANT'S NAME APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE (OFFICE USE ONLY) RECEIVED BY & DATE APPROVED ZONING PLANS CKE Y CITY ENGIDPW PUBLIC WORKS c� PERMIT FEE PLAN REVIEW FEE ASSESSINGIUTIL BILL UTIL TAX OTHER 33S 3 d ^ 217-75. • BUILDING OFFICIAL -2649- __ CERTIFICATE • City of Mound STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) . I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota, hereby attest and certify that: 1. As s off icer, I ha the l custod of th original r ecord fr which the attached and foregoing extract was transcribed. 2. 1 have carefully compared said extract with said original record. 3. 1 find said extract to be a true, correct and complete transcript from the original minutes of a meeting of the City Council.of said City held on the date indicated in said extract, including any resolutions adopted at such meeting, insofar as they relate to: RESOLUTION #94 -117 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE EXISTING NON— CONFORMING SETBACKS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AT 1744 AVOCET LANE, LOTS 15, 16, AND 17, BLOCK 9, DREAMWOOD, PID #13- 117 -24 24 0007, P &Z CASE #94 -61 4. Said meeting was duly held, pursuant to call and notice thereof as required by law on: AUGUST 23, 1994 WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk, and the sale of said City, this 4TH day of NOVEMBER , 1 9 94 W ..h i•. �.. o !r . CITY CLERK. seal 2650- August 23, 9 • ► 7. 9 4 --- - - - - -- - - - - - -- N #94117 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING SETBACKS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AT 1744 AVOCET LANE, LOTS 15, 16, AND 17, BLOCK 9 9 DREAMWOOD, PID #13- 117 -24 24 0007 P &Z CASE #94-61 WHEREAS, the owner, Michael Kohler, has applied for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming dwelling and deck in order to rebuild and slightly modify the deck, and; WHEREAS, this request results in variances of 1.2 feet to the required 20 foot front yard setback and 3.4 feet to the required side yard setback. All other aspects are conforming to the zoning ordinance, and; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R -lA Single Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires a lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 20 foot front yard setback, 6 foot side yard setbacks, and a 15 foot rear yard setback, and; WHEREAS, the proposal is a logical expansion of the deck and -the corner is cut back to minimize the impact to the nonconforming setback, and; WHEREAS, all other setbacks, lot area, and lot coverage are conforming, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 18.8 feet, and side yard setback of 3.8 feet to allow construction of a deck as shown on the attached Exhibit A. 2. The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420, Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and restrictions of Section 350:420. 3. It is determined that the livability of the residential property will be improved by the authorization of the alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to afford the owners reasonable use of their land. - `2651 -_ - 245 • August 23, 1994 - 4_.__ This variance is granted for the_follow ng - -1 -gall -d rib esl property_____ Lot 17 and the Northeasterly 35 feet of Lots 15 and 16, Block 9, Dreamwood. 5. This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1). This shall be considered a restriction on -how this property may be used. 6. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Ahrens and seconded by Councilmember Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Attest: City Clerk 246 -2652- RESOLUTION #-94-117- ' : � 4 ,exhibit Certificate of Survey for Dukaynou- D. Terl • in Lots 15, 16, r ind 17, B-Ioc!,c 9, D reamwoo d hannepin Count 3 • � t. Y •ti'' '• "tea .. 0. S .1p� 1 ' � Baar� hgGp� I hereby certify thtit this Is a true rind correct representitior of a of this bou-ndarinm o;, I Lot 17anc. tj..o 1 6, Flock 9, DreaIrwood, ind th!- lo( t." or .15 Ce'.'t Of :,Ots 1e .ind %.. - * cr :111 ox: sLrc. buillings thte4-aor,. It doe not purport to .5�iow ot.;tr or :.nr:-cj.ch=en Scule Date 2-264.0 0 Iron marker • I • Cat'!'i.n Re, 7 6 06 4 Rehder Re,., t;0.13295 S1)T•V•.!Y0rs arj(! Planners V.inresota 5_12653- Property Information Search by Street Address Result page Page 1 of 2 Hennepin County, Minnesota 0 Home Property Information Search Result The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Search By ` Parcel Data for Taxes Payable 2009 I "j Click here for information on your PROPOSED 2010 PROPERTY TAX - Truth In Taxation statement HOUSE or BUILDING . 1744 '- -, STREET NAME: (at least first 3 characters)_ Avocet Lane UNIT # (if applicable) � is 40 records per page Property ID: 13 -117 -24-24 -0007 - Address: 1744 AVOCET LA Municipality: MOUND School Dist: 277 Construction year: 1920 Watershed: 3 Approx. Parcel Size: 75 X 80 Sewer Dist: LOT 12 Owner Name: SOPHIA RESOURCES LLC Taxpayer Name BRUCE E it JUDITH K MCKEEMAN & Address: 1744 AVOCET LA MOUND MN 55364 Most Current Sales Information Sates prices are reported as listed on the Certificate of Real Estate Value and are not warranted to represent arms- length transactions. Sale Date: August, 2000 Sale Price: $240,000 Transaction Type: Warranty Deed Tax Parcel Description Addition Name: DREAMWOOD Lot: $270,000 Block: 009 Metes & Bounds: LOT 17 AND NLY 35 Fr OF LOTS Total Net Tax: 15 AND 16 ALSO THE W 1 FOOT OF Total Special Assessments: LOT 12 Abstract or Torrens: BOTH Value and Tax Summary for Taxes Payable 2009 Values Established by Assessor as of 3anuary 2, 2008 Estimated Market Value: $270,000 Limited Market Value: $270,000 Taxable Market Value: $265,800 Total Improvement Amount: $270,000 Total Net Tax: $2,635.03 Total Special Assessments: $204.28 Solid Waste Fee: $29.13 Total Tax: $2,868.44 an Property Information Detail for Taxes Payable 2009 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 2008 Values: Land Market $61,000 Building Market $209,000 Machinery Market Total Market: $270,000 Land Limited $61,000 Building Limited $209,000 Total Limited: $270,000 Qualifying Improvements $4,200 Veterans Exclusion http://wwwl6.co.hennepin.mn.us/pins/addn-266 11/13/2009 5341 Maywood Road City of • • • Mound, MN 55364 Planning and Building Depa (952) 472 -0604 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Comm. Dev. Director Date: 11/19/2009 Re: Funding Expenditure Timeline under Metropolitan Council Grant No. SG004- 129 for Auditor's Road Parking Structure Summary. Attached is a proposed cover letter and draft resolution for consideration /action by the City Council regarding the grant agreement with the Metropolitan Council (Grant No. SG004 -929) for the proposed parking structure to be constructed in the Auditor's Road District which expires on June 30, 2010. As the Council may recall, the original grant agreement expired on June 30, 2007 but was administratively extended by Metropolitan Council Staff for an additional 1- year period. An additional 2 -year extension was approved by the Metropolitan Council in April 2008 which provides for the current grant deadline as noted above. Due to current market conditions and the Metropolitan Council's 2009 • policy regarding Livable Communities grants which allows for only one (1) grant extension which requires formal approval by the full Metropolitan Council and provides no option for a second extension, the City's ability to proceed with the project or apply for an additional extension is not feasible. Members are advised that the draft resolution also authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to sign any required documents regarding same on behalf of the City if required by the Metropolitan Council. Recommendations. Approval of the attached resolution (draft). 2. Authorize the City Manager to submit the letter to the Metropolitan Council on behalf of the City of Mound regarding the expenditure of funds under Council Grant No. SGO04 -129 by the City of Mound within the established timeline to any revisions from Staff or the City Council. • -2655- 10 6 November , 2009 Mr. Paul Burns, Manager, Livable Communities Ms. Deb Streets Jenson, Grants Administration Livable Communities Program Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North St. Paul, MN 55101 Re: Council Grant Agreement No. SG00 -129 with City of Mound Dear Mr. Burns and Ms. Jenson: Background • Over the past nine years, Mound has been experiencing a renaissance. The rebirth of this community has in part, been enabled by the availability of grant funding. In fact, the City of Mound has been the grateful recipient of numerous grants from cooperating agencies including, but not limited to, the Metropolitan Council, DEED, Hennepin County, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, which has resulted in many successful redevelopment projects in downtown Mound. 2005 Livable Communities Grant Award On February 9, 2005, the Metropolitan Council awarded a Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) grant to the City of Mound in the amount of $1,150,000 for a parking deck to be located in the Auditor's Road District of Mound's downtown redevelopment area. 2007 and 2008 Livable Communities Grant Agreement Extensions On May 29, 2007, the Metropolitan Council Staff approved a one (1) year administrative extension to June 30, 2008; a two (2) year extension was approved by the Metropolitan Council on April 9, 2008 which provides for the current grant completion deadline of June 30, 2010 for all related project activities. Grant Agreement Funding Expenditure Obligation After much thoughtful consideration and in response to unforeseen market and economic conditions, the City of Mound has determined that we are unable to expend the grant • funds within the established timeline referenced in Council Grant No. SG004 -129 and hereby notifies the Metropolitan Council of this determination and respectfully requests that the Metropolitan Council formally advise the City of Mound of the required steps to close -out the grant agreement -2656- November _, 2009 Mr. Paul Burns Ms. Deb Jenson Page 2 ............._.........._.... ... Many significant projects have been completed in the City's downtown areas since the original approval of the Livable Communities grant. They include, but are not limited to, the constructing and rerouting of CSAH 15 through Mound and pedestrian streetscape improvements, the construction of a new parking deck and surface parking. in the Transit District, the remediation of a former dump in the Lost Lake District and subsequent completion of a dredge project and municipal pier, and construction of eleven (11) townhomes and a commercial building. In spite of the level of public and private investment, the City and the developer, Mound Harbor Renaissance, have been unable to procure an east end anchor for Auditor's Road District, which is the area proposed for the new deck structure. Because that is the case, the City of Mound cannot meet the June 20, 2010 grant deadline in accordance with our current agreement. On a more optimistic note, however, the City is continuing with its redevelopment and marketing efforts for downtown Mound. Proof of that is the City's recent investment in its downtown. The City recently procured and demolished four (4) structures in the Auditor's Road District as part of a region -wide emergency operations exercise and also completed the connection from Auditor's Road to "new" County Road 15. Additionally, a comprehensive, transit oriented development (TOD) way finding master plan is being prepared for Auditor's Road in cooperation with Hennepin County. It is our belief these projects will further the City's mission to be ready for development when the market returns. The City is sincerely appreciative of the relationship it shares with the Metropolitan Council and the mutual cooperation we have enjoyed over the years. We continue to be proud of the many strategic relationships and partnerships we have forged with other agencies and look forward to continued cooperative efforts with the Metropolitan Council on future projects in the years to come. Sincerely, Kandis Hanson City Manager Sarah Smith Community Development Director C: The Honorable Mayor Mark Hanus and Mound City Council -2657- 01 401 • 10 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 09- RESOLUTION NOTIFYING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REGARDING OBLIGATION FOR EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS UNDER COUNCIL GRANT NO. SGO04 -129 WITHIN ESTABLISHED TIMELINE WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council and City of Mound entered into a grant agreement identified as Council Grant No. SGO04 -129 on October 25, 2005 to provide $1,150,000 in support of the Mound Harbor Renaissance project in the Auditor's Road District in Mound; and WHEREAS, official copies of the original grant application and agreement are on file with the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, the timeline for completion of the improvements covered by the Demonstration Account grant agreement originally expired on or before June 30, 2007; • and WHEREAS, on May 29, 2007, the Council and the City amended Grant No. SGO04 -29 and extended the original June 30, 2007 grant end date to June 30, 2008 as provided in Paragraph 4.03 of the grant agreement; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound submitted a letter to the Metropolitan Council on March 6, 2008 as allowed in Paragraph 4.03 of the grant agreement requesting a 2 -year grant extension; and WHEREAS, following submittal of an official request to the Metropolitan Council as allowed in Paragraph 4.03 of the grant agreement, the Metropolitan Council approved a two -year grant extension for Council Grant No. SGO04 -129 on April 9, 2008; and WHEREAS, the grant agreement amendment executed by the Metropolitan Council and City of Mound included a current grant deadline June 30, 2010 for completion of all related, project activities. WHEREAS, due to current market conditions and the Metropolitan Council's new grant policy for the Livable Communities Program for 2009, extensions beyond a 1 -year period for grants is no longer possible. is 2658- NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Mound, Minnesota, hereby finds and determines that it will be unable to expend the grant funds within the • established timeline included in Council Grant No. SG004 -129. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Mound hereby notifies the Metropolitan Council of this determination and respectfully requests that the Metropolitan Council formally advise the City of Mound of the required steps to close -out the grant agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager and Mayor are hereby authorized to execute all related documents relating to the close -out of the grant agreement on behalf of the City of Mound. Adopted by the City Council this 24 day of November 2009 Mayor Mark Hanus Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 0 � .7 - 2659 - I* I* • k August 2009 In this issue: - 2009 LCA calendar - Important announcements about the LCA program - New procedures for extending existing grants - New official payment request form - New procedures for 2009 grants 2009 LCA Calendar • _ LCDA applications_are..due by..4:30.PM. on......... Monday, August 24th. There will be no pre- application for LCDA this year. TBRA applications are due November 2, 2009. LHIA Single Family applications are due September 24, 2009. • LHIA Multifamily Rental applications are due October 1, 2009. Important announcements about the LCA program The Livable Communities grant program is adapting to address, the impact of the recession on our grants and the projects they support. When projects fail to deliver the expected benefits within the promised time frame, the continued availability of grant funds to support that project may also be affected. Over the last few months, this has led us to emphasize the deliverables identified in grant applications and grant agreements, to re- examine our amendment procedures and payment processes, and to remind grantees of the very definition of a "project." In particular, the Council is intensifying its scrutiny of project deliverables. "Projects" vs. "Grant- Funded Activities." Each LCA application contains a description of the development or redevelopment Project that the Grant - Funded Activities are intended to support. The Grant - Funded Activities for a TBRA clean up grant, for example, may include asbestos abatement, while the Project itself is the redevelopment of the existing building to provide increase the net tax capacity. An LCDA grant might fund street reconstruction to support a new mixed -use development. The important concept here is that the Grant - Funded Activities alone are not the Project. Completion of the Grant- Funded Activities alone does not deliver the promised benefits of increased net tax capacity, new jobs, new affordable housing, better connections to transit, etc. Therefore, completion of the Grant - Funded Activities without completing the Project, as it was proposed in the grant application and within the same time frame, does not successfully complete the work of the grant. The application might include descriptions of future phases, but the deliverables discussed - here refer to those elements described in the application as being completed within the term of the grant. Changes to the Project and its deliverables have the effect of changing the basis upon which the application was ranked against other competing projects. If these changes are significant enough' It may force a reconsideration of whether further costs may be incurred against the grant. This has led to important clarifications and changes in how LCA grants are administered at the Council. All are addressed in this edition of the Livable Communities News. Additionally, all grantees with grants expiring in 2009 have received emalls asking for status report updates to help us understand whether the Project will be able to deliver the regional benefits promised in the grant application. - -2660- New payment request form To help keep track of the progress of Grant- Funded Activities and Project- related work, the official LCA payment request form has been revised_ to include a status report on both aspects of the work. The new form, available now on the Council's web site requires the grantee to detail the status of the Grant - Funded Activities and the larger Project. Grantees are also reminded that the claimed costs in the detailed portion of the payment request must be clearly identifiable in supporting documentation that accompanies the request. If the amount was derived through the use of a percentage, for example, note the percentage and the total to which it was applied. If only some of the line items on a supporting document are being claimed, clearly indicate w�'ich line items those are. The single most frequent detail that delays payments is lack of specificity for consulting invoices. It is insufficient to supply an invoice documenting charges for an engineer's time, for example; we need to know what it is that the engineer did during the charged time. Because we don't pay all project costs, we must be able to identify if there are soft costs or other ineligible items included in the professional /technical invoices. Ask your vendors to provide task -code level detail to support their claims or invoices. New procedures for extensions to existing grants LCA grant agreements for existing grants allow for the possibility of a one -time, one -year administrative extension of the grant agreement. Extensions beyond a third year require the approval of the governing body of the Metropolitaq Council. To ensure that existing grants and the Projects supported by Grant - Funded Activities stay on tr ck for their agreed -upon completion dates and that the Projects can still provide the deliverables promised in the grant application, grantees requesting amendments to extend their grants will be asked to: Demonstrate that the development or redevelopment Project supported by the grant- funded activities has not chang (i.e., the deliverables promised in the gran application are still a part of the Project plan in the-quantity and quality._ in which they were represented in the original application); Have a signed development agreement; Have site control; and Provide a schedule for the completion of the Grant - Funded Activities and the rest of the Project. For LHIA and LCDA grants, both the Grant- Funded Activities and the larger Project must be completed within the one -year extension. For TBRA grants, the Grant - Funded Activities must be completed and the larger Project must have at least commenced within the one -year extension. Important notes: 1. As a condition of any extension, the Council also reserves the right to withhold grant payments for Grant - Funded Activities until construction on the development or _. redevelopment projecf has begun, to ensure that the Project is proceeding. If the Project stalls, the grant may be terminated. 2. Grantees are required to notify LCA staff if their Projects change. Grant payments may be placed on hold while LCA staff seek to determine the degree and impact of the Project changes. 3. If the Project has changed significantly, the grantee may be asked to make its case for retaining the grant to the Council's governing body. If the grant is terminated because of the Project change, payments will be made only for costs incurred in good faith prior to the date that grant payments were placed on hold. 4. If you intend to request an extension to an existing grant, please do so as early as possible to ensure that the request can be processed before the grant expires. Expired grant agreements will NOT be extended. *I New procedures for 2009 gran At its June 24, 2009 meeting, the Metropolitan Council adopted the 2409 LCA Fund Distribution Plan The Plan details the amount of funding available for each LCA account as well as any procedural changes for the coming year. Notable changes included revisions to the procedure for extending LCA grants issued in 2009 • and onward. New grants will have a 24 -month term, as they have in recent years, but they will - -2661- have an opportunity for only one extension, which must be approved by the full Council. For future grants, the Council will no longer entertain requests for second extensions. • In another area of emphasis, applicants for LHIA and LCDA grants are reminded that the application allows applicants to distinguish between those parts of the larger development or redevelopment Project that will be completed during the grant term and later phases that will be completed in the future. Applications will be scored accordingly. Project deliverables cited as being expected to be completed during the grant term - in addition to the grant- funded activities - must be completed during the grant term. If an LCDA grant request is awarded to build a street to support a mixed -use development, for example, both the street AND the development must b e done. • For TBRA projects, construction on the larger Project must at least commence during the grant term. It is not enough to complete the infrastructure or clean up work described by the grant- funded activities, because that work alone does not provide the deliverables upon which the grant award was based. A TBRA request for • asbestos abatement, followed by demolition and redevelopment, must include at least the beginning of the actual Project construction work during the term of the grant. Given that the grant terms will be limited to at most 36 months, and that the work of the larger Project is required to be completed along with the grant funded activities (or, for TBRA grants, Project construction must have commenced), 2009 grant applicants are advised to take special care to limit the descriptions of their Projects to the work that can actually be completed (or, for TBRA grants, commenced) during the grant term. If necessary, Projects may need to be phased to accurately portray the deliverables that the region can expect to realize from the expenditure of LCA monies. Payments may be placed on hold for grant- funded activities associated with projects that are failing to progress as expected. Don't risk your grant payments - be realistic in what you promise. Potential applicants are strongly encouraged to work with LCA program coordinators to ensure • that they properly state the scope of their proposed Projects. Grant administration tips Payment requests and their supporting documents may be scanned and attached to an email to LCA staff (either to Deb Jensen or Jan Bourgoin) to speed the process and reduce copying and mailing costs. Remember that every payment request must be signed by an authorized employee of the grantee and that both certifications must be signed and dated. Helpful links Official LCA Payment Reguest and instructions LCA Participating Communities list Minnesota Housing 2009 LCA Housina and Rental Affordability Limits -L-tva b le- C- or- nt�u�i —v,T LCA Staff Paul Burns Manager, Livable Communities 651.602.110 aul.burns metc.state.mn.us Joanne Barron LCDA program coordinator 651.602.138 ioan ne. barron0metc. state. mn.us Marcus Martin BRA program coordinator 651.602.105 marcus.martin me c.state.mn.us Linda Milashius LHIA program coordinator 651.602.154 linda.milashius@) Deb Streets Jensen G rants Administration 651.602.155 eb.'ensen metc.state.mn.us Jan Bourgoin Grants Administration 651.602.163 an. bour oin O metc. state, mn.us - 2662 -- AL 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD • MOUND MN 55364 -1687 -� PH: (952) 472 -0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 1d11.EB:.wwwsit�ahameurad_eaKa - ......_... -. IM TO: . Mayor and Council Members FROM: Jim Fackler, Park Super! DATE: November 17, 2009 RE: Additional BSU and Small Water Craft Fee Change Lost Lake Villa Fee Change At the November 17, 2009 Docks and Commons Commission meeting the Commission discussed fees. The Commission recommended fee changes. Below is an excerpt from the meeting minutes: • Discuss: Additional Boat Fee and Proposed Dreamwood Rip Rap Project Request. Fackler stated Dreamwood is a large riprap project that's coming up. He's suggesting replacing 1,400 lineal feet in a two -year (2010/11) period, and utilize half of the dollars from the main dock fund and other half from the capital reserve fund. Page 20 of the packet shows the effect of a two -year Dreamwood project on the capital reserve fund. There would be a reduction of 75,000 but if the yearly transfer of 25,000 from the main dock fund to the capital reserve fund is continued, by the end of 2012 the capital reserve fund will have a $80,000 balance. At that point we would look at rip rapping Island View Drive, which would take multiple years because of length of it. That's what capital reserve fund is for. Osmek referred to the pictures of the Dreamwood area included in packet and stated some areas may need riprap, but other areas look functional. Discussion followed on the condition of the riprap on Dreamwood. Fackler stated page 19 of packet shows if the additional BSU was reduced to $75, it would be revenue reduction of $7,350 per year. Osmek stated the reduction should be the same for personal watercraft. From page 21, Fackler summarized the BSU counts over the years and what staff has done to keep it under control • printed on recvcW paper _ 2663- such as a moratorium on shares in 2003 when the boat count was 588 when the • maximum number can only be 590 BSU's. That action helped bring BSU number down to a point wherein 2007, we had a buffer of 55. Hoff stated the 2006 `additional BSU fee' didn't decrease our boat count as much as we had hoped but it seemed to have evened out the prior large year to year swing in boat counts. Staff has a concern that reduction of the additional boat fee could jeopardize our buffer and we don't want to have to begin daily boat counts. Funk stated we made changes to slow the use of the shares. Fackler stated the share count is capped at 50 and we only had 30 shares in 2009. MOTION by Osmek to reduce personal watercraft and each additional watercraft fee from $150.00 to $75.00 for the year 2010. SECOND by Gardner. MOTION carried unanimously. 6. Discuss: Fees Osmek stated he would like to reduce regular dock and slip fees by $50 each. This would reduce the dock fee from $300.00 to $250.00 and multiple slip fees from $350.00 to $300.00. It would be a $20,000 revenue reduction. He stated we have a healthy fund balance. Funk stated it still seems to come in lower. Osmek stated when you get rid of the capital reserve fund it brings $100,000 forward. Fackler stated dredging is coming back to some areas, it's not only rip rapping, and dredging is expensive. Osmek stated the fees would only be reduced for one • year. Gardner stated maybe we should start slow with the additional fees and not drop the regular rates. Osmek recommends the commission walk the Dreamwood area to decide what really needs to be done as far as riprap. MOTION by Osmek to reduce for the 2010 program year primary dock fees from $300.00 to $250.00 and multiple slip fees from $350.00 to $300.00. No Second. MOTION fails. Mark Hanus, as a citizen, stated when you look at budgets like this, what is a comfortable balance to hold, but before you decide you have to ask what kind of budgeting philosophy you want to follow. Do you want to plan and bond for projects, or do you want to save up before your projects are known. Osmek stated even though we haven't done this in the past, we could float revenue bonds for these types of projects. If you did a revenue bond you could identify the revenue by any source you want and the dock fund could be one of them. Osmek stated he will discuss a fee reduction with the City Council. Funk stated his concern is not so much about the fee reduction, but makes him nervous as to what the fund balance effect is 2 to 4 years from now. Fackler discussed Lost Lake Villa Slips. There are 37 slips and 11 townhouse units built. The slips were first made available to Villa residents, then wait list applicants, then Mound residents, and finally non -Mound residents. With the season behind us, it has became apparent there were direct additional costs. Our -2664- insurance, Xcel, and water use increased due to dock uses. He recommends the actual direct costs need to be reclaimed from the 37 sites. • MOTION by Osmek to increase Villa fees from $525.00 to $800.00. SECOND by Funk. Discussion followed. Motion carries unanimously. lei __ -2665- _ _ I AA 1 1 - W - �At r lel l el-ti Me Mayor Hanus and City Council Members From: Dock Program Administration Date: 11/19/2009 Re: Lost Lake Villa Slips — Base Fees and Related Expenses Background on Lost Lake Villas: In 2005 the City of Mound made an application and received a license from the LMCD to dredge and operate a multiple slip complex for 37 boats; one for each of the 37 planned housing units. Each housing unit would be considered an abutting site in our Dock Program. Legal agreements between the developer (MHR) and the City had MHR dredge and build the complex with the City being the owner. The agreements also stated that after 2008 the City could lease out all slips not utilized by Villa residents. With the downturn in the housing market just 11 housing units are currently built. In 2009 the City leased out 33 of the 37 slips to non - Villa people. Fees and Expenses When this project was initially discussed with respect to establishing a base fee, a figure of 1.5 times our general program multiple slip fee was • decided upon ($350 x 1.5 = $525). There was no tangible basis for this figure nor is it stated in the Villa Agreements. (In addition to the base fee there is a $348 /slip escrow fee. This was established by an Escrow and Disbursing Agreement to cover channel maintenance, slip area dredge and slip maintenance and is to be re- evaluated periodically by City staff, Villa homeowner's association and the developer.) With our first season of full usage behind us, we now know expenses related directly to the Villa complex. Insurance $ 8,500/yr $ 230 /slip Xcel Energy $ 1,000 /yr $ 27 /slip "Water $ 370/yr $ 10 /slip ** Water usage has not been metered due to meter being broken. Therefore, the above figure is a guesstimate. Staff would like to recommend direct costs, such as those stated above, are considered and recovered when determining the yearly base fee. The Xcel Energy and water bill for all 37 slips is paid by the homeowner's association. However, they utilized only 4 slips during the 2009 season. Therefore, the City should issue the association a check for 33/37 of the bills. • Cc: Villa File Jim Stubbe- LL HOA Pres. Milt Hysjulien -LL HOA Treasurer Filename: Memo -To CC on We Base Fee & Exp; 11 -1949 -2666- To City of Mound - Dock & Commons Commission Projected Revenues and Expenditures 20Q6 Rams 2007 Rana 2008 Rafe$ 2012 Rates 2013 Rates 2014 Raft Revenue/Emense liaures as of 5/20/09 Regular Dock Fee (w/ tbsu) $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $308 $300 $300 $300 Slip Fee $350 $350 $350 $350 $380 $350 $350 $350 5350 Inflationtyear. 3% (for all Program Administration expenses EXCEPT LMCD fees pwc &V The $150 $150 $150 r ° ° $75 $75 $75 $75 and Tree Removal. 3% also applies to the the Subsidy to Parks General Fund budget Each Addl BSU Fee $160 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $75 Share Fee $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 We Fee $0 $525 $525 MINMENfIfM 7,350 $800 $800 $800 $ 800 • of Win 0 6 8 37 37 37 37 37 37 300 300 450 Acluals Proposed 3-111 375 Fees - Villas on Lost Lake (up to 37) 2 2006 23_07 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 T Fees - Wait List $20 x Approx 120 Fund balance - Jan.1 ! HM $168,437 20 427 9 $218,897 2& 71' 211 41 1 1 614 Revenues Fees - Regular Docks Sites; a rox 30 + Commercials 118,494 89,235 93,911 90,740 92,950 90,550 96,550 90,550 90,5 90,550 Fees - Share Fee; varies 5,400 6,000 5,550 4,950 4,500 4,500 4,500 4, 4,500 Fees - Additional BSLPs (averages 98 but can vary great 15,750 13,650 15,150 7,350 7,350 7,3 7,350 Fees - Slips; oTries as new complexes are added) 32,200 32,000 32,2001 35,000 35,700 35,700 35,700 35,7 35,700 Fees - PWC small watercraft slips 5 slips but not all rent every year) 300 300 450 375 375 3-111 375 Fees - Villas on Lost Lake (up to 37) 0 1,100 4,200 29,600 29,600 29,8 29,600 Fees - Wait List $20 x Approx 120 2,815 2,580 2,660 2,840 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2, 2,400 LMCD fees - Sites and SlipsMlias 5,378 5,165 5,355 5,566 5,8001 5,8001 5,800 5,800 5,80 5,800 Interest - 6,551 11,042 14,305 8,155 4,500 1,000 1,000 1,000 1 ,0 1 30 1,000 i her Revenues 1,350 2,225 0 1,430 380 0 0 0 0 N 0 Total Revenues i mm IBM 169,281 166.281 179 805 27 17 7 71 7.275 1 727 27 v Expenditures (1) ��� °r r ram.Administratlon• Personnel 52,144 57,857 59,894 61,781 80,378 81,893 84,350 86,880 89,461 92,171 Supplies: Office, Operating, MaintlRe air 5,0131 4,377 4,424 6,050 10,870 9,105 9,378 9,639 9,949 10,248 Special Services: Legal, Admin Overhead, etc. 9,096 9,238 9 9,801 13,156 13,156 13,551 13,957 14,376 14,807 Utilities, Insurance and Office Overhead 6,168 6,624 7,974 12,668 17,046 19,227 19,804 20,398 21,010 21,640 Equipment Re air 1,940 2,100 1,760 1,817 4,120 4,120 4,244 4,371 4,5QS 4,637 LMCD fees - Sites and Slips/Villas 5,813 6,294 11,322 1,909 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 . 7,000 Dock - installation & removal 12,367 11,322 12,189 13,367 16,000 16,000 16,480 16,974 17,484 18,008 Tree Removal 8,293 5,520 3,800 0 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Total ram Administration Expenses 1 1 7 107 1 1 501 O 46 1 Capital <Outla : (2) ac)ustment Multi le docks -New Complexes 0 19,662 0 8,197 10,086 0 0 0 0 Multiple docks-Deck Replacement 0 1 W7 2,403 3,700 3,340 0 4,200 3,900 3, 3,900 •• Subs(d to Parks General Fund Budget 6,130 18,970 880 5,940 12,720 15,500 15,965 44 16,4 16,9 17,445 Total capital Outlay1 1Z Miff 1 29 21 Other Improvements: RI Rap; Repair ill Maintenance 3,520 0 7,245 0 12,000 0 20,000 20,000 20 20,000 • Capital Reserve Fund for designated projects 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dredging of 0 0 9,741 0 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Stairs 0 0 8,388 01 5,9281 01 0 0 0 0 (3) acq ustment i Total Other Improvements 3,5201 O 15,6331 9,7411 17,9281 01 25,0001 25,000 25,000 25,000 DOCi• Balance Sheet with Reserve2; DCC Passed -thru 2014 PQf 2 0 02009 City of Me - Dock & Commons Commission Projected Revenues and Expenditures RevenuaMxo nse flaums as of 5/20/08 • i 200 91408 2007 Rates 2008 Rates 2012 Rates 2013 Rates 2014 Rates Regular Dock Fee (W tbsu) $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 Slip Fee $350 $350 $350 $350 $380 $3511 $350 $350 $350 " Inflation/year: 3% (for all Program Administration expenses EXCEPT LMCD fees pwc * fee $150 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $75 and Tree Removal. 3% also applies to the the Subsidy to Parks General Fund budget Each Adfl BSU Fee $150 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $75 Share Fee $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 VMS Fee $0 $525 $525 INUINKNE sew $800 $800 $am M Of Villas 0 8 8 37 37 37 37 37 37 Adjustments made from 2009 ADDroved B N 1) 2009 Approved Budget - Revenue included 12 Villas Slips; thru Supplemental MOU's we leased out 37911ps. 2) $10,086 is addition onto Centerview Multiple not in 2009 approved Budget; passed by CC'in April 2009 00 ao 3) $5,928 actual cost Budget was 12,000 DOCKS Slip Balance Sheet with Reserve2; DCC Passed -thru 2014 Page 2 of 2 11!1912009 Notes: (') Capital Reserve Fund is for larger projects/improvements in the future. City of Mound - Dock & Commons Commission Projected Revenues and Expenditures p 2000 Rates 2007 Rated ` �� ' �'�'� � "' ,' ' ' ' 2008 Rates � � � ` '� 2012 Rates 2013 Rates 201 Ra>�g Revenue/E�mense floures as of 5120109 Regular Dock Fee (%W Ibau) $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 Slip Fee $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 Inflation/year: 3% (for all Program Administration expenses EXCEPT LMCD fees pwc SNP tee $150 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $75 and Tree Removal. 3 also applies to the the Subsidy to Parks General Fund budget % Each Add'1 BSU Fee $150 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $76 Share Fee $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $160 $150 villa Fee $0 $525 $525 $800 $800 $ 800 $800 # Of v01as 0 6 8 37 37 37 37 37 37 At;tuals Proposed 0¢ 2007 2018 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 DOC9 Balance Sheet with Reserve2; DCC +DJO thru 2014 Per 2 �W009 City of Me - Dock & Commons Commission LJ • Projected Revenues and Expenditures zoos mares zoos Revs ,egos Bares �. � 4 �i �, � ,� ' � 2012 Ra#es 2013 mates 2014 Rates Revem nlExopse flaum as of 5!20/08 Regular Dock Fee (vd 1bw) 5300 $300 $300 $300 $300 Slip Fee $350 $350 $35p $350 $350 $350 ** Inflation/year. 3% (for all Program Administration expenses EXCEPT LMCD fees P— w fee $150 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $75 and Tree Removal. 3% also applies to the the Subsidy to Parks General Fund budget Each AckM BW Fee $150 $150 $150 $75 $75 $75 $75 Share Fee $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150. Ville Fee $0 $525 $525 r $am $800 $800 $800 f of view 0 8 8 37 37 37 37 37 37 - Dec. 31 Notes: (`) Capital Reserve Fund is for larger projects/Improvements In the future. Adiustments made from 2009 Aooroved Bud Set: 1) 2009 Approved Budget- Revenue included 12 Villas Slips; thru Supplemental MOU's we leased out 379111ps. 2) $10,086 is addition onto Centerview Multiple not in 2009 approved Budget; passed by CC i in April 2009 v 3) $5,928 actual cost. Budget was 12,000 0 DOCKS Slip Balance Sheet with Reserve2; DCC +DJO -thru 2014 Page 2 of 2 11/19/2009 2009 Dock Program- Fees All fees are per.year unless otherwise specified vo. Commercial Applications (Al & Alma's and Mtka Boat Rental) Basic Renewal Fee $ 500 Water Slips $ 30 /each Boats Stored on Land $ 10 /each Wait List Applications Processing fee; non - refundable $ 20 Dock Applications Dock fee; allows Primary Watercraft (1 watercraft) $ 300 Each Secondary Watercraft $ 150 /each Secondary Site holder fee (1 watercraft) $ 150 Secondary Site holder late fee — on /after March 1 $ 25 Sailboat Mooring fee $ 300 LMCD fee (based on boat length) $ set by LMCD LMCD fee (no boat) $ minimum LMCD Late fee (abutters only) on /after March 1 $ 50 /month Processing fee for full dock refunds $-50 Temporary visiting dockage permit (up to 21 days) $ 50 Penalty fee for undeclared watercraft at dock $100 Multiple Slip Applications Multiple slip fee $ 350 Small watercraft slip fee $150 LMCD charge (based on slip length) $ set by LMCD Processing fee for full slip refund $ 50 Processing fee for voluntary suspension of license $ 50 .Penalty for undeclared watercraft at slip $ 100 Penalty for watercraft at slip after fall deadline $ 100 Villas on Lost Lake Applications Villa residents $ 525 (or 150% slip fee) Non -Villa residents $ 873 LMCD fee (based. on sf of slip) $ set by LMCD Key deposit — refundable $ 50 Other Fees Light fee (2 locations) $ 10.50 0 1 *I • Filename: 2009 Fee Schedule - Print date 11/4/09- - 2671_ -- -1+J- 16 (i\ 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MO U N D, MN 55364 -1687 PH: (952) 472 -0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com To: Mayor Hanus and City Council Members From: Dock Program Administration Date: 11/19/09 Re: Boat (BSU) Counts — Year by Year; Fee Reduction Possible Effect 16 Below are the boat and share counts for the last 9 years. You will notice in'2003 we were only 2 boats shy of our LMCD licensed maximum of 590. Therefore, in an effort to decrease our boat count in 2004 and re- establish a buffer, a share moratorium was passed. The buffer is what allows flexibility for current program users to add boats as needed without the scrutiny of daily boat counting so as to not jeopardize our LMCD license. Number of Increase/Decrease Buffer Year Boats from prior year to 590 2009 544 +2 46 2008 542 +7 48 2007 535 -8 55 2006 543 -13 47 2005 556 -1 34 2004 557 -37 33 2003 588 +24 2 2002 564 +19 26 2001 545 n/a 45 U� a of Shares Note 33 Additional BSU Fee Continued 37 Additional BSU Fee Continued 40 Additional BSU Fee Continued; Share moratorium lifted/capped Q 5o 36 Additional BSU Fee Began; Continuation of share moratorium 47 Continuation of share moratorium 57 1 year of share moratorium 80 83 75 FHename: Marr*aoat Counts By Last Few Years2o09 -CC 11- 24.08; 2 printed on recvcled paper 1) -2672- The 'additional BSU fee' ($150 /ea) began in 2006. This represented a fundamental philosophical change in the program's fee structure as the Council felt an emphasis needed to be placed on how important each BSU is to the program. As you can see from the chart the 'additional BSU fee' didn't dramatically reduce the boat count. But it appears to have reduced the large year -to -year swings in boat counts. This fee structure also raised more revenue since all boats greater than 1 per applicant were charged $15GAioat Since the�2006 implementation of this fee we have averaged 98 `additional' boats' /yr ($14,700/yr). Staff would like to point out that the DCC passed motion of reducing the fee would, obviously, decrease revenue but it could have our program return to the years of rather large fluctuations in the year to year number of boats that current program users claim. If not careful, this could jeopardize our buffer of flexibility that allows program users to add boats at will. At the November 17, 2009 Dock Commons Commission meeting, Council Member, David Osmek presented a motion of reducing all dock and slip fees by $50 for 2010. Staff would simply like to stress that this could compound the boat count effect. Site users who have previously hesitated adding an additional boat due to the $150 /ea fee may be inclined to add the boat to their application under the proposed new fee structure. See below table showing those proposed new rates. Dock Sites - 2010 Yearly Fee based on # of Declared Boats Base -1 boar Ea Extra boat Current DCC Passed Motion Osmek Proposed Motion Siteholder Yearly Pee Current Fee Structure DCC Passed Motion Osmek Proposed Motion 300 1 300 75 250 75 1 Boat 2 boats 3 Boats 4 Boats 5 Boats 300 450 600 750 900 300 375 45 525 600 250 325 400 475 55 ie: under current fee structure site holder with one boat would pay $300. Under DCC passed motion, that same site older could add a second boat to his application and pay $75 more than their entire 2009 fee. Under the Osmek proposed motion, that same site holder would pay $25 more than their 2009 fee to have a second boat at their dock. w. DCC packet; January 2010 61 C] �1 Filename: Memo -Boat Counts By Last Few Yews2009 -CC 11 -2409, 2 —2673— 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 -1687 To: Mayor Hanus and City Council Members From: Dock Administration Date: 11/10/09 Re: Dock Fund and Capital Reserve Fund PH: (952) 472 -0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com Since 2007 a yearly contribution (transfer) of $25,000 has been made to the Capital Reserve Fund within the Docks Fund. The intention of the Capital Reserve Fund is for larger capital projects needed in the future. To date, zero dollars have been spent from this fund. An example of how this fund is intended to operate is the proposed Dreamwood rip rap project (2 year project). City of Mound Dock Program - Capital Reserve Fund Effect of 2 Year Dreamwood Rip Rap Project cap It I" eserve Fund 2007 2008 2009 2010 ;` ,2011, 2012; . Beginning Balance 0.00 25,000.00 50,000.00 75,000.00 65,000.00 55,000.00 DEPOSITS 25,000.0025,000.0025,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.0025,000.00 DISPURSEMENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00,(35,000.00) (35,000.00 **0 Ending Balance 25,000.00 50,000.00 75,000.00 65,000.00 55,000.00 80,000.00 4V For 2012, staff would begin looking at possible rip rap expenditures on Devon Common Assumes continuation of yearly contribution of 25K printed on recycled paper Filename: Memo-CC, Capital Reserve Fund —2674- Dreamwood commons has approx 1,400 lineal feet of shoreline. Although fieldstone is present over the majority of Dreamwood, in many areas, however, there isn't enough fieldstone to property secure the shoreline and spring ice heaving and erosion. Based. on the presence of fieldstone, staff feels we may be able to secure more favorable lineal/foot pricing. However, for quick analysis, staff reviewed the 3 recently received quotes of $85, $100 and $122 per lineal foot for the Amhurst Lane project. Based on an average of these 3 quotes we will assume pricing of $100/lineal foot. Under a 2 year period to complete Dreamwood: Year 1 (2010): Rip Rap approx. 700 feet x $100/foot = $70,000 > Capital Reserve Fund: $35,000 > Budgeted for Rip Rap: $35,000 Year 2 (2011): Rip Rap approx. 700 feet x $100/foot = $70,000 > Capital Reserve Fund: $35,000 > Budgeted for Rip Rap: $35,000 *I Filename: Me,w -cc, carnal Rare Fund -2675- DOCKS AND COMMONS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10 Present: Chair Jim Funk, Commissioners Susan Gardner, Cliff Schmidt, Council Representative David Osmek Absent: Rodney Beystrom, Mark Drahos Others Present: Park Superintendent Jim Fackler, Dock Administrator Katie Hoff, City Clerk Bonnie Ritter, Administrative Assistant Vicki Weber Chair Funk called meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Approval of September 17, 2009 Me g inute MOTION by Schmidt to approv inut s written. Second by Gardner. MOTION carries unanimously. 3. Comments and sugges ' s m tizens present: None 4. Review: 2009 a 2010 ock Fund Fackler reviewed fin a cials included in the packet. He stated in 2012 the unreserved fund balance will be negative $33,100. There are dollars in the capital reserve fund for projects. There are no proposed dock complexes in 2009 and repair and maintenance in 2009 doesn't have any dollars in it. $75,000 is in the capital reserve fund. Osmek stated in reality capital improvement says $25,000 spent and it hasn't been spent, so $75,000 should be added to 2012. Funk asked if we could add a line item so we have visibility of that. Hoff stated page 12 of the packet splits them out and the capital reserve fund is increasing by $25,000 per year and unreserved fund balance shows there also. Funk stated its alarming when it shows negative, where capital fund should be shown. Osmek stated he knows why its there, it acts like any other reserve fund, Council must approve any expenditures from that fund, and doesn't see the reason for adding $25,000 per year. Since we're not actually spending it, he suggested getting rid of that line entirely. If have a fund balance you can tap it and it is more realistic numbers that way. 1 -2676- There was a consensus among commission members they would like to see this done. Fackler referred to page 20 and gave an explanation of the history of the dock fund, the capital reserve fund and past commission's discussion of how much balance is enough. He stated that everyone had differing opinions, the fund was spent down and then there wasn't enough in the fund to take care of larger projects. The.creatioo of the capital reserve fund in 2007 was to yearly set dollars aside from the main dock fund to accumulate for large capital projects needed in the future. Osmek referred to the budget under personnel and program administration expenses and from 2008 actual to 2009 budget it jumps 50 percent. $20,000 out of $50,000 there. He asked if Parks and Docks looked at this budget at all last year? He didn't see this. Funk did look at, but was a surprise. Osmek asked if there is backup documentation on time spent on docks? Fackler referred to a d outdated 11/10/08. This is a worksheet he puts together each yea the last page —'/ coming out of parks is assessed to the docks. 20 ' was 1/8. In November when getting into crunch for 2009 b et a qu ion was asked was it possible a percent could be charge ks. '/ was settled on. Fackler took the 1/8 and moved to'/ a mad me changes and gave to Finance Department. Osmek c is too late for 2010, to put back to 1/8. He can live it f 1 , ut will have to have some kind of justification for the'/ ju ra om change to'/ to 1/8, is not good. Fackler stated he didn a could put something like this together. In Docks, still corn o %. If mowing Carlson Park, what percent is charged to doc nd t rcent is charged to parks? Osmek stated he needs a better anati and justification as to why. Funk stated administration an n eats away at the fund balance, and at some point we may be forc to raise fees to maintain the program. Fackler stated everything from 2008 is actual, and 2009 bottom line will come out and anything left stays in the fund. Osmek stated he didn't think we could do anything for 2010 as it's too far down road. If backed off to Y2 of the increase, instead of 1/8 to' /, there is still a $20,000 hole in parks budget. Fackler stated for the 2011 budget he will look at 1/8 vs. '/ and get more direction on this. Discussion followed on tree removal costs. Osmek discussed the capital reserve fund. He stated fund balance is true indicator of what we have, not capital reserve fund. His opinion is that without combining the two funds it doesn't serve a good purpose, and probably scares people to increase fees. 5. Discuss: Additional Boat Fee and Proposed Dreamwood Rip Rap Project Request. 01 2 -2677- -_ - - - -- Fackler stated Dreamwood is a large riprap project that's coming up. He's • suggesting replacing 1,400 lineal feet in a two -year (2010/11) period, and utilize half of the dollars from the main dock fund and other half from the capital reserve fund. Page 20 of the packet shows the effect of a two -year Dreamwood project on the capital reserve fund. There would be a reduction of 75,000 but if the yearly transfer of 25,000 from the main dock fund to the capital reserve fund is continued, by the end of 2012 the capital reserve fund will have a $80,000 balance. At that point we would look at rip rapping Island View Drive, which would take multiple years because of length of it. That's what capital reserve fund is for. Osmek referred to the pictures of the Dreamwood area included in packet and stated some areas may need riprap, but other areas look functional. Discussion followed on the condition of the riprap on Dreamwood. Fackler stated page 19 of packet shows if the additional BSU was reduced to $75, it would be revenue reduction of $7, per year. Osmek stated the reduction should be the same for per watercraft. From page 21, Fackler summarized the BSU counts o the rs and what staff has done to keep it under control such a m ratori on shares in 2003 when the boat count was 588 when ximum number can only be 590 BSU's. That action helped bri SU ber down to a point wherein 2007, we had a buffer of 55. H 2006 'additional BSU fee' • didn't decrease our boat c - t a c s we had hoped but it seemed to have evened out the pr" la y r to year swing in boat counts. Staff has a concern that re i additional boat fee could jeopardize our buffer and we I I f to have to begin daily boat counts. Funk stated we mad I ang to ow the use of the shares. Fackler stated the share count is c ed a 4 0 and we only had 30 shares in 2009. MOTION by Osmek reduce personal watercraft and each additional watercraft fee from $150.00 to $75.00 for the year 2010. SECOND by Gardner. MOTION carried unanimously. 6. Discuss: Fees Osmek stated he would like to reduce regular dock and slip fees by $50 each. This would reduce the dock fee from $300.00 to $250.00 and multiple slip fees from $350.00 to $300.00. It would be a $20,000 revenue reduction. He stated we have a healthy fund balance. Funk stated it still seems to come in lower. Osmek stated when you get rid of the capital reserve fund it brings $100,000 forward. Fackler stated dredging is coming back to some areas, it's not only rip rapping, and dredging is expensive. Osmek stated the fees would only be reduced for one year. Gardner stated maybe we should start slow with the additional fees and • 3 -2678- not drop the regular rates. Osmek recommends the commission walk the Dreamwood area to decide what really needs to be done as far as riprap. • MOTION by Osmek to reduce for the 2010 program year primary dock fees from $300.00 to $250.00 and multiple slip fees from $350.00 to $300.00. No Second. MOTION fails. 7 A Mark Hanus, as a citizen, stated when you look at budgets like this, what is a comfortable balance to hold, but before you decide you have to ask what kind of budgeting philosophy you want to follow. Do you want to plan and bond for projects, or do you want to save up before your projects are known. Osmek stated even though we haven't done this in the past, we could float revenue bonds for these types of projects. If you did a revenue bond you could identify the revenue by any source you want and the dock fund could be one of them. Osmek stated he will discuss a fee reduction with the City Council. Funk stated his concern is not so much about the fee reduction, but makes him nervous as to at the fund balance effect is 2 to 4 years from now. Fackler discussed Lost Lake Villa SI' , T ere a 37 slips and 11 townhouse units built. The slips we made available to Villa residents, then wait list applica the ound residents, and finally non - Mound residents. With the sea n s, it has became apparent there were direct addition ost ur surance, Xcel, and water use • increased due to dock s. a ommends the actual direct costs need to be reclaimed from t 37 MOTION by Os k to r e Villa fees from $525.00 to $800.00. SECOND by Fu Di ssion followed. Motion carries unanimously. Discuss: Ordinance Fackler stated the City went though a recodification of the entire City Code. The dock and slip ordinances were split up. Fackler summarized proposed changes included in the packet as it relates to mailing requirements, dock installation without a license, right to impound undeclared watercraft and public lands and public water storage and removal. MOTION by Funk to approve proposed changes as outlined on in the packet. SECOND by Osmek Motion carries unanimously. Discuss: 2009 Dock Location Map • 4 -2679- __ Hoff stated once a year changes to the dock location map is brought before the commission. The changes noted in the packet were summarized. MOTION by Osmek to approve changes as noted. SECOND by Schmidt. MOTION carries unanimously. 9. Review: Boat Counts Fackler summarized number of boats in program, and the breakdown of by boat size. 10. Review Dock Final Report Hoff summarized dock final report included in the packet. 11. Review: Calendar No changes noted. 12. Reports: Council Member Osmek stated ncil approved a variance for a resident on Cambridge L to d deck into Wychwood Commons. Park Superintendent kl all docks are out and in storage. Parks department ' e in 40 plus dock sections over the winter. The in /out contract ren a ith Dock Masters. MOTION by Funk to adjo :55 p.m. SECOND by Schmidt. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. 5 %r 5 -2680- General Fund 677,434 Park Dedication Fees 41,349 Area Fire Protection Services 584,146 Dock 298,621 Mound HRA 90,821 G.O. Equip. Certf. 2004 - C 25,110 G.O. Equip. Certf. 2005 - C (19,239) G.O. Equip. Certf. 2006 - C (27,553) G.O. Equip. Certf. 2007 - C (21,417) G.O. Equip. Certf. 2008 - D (21,673) G.O. Equip. Certf. 2009 - C - Mound Transit Center Series 2006 90,722 G.O. Bonds 2001 - C 78,904 Commerce Place TIF 480 G.O. Bonds 2003 - C TIF 1 -2 394,110 G.O. Bonds 2001 - A 21,044 G.O. Bonds 2003 - A 244,456 G.O. Bonds 2004 - A (132,637) G.O. Bonds 2005 - A 368,883 G.O. Bonds 2006 - A 350,209 G.O. Bonds 2007 - A 326,026 G.O. Bonds 2008 - B 94,198 G.O. Bonds 2009 - A - Taxable G.O. TIF Bonds 2008 A 1,426,812 HRA Lease Rev Bonds (110,769) Capital Improvement 403,278 MSA (3,498) Sealcoat 69,436 Parking Deck - Downtown TIF 1 -2 60,014 Downtown TIF 1 -3 MHR (1,079,458) HRA Public Safety Bldg - Water 2,169,518 Sewer 2,196,008 Liquor Store (578,811) Recycling (4,856) Storm Water 180,071 (271,876) Note: The above schedule shows the combined cash and investment balances by fund for the months indicated as recorded in the General Ledger. The balances do not reflect receivable, payables, authorized transfers, encumbered funds, or dedicated /reserved resources, etc. Only some accrued transactions are reflected. Investment income will be distributed to the funds at the end of the year and is not included. A long and complete process is followed to record all transactions, before we close the books, at the end of the year. In addition, the audit from the independent auditor is performed and an official Comprehensive Report will be presented to the City Council and made available to interested parties. In no way this schedule is intended to represent balances of funds available for spending. • CITY OF MOUND INVESTMENTS - 2009 02 -Nov -09 11Mnd- s011shareddatalFiNANCE DEPTIINVESTMENTSVINVEST -2006 to Dresent.XLS12009 Inv. # Vendor Type Purchase Maturity Yield Par Cost Date Date Value Salomon S. B. MONEY MARKET Govt Port CL A 1,554,404 1,554,404 Wells Fargo MONEY MARKET U S Govt MM Fd 233,518 233,518 PMA 4M Fund MONEY MARKET 4M Plus Fund 3,675,118 3,675,118 Wells Fargo SAVINGS 3,001,825 3,001,825 Subtotal City of Mound: 8,464,866 8,464,866 4M Plus MONEY MARKET Fd 285 L. of Cities 0 0.00 US Bank HRA Acct 33424701 HRA 49 49 US Bank HRA Acct 33424702 HRA Debt (SSB) 91 91 US Bank HRA Acct 33424704 HRA 189 189 09 -01 Salomon S. B. Certificate of Deposit Ally Bank (Former GM 6 -30 -09 12 -30 -09 0.5 48,120 48,000 09 -02 Salomon S. B. Certificate of Deposit Israel Discount Bank 4 7 -1 -09 1-4 -10 0.55 249,685 249,000 09 -03 Salomon S. B. Certificate of Deposit State Bank of India 7-8 -09 1-8 -10 0.6 249,747 249,000 Subtotal Mound HRA: 547,881 546,329 Total Investments: 9,012,747 9,011,195 i N 0) co N i 401 *I 61 -2683- -- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT October 2009 83.33% October 2009 YTD PERCENT BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVED GENERAL FUND Taxes 3,840,495 - 1,871,351 (1,969,144) 48.73% A Business Licenses 18,100 150 17,545 (555) 96.93% B Non - Business Licenses /Permits 206,700 14,133 109,572 (97,128) 53.01% c Intergovernmental 302,060 - 147,539 (154,521) 48.84% D Charges for Services 89,400 290 87,438 (1,962) 97.80% E Court Fines 75,000 4,333 47,198 (27,802) 62.93% F Street Lighting Fee 135,000 11,144 123,370 (11,630) 91.38% G Franchise Fees 298,000 67,531 246,331 (51,670) 82.66% H G.O. Equipment Certificates 157,000 - 156,663 (337) 99.79% Charges to Other Dpts 12,000 - 6,599 (5,401) 54.99% d Park Dedication Fees - - - - 0.00% K Other Revenue 317,650 5,953 114,431 (203,219) 36.02% L TOTAL REVENUE 5,451,405 103,658 2,928,036 (2,523,369) 53.71% FIRE FUND 1,038,710 154,857 1,258,579 219,869 121.17% DOCK FUND 167,450 (200) 174,797 7,347 104.39% MOUND HRA 78,829 3,802 4,090 (74,739) 5.19% WATER FUND 1,110,900 102,666 947,738 (163,162) 85.31% SEWER FUND 1,598,625 127,370 1,233,062 (365,563) 77.13% LIQUOR FUND 2,860,000 241,454 2,277,863 (582,137) 79.65% RECYCLING FUND 231,700 20,209 204,221 (27,479) 88.14% STORM WATER UTILITY 175,000 12,778 128,560 (46,440) 73.46% INVESTMENTS (Net of Ex) 1,971 1,971 1,971 401 *I 61 -2683- -- Explanations of Actual Revenues to Budget as of 10/31/09 • A We received a portion of the first tax payment in June, the remainder of the first payment was received in July. The second property tax settlement will be received in December. Taxes are at 48.7% of budget, excluding the impact of MVHC unallotment. B Business Licenses are well over budget for this time of year because most of the liquor license revenue was received in June with a few items trickling in during July. Liquor license revenue makes up most of the revenue in this line item. The only change in October was a receipt for a tree license. C Non - Business licenses and permits are quite low for this time of year. Key items are as follows, Plan check fee (43.57 %), building permits (56.34°/x), electrical permits (163.94 %), plumbing permits (59.69 %), heating permits (29.33 %), dog /cat licenses (81.34 %), grading /excavating permits (85.75 %). D Intergovernmental Revenue to date includes safe & sober reimbursement (6,857), operation nightcap reimbursement (3,245), reimbursement from the BCA (114), as well as operation black cat reimbursements (11,375), post board training reimbursement (5,153) and MSA streets funding (30,000), PERA State Aid (3,030) and Police State Aid (87,765). The total percentage of revenue received so far is low because of a large portion of the budget was MVHC (180,000) which the city will not be receiving because of unallotment. E Charges for services is quite high for this time of year, however, that is because antenna leases (111.77 %) are paid at the beginning of the year for the whole year. Other minor revenue amounts included here are dog kennel fees (76.20 %), assessment search fees (980.00 %), dog pick up fees (17.50 %), and planning commission approval (22.00 %). F Court fines are low compared to budget for this time of year at about 62.69% (however they are given to us in the month after they are collected thus, we only have revenue through September included in this amount). Admin Citations are at 63.60% of the budgeted amount at the end of October and are expected to be short due to the change in legislation restricting the use of admin citations. G Street Lighting Fee revenue is over budget for this time of year, however, it has remained consistent through the year. H Franchise Fees are on budget for this time of year. Third quarter franchise fees were collected in October. The equipment certificates were sold for 2009 and the proceeds were received in June. J Charges to Other Departments is low for this time of year. Photocopies are charged back to departments monthly, and postage is charged quarterly. The first three quarters of postage charges have been reflected here. • K There has been no revenue related to park dedication fees. L The other revenue receipts include refunds and reimbursements of $54,466 which is made up of a reimbursement from the Hennepin county drug task force (30,000), reimbursement of the Crosswalk officer from Westonka Schools (5,700), reimbursement from IKM for public works employees' hours worked (8,307), reimbursement from an insurance company for a light pole (8,243) and reimbursement for police detail at the OLL Blast and Fletchers (650, and 1,379, respectively). The remainder of miscellaneous revenues consists of admin charges to IKM ($22,500), accident report charges ($760), proceeds on sale of fixed assets ($9100), depot rental ($4,900), cemetery lot charges ($3,850), and interest earnings ($16,684). • CITY OF MOUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT October 2009 83,33% October 2009 YTD PERCENT BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED GENERAL FUND Service Fund Council 81,336 7,620 58,709 22,627 72.18 % A Promotions 73,848 - 17,400 56,448 23.56% B City Manager /Clerk 356,533 26,579 266,530 90,003 74.76% c Elections 3,155 - 831 2,324 26.34% D Finance 345,337 22,745 253,038 92,299 73.27% E Assessing 96,650 6 91,748 4,902 94.93% F Legal 140,533 10,235 90,426 50,107 64.35% G City Hall Building & Sry 115,604 7,289 81,602 34,002 70.59% H Computer 62,800 15,251 19,833 42,967 31.58% Police 2,002,880 123,465 1,547,021 455,859 77.24% J MEMO: Police Reimb. (54,000) (850) (53,098) (902) 98.33% K Emergency Prepardene 7,600 25 13,176 (5,576) 173.37% L Planning /Inspections 439,466 30,237 249,026 190,440 56.67% M Streets 849,994 48,054 601,830 248,164 70.80% N Parks 502,830 50,751 418,072 84,758 83.14%o Park Dedication Fees - - 6,656 (6,656) #DIV /01 P Cemetery 11,123 - 8,759 2,364 78.75% Q Recreation 5,000 - 3,106 1,894 62.12% R Transfers 506,453 42,204 422,040 84 83.33%s Cable TV 45,230 11,180 33,797 11,433 74.72% T Contingencies (43,300) 647 31,413 (74,713) - 72.55% u GENERAL FUND TOTAL 5,603,072 396,413 4,215,013 1,388,059 75.23% Area Fire Service Fund 1,038,710 143,766 871,325 167,385 Dock Fund 221,630 9,991 136,298 85,332 HRA Fund 35,250 1,622 23,745 11,505 Capital Projects 1,672 1,251,888 3,871,991 - 3,870,319 Parking Deck 1 35,250 0 3,199 32,051 TIF 1 -2 Downtown Moun - 0 0 0 TIF 1 -3 MHR - 4,693 174,792 - 174,792 Water Fund 1,373,922 40,936 1,201,012 172,910 Sewer Fund 1,585,771 95,448 1,373,561 212,210 Liquor Fund 586,884 38,588 450,725 136,159 Recycling Fund 241,448 18,352 170,090 71,358 Storm Water Utility 294,641 158,805 381,844 - 87,203 83.89% 61.50% 67.36% 87.41% 86.62% 76.80% 70.45% 129.60% 91 • -2685- Explanations of Actual Expenses to Budaet as of 10131/09 A Council expenses are under budget as of the end of October primarilly due to legal notice publications (24.45 %), miscellaneous expense (40.77 %) and dues /subscriptions (57.34 %). B Promotions is well under budget because of the amount budgeted for the senior trust account and has not • been spent. Payments were made for Phelps Bay milfoil treatment as well spirit of the lakes festival sponsorship. C City Manager /Clerk is under budget due to duplicating and copies (68.45 %), telephone (66.37 %), and postage (36.09 %). Dues & subscriptions is over budget at 130.42% as of the end of October. D Elections is under budget as of the end of September. There have been minimal expenses mainly due to postage and repairs & maintenance. E Finance is under budget at the end of October due to office supplies (34.43 %), salaries & related benefits ( -70 %) being under budget for this time of year due to the vacation purchase plan and allocating a portion of salary to the HRA. Althought these items are under budget, other items such as dues & subscriptions (143.33 %) and conferences & training (413.83 %) are well over budget. F Assessing is well over budget because Hennepin County was paid their 2009 assessing fees in July. Other charges include minimal charges for copies and postage. G In total legal expenses is well under budget at the end of October. Legal fees are at 111 % in total, however professional services (35.61 %) and board of prisoners (64.35 %) are both well under budget. H City hall building and services is well under budget as of the end of October. Repair & Maintenance supply (23.99 %), electirc utilities (70.87 %), building repairs (15.04 %) and repairs & maintenance (56.44 %) are all under budget, wereas other contractual services (141.86 %) and janitorial services (88.11 %) are over budget for this time of year. I Computer is well under budget at the end of October because the server project has just started. There are only minimal expenses for labor and operating supplies at this time. The majority of the amount expensed in October was a required down payment on the server project. J Police expenses are slightly under budget as of the end of October. Items under budget include office supplies (43.22 %), motor fuels (45.18 %), phones (68.38 %), other rentals (60.28 %) and janitorial services (33.29 %). Items which are over budget include dues & subscriptions (123.36 %), conferences & training (138.52 %), other contractual services (112.42 %) and capital outlay (93.64 %). The new squad car that was budgeted for capital outlay was purchased in July. K Police Reimbursements to date include drug task force yearly reimbursement (30,000), operation nightcap (3,245), safe & sober reimbursement (6,857), post board training reimbursement (5,153), Westonka schools crosswalk reimbursement (5,700), reimbursement for police security at the OLL Blast event (650) and Matchers (1,379), and reimbursement from the BCA (114). • L Emergency prepardeness is over budget because the majority of expense related to Operation Black Cat being coded here. However, these expenses have been reimbursed. The total reimbursement for black cat was 13,143. The only expense items not related to black cat includes minimal expense for siren maintenance, electricity for the sirens, office & operating supplies, association dues and conference expense. M Planning and inspections is well under its budget due to building inspection fees (40.74 %), professional services (6.33 %), other contractual services (45.67 %) and phone (75.26 %) being under budget for this time of year. The only item over the budgeted amout for this time of year is conferences & training (132.07 %). The storage files which were in the capital outlay budget were also purchased and paid for in August, thus capital outlay Is at 97.23% as of the end of October. Streets are under budget at the end of September. Items under budget include operating supplies (7.83 %), motor fuels (42.00 %), repair and maintenance supply (11.52 %), shop materials (50.22 %), and capital outlay (43.22 %). Items over budget include concrete sand (429.67 %), machinery & equipment repairs & maintenance (97.22 %), street maintenance materials (105.79 %), conferences & training (125.26 %), other contractual services (98.62 %). Streets should come in at about 90% of budget at the end of the year given the savings in the two early retirements at the start of the year. O Parks is on budget for this time of year. Items under budget include motor fuels (43.37 %), electric (20.55 %), repair and maintenance (54.81 %), other eqipment repairs (26.18 %), gas (48.11 %), garbage (33.32 %), building repair (14.39 %) and conferences & training (20.59 %). Items over budget for this time of year are office supplies (99.26 %), operating supplies (188.24 %), landscape material (124.91 %), machinery and equipment repair & maint. (114.16 %), legal notices (268.29 %), medical services (166.96°/x) and tree removal (138.55 %). All of the allocations from parks to the docks and cemetery funds were made in July with the exception of the part-time salary allocation to docks which will be calculated closer toward the end of the year. P There were no funds used in October, however in September there were funds expended for the wiring and camera installation at the skate park. Q Cemetery expense is slightly under budget for this time of year, however the yearly allocation of part-time salary and the related payroll expenses (PERA, HCSP) from the parks department were already made during July. As for other expenses, repair and maintenance is at 43.36% of budget at the end QfSeptember and landscape material is at 31.95 %. R During September there was expense for other contractual services and capital outlay related to the installation of the skate park cameras and tree removal from the skate park. There was no expense charged to recreation in October. • S Transfers are on budget. T Cable TV is on budget because it is paid quarterly. The first quarterly payment was made in May, the second was paid in July, and the third quarter payment was paid out at the beginning of October. Expense for contingencies through October consist of fees for professional services for labor relations and mediation as well as miscellaneous expense for mowing various properties in the city and a large expense for abatement. The mowing charges will be billed and assessed to the owners of the respective properties. • i • Mound Fire Department Fire Commission Meeting Wednesday November 18, 2009 11:00 a.m. —1:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Hot Topics - Review and Important 2009 Strategic Plan Initiatives • Fire Commission, City Manager and support of Strategic Plan • Firefighter Staffing and Organizational - update • Apparatus Information and Efficiency Plan - update (truck replacement plan) • MFD Relief Association Pension Plan Study *I 2. Financial and Budgets • 2009 and 2010 Cost Controls and Cost Savings Initiatives - review • 2010 MFD Budget — overview and comparison • Important Budget considerations for the Future o MFD Relief Association Pension Fund o Apparatus Replacement and Fund Balance • 2010 Contribution by City — Fire Formula results • 3. Other • Fire Services Contract - updating, improving, and clarifying issues • The Duty Officer and /or Duty Crew study (evaluation of feasibility) 4. Adjourn FA -2687- U1 Mound Fire Department March 2009 Goals and Strategic Plan Initiatives (for Fire Chief Greg Pederson) I. Personnel / People a. Increase firefighter staff to 40 members b. Complete comprehensive and diversified training of firefighters c. Implementation of "Duty Officers" d. Research feasibility of "Duty Crew" e. Maintain volunteer firefighter commitment f. Reorganize department officers structure II. Budget and Financial Management a. Develop a long term financial plan for existing station #1 b. Complete a cost analysis & budget for Minnetrista fire station c. Develop a operations /financial plan for a two fire station operation d. Evaluate existing Fire Contract Formula and change as needed Restructure and implement New Fire Contract formula for all Pursue other funding options i.e. grant money g. Establish hourly rates for firefighter staff and apparatus III. Equipment and Supplies a. Rethink, plan and budget apparatus replacement program b. Implement apparatus replacement plan cost saving initiatives b. Continue to do annual replacement of essential safety equipment c. Implement purchasing and cost control plan IV. Facility a. Maintain existing facility b. Consider other facility needs i.e. Minnetrista c. Work on final closeout of Mound P.S. Facility project V. Fire Prevention and Inspection a. Implement comprehensive fire inspection program b. Focus on Fire Code Services and Enforcement tegic Plan Initiative - Fire Commission dated 03/22/09 Status Completed in 2004/05 - ongoing Completed in 2005 - ongoing Implemented part -time 2005 Incomplete - not implemented yet Completed, but ongoing Completed in 2004/05 Completed for Station #1 in 2005 Completed proposal Minnetrista 2006 Completed for Station #1 & 2 in 2006 Completed in 2006 Completed in 2006 Ongoing work in progress (grant list) Completed in 2006 Revised plan in 2006 - WIP Implemented in 2006 with more in 2009 Ongoing Implemented in 2005 - delegated some responsibilities Ongoing Project Plan /Budget complete 2006 Project complete - slightly under budget - closeout pending Started in 2005, strong active program Ongoing suucessful project Chief 1 1 Chief 2 2 Dist. Chief 3 Dist. Chief 4 Captain 12 5 Captain 11 6 7 8 Captain 15 9 10 11 12 13 Lieut. 12 14 15 16 17 Captain 14 18 Lieut. 11 19 Fire Marshal 20 21 Lieut. 14 22 Lieut. 15 23 24 25 Lieut. 16 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Probationary 41 Probationary 42 Probationary 43 Probationary 44 MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT Seniority List *I NAME _ _ START DATE EQUIP. # GREG PEDERSON 2/3/1975 18 JEFF ANDERSEN 9/221980 31 Over 20 years RICK WILLIAMS 11/7/1983 22 GREG PALM 2/6/1984 15 TIM PALM 5/1/1989 17 KEVIN SIPPRELL 3/5/1990 20 15 - 20 years DAN GRADY 12/3/1990 9 EDDIE VANECEK 11/4/1991 34 DENNIS WOYTCKE 3/2/1992 24 PAUL BABB 9/13/1993 28 CHRIS POUNDER 9/13/1993 36 BOB CRAWFORD 3/21/1994 6 JASON MAAS 5/2/1994 32 JOHN LARSON 3/6/1995 5 10 -15 years RICH ROGERS 10/16/1995 19 ROGER KRYCK 1214/1995 27 BRUCE GUSTAFSON 2/5 /1996 11 MATT HENTGES 5/6/1996 14 MATT JAKUBIK 11/17/1997 37 TONY MYERS 5/4/1998 33 DARREN POIKONEN 12/19/1998 30 KEVIN FLAIL 4/19/1999 7 BRIAN BERENT 4/24/2000 1 5-10 years STEVEN HENKELS 9/10/2001 2 military leave 13-14 months JIM CASEY 11/412002 4 workers comp 12 months MIKE MCCARVILLE 1/6/2003 35 JOSH CLEMONS 5/10/2004 23 MIKE FOLEY 5/10/2004 16 PAUL JOLICOEUR 5/10/2004 39 MARK LEE 5/10/2004 40 DERAK ANDING 7/26/2004 3 JASON RICE 7/26/2004 42 ANDY DRILLING 5/20/2006 25 Under 5 years BEN FOSTER 5/20/2006 29 BEN GOTTSCHALK 5/20/2006 26 TONY BOLDON 11/5/2007 12 BRYAN GORMAN 11/5/2007 21 MATT MORRIS 11/5/2007 44 JEREMY SPADER 11/5/2007 45 MATT SVIHEL 11/5/2007 46 AARON CRANDALL 10/5/2009 8 JEFF HARRISON 10/5/2009 10. SHAWN HAYES 10/512009 38 MIKE SHEPHERD 10/5/2009 41 01 • Seniority List 072809.xls _ _ 2689- • • Mound Volunteer Fire Department 2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364 2009 Fire Officers and Companies Fire Chief: Greg Pederson District Chief 11: Rick Williams Medical Director: Kevin Sipprel) Engine Co . 1 (18,24,25) N cfl 0 Assistant Chief: Jeff Andersen District Chief 21: Greg Palm Fire investigator: Tony Myers Engine Co. 2 (29,33,35) • Deputy Fire Marshall: Tony Myers Training Officer: Matt Jakubik Truck - Ladder Co. (17,26) F.M. 1 Tony Myers Capt. 14 Matt Hentges Capt. 15 Dennis Woytcke Lt. 15 Brian Berent Lt. 14 Kevin Flaig Lt. 12 John Larson Dan Grady . Ed Vanecek Ben Gottschalk Paul Babb Rich Rogers Matt Svihel Bob Crawford Roger Kryck AarcnCrad�it Jim Casey Bruce Gustafson 9 larr�r Jason Rice Steve Henkels Shawn Mike Foley Bryan Gorman Mikes Rescue Co. 1 (19, 34, new) Heavy - Special Rescue Co. (22,28,37) Capt. 11 Kevin Sipprell Capt. 12 Tim Palm Lt. 11 Matt Jakubik Lt.16 Mike McCarville Jason Maas Chris Pounder Darren Poikonen Derak Anding Josh Clemons Andy Drilling Paul Jolicoeur Ben Foster Mark Lee Tony Bolden 10/13/09 Jeremy Spader Matt Morris CITY OF MOUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Your File Name: CIP2010 Prepared By: G. Pederson FUND Fire Apparatus Replacement Fund PROD. N o.: Fire 001 DEPARTMENT Fire Department LEVEL: 1 - Critical PROJECT TITLE: Fire Truck Replacement Program PAGE NO.: 1 of 4 SCHEDULE START: 2007 SCHEDULE COMPLETION.: On -going DESCRIPTION & LOCATION Replacement program that replaces old obsolete fire apparatus with new and better fire apparatus PURPOSE & JUSTIFICATION Continue to replace fire trucks to meet the needs of the community and to improve department capabilities FUNDING: By all contract fire service cities including Mound. Approximately 55 - 60 % funded by the city of Mound COST CATEGORY 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 TOTAL 2013 -2018 1 ; 1 ankgr" track >3t)0 , 'QaL , $170,000.00 $0.00 2 ,;7nker.fum , Ir2�f10 a. $28,400.00 $28,400.00 $28,400.00 $84,000.00 $170,400.00 Whee l er utillty $8,000.00 $8,000.00 5} Etnorg. ire $3,900.00 $3,900.00 $3,900.00 $11,700.00 $23,400.00 6) Fire Pumper 1500GPM $290,000.00 7) Heavy Rescue Utility $205,000.00 Total Expend $170,000.00 $8,000.00 $0.00 $32,300.00 $32,300.00 $32,300.00 $103,700.00 $968,800.00 Truck Fund Contribution $44,000.00 $39,000.00 $47,000.00 $16,985.00 $22,000.00 $24,000.00 $192,985.00 Truck Fund Balance $151,713.001 $168,698.001 $1190,698.001 $214,698.00 1 N C� CO 10/6/2004 - updated November 2009 Capital Improvement -Fire Apparatus - Budget Financial • • 1 2020 or beyond 2019 or beyond • N N • Catezory/Descrintion *Budget Total 2009 •` ' Operating Expenses • Pension Contribution — Relief Assn. • Building Rental for Debt Service (HRA) 'Operating Expenses (from above) • Salaries for all Staff (all inclusive) • Operations and Supplies • Capital Outlay November 2009 i s Mound Fire Department November 2009 2009 vs. 2010 Bu 2009 Budget $1,038,710.00 $ 613,434.00 $ 133,500.00 $ 291,776.00 dget and Expenses 2010 Budget $1,052,805.00 $ 613,658.00 $ 137,600.00 $ 301,547.00 $ amount change $14,095.00 $ 224.00 $ 4,100.00 $ 9,771.00 % change 1.36 .03 3.07 3.35 $ 613,434.00 $ 613,658.00 $ 224.00 .03 $ 338,980.00 $ 345,938.00 $ 6958.00 2.05 $ 200,267.00 $ 192,705.00 -$7,562.00 - 3.78 $ 74,187.00 $ 75,015.00 $ 828.00 1.12 ol I'M790 U. 42W 000 12,6* 300 7VI 21 �. �W 7,47,9 4AS tw 6�146 13,001 M.429 ASO 14 548 3,'559 Adaz 1 po* f3,844: �flGeiiaV '. 2"SM � i 84a X00`: Soo • Worm -2693- - 11�.404, 2Z % IVA= S:tO% 17X0 3,03% 97,7150 2.50W $30 ZAINO zew 47,.28"/o *$14 8;00% 2A OD A.0( ft am% 200: Boo 0.00% PAO it000 -.4,4M 4, 411 4* 040* 14;506 14505 0: M 0 /0 ol I'M790 U. 42W 000 12,6* 300 7VI 21 �. �W 7,47,9 4AS tw 6�146 13,001 M.429 ASO 14 548 3,'559 Adaz 1 po* f3,844: �flGeiiaV '. 2"SM � i 84a X00`: Soo • Worm -2693- • t;PMR "O NA -7K 4x # k. 32. TEMPRONEs 4 M 4.6% 4W 4,20 4VI /c 32 F t7 R 6VI 837. 8(X? 6_ '3 ?A v RS" ; 6 AN INS gx0a S.,{)t3t3 4, - 4240-JA 333 4 P I t P 0 00 4 00 W -aW% ISO t7 t'F'YW 7 Sl °,W*.M1.. .` 7,600 0 ` A 4'7i •477`:t�i7 n ��F,`at ;t FiJ� dKhfT'✓.V' y4yy7 ii�P�1 ^3 4F K C4 1L 17�, 110 e WMWIS '�sP"fY�sti7; a f a 5 yti7@T:: a 3�141' Fia410% 1* 200 6i Asi; 1� • 4. 4�T{�aPPA� �fy,�rt F7tR747Si!�4L'�. ti4 a � ..,a Sfti7yPLiYY ' v�7+3giyT /a 44xR6!a./' 03 38% 440 jolpOIANYU& i 3. 3;M SAW f O ; o a% ; AM Im 4,U DV A.f 2: 4 18;; }: 4100 3, 434 >. �' OWk ago Inumb :.RssJi^Ni.:�.7a 3', ?SYYYi.7 A" 74 % 'i7F:i »g .•aJ'lWC1ti V.�'S7V+3.' 'T "`:i�.i'7O %, 2 53 2;(4 '7i. 3�'z'i!4'Iid.�i 4 %�' Y�:: ;.kf i7si7ifc? 'Yr ^�:a:tldv. " " � TOM, WIN AIMAS USA 'T -2694- October 13, 2009 0 Mound Fire Contract Issues or Improvements: Regarding the Termination clause: ■ Termination provision needs,review and is not very fair to Mound or others. Should be revisited for all parties benefit and modified in contract. Regarding the fire formula and the building: • Are all four factors in the rolling average or just the property values? • Does the rolling average apply to everything? Or just the building? • Put the rolling average into the contract. • Possibly separate the formula page from contract and add as addendum Regarding the Fire Station (building): • What is the arrangement with the HRA? Who owns the building at the end of the payments? • Is it debt service or rent, should be clarified in contract? • Once the building is paid off, can we assume costs will reduce ?? • What happens to cities' payments if refinancing takes place? o Any guarantee payments will not go up ?? • Regarding the Fire Budget: ■ Need more than 10 days to respond to proposed capital expenditures, like 60. Regarding major capital purchases and other decisions: • Need more influence over what happens to the Capital Outlay Fund. • Would like the capital fund and budget to have a more formal approval or acceptance process. • Can we define the fire commission and its purpose? __ -2695- PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES • Thursday, November 12, 2009 Present: Chair Mike Wilkus, Commissioners Josh Dunwoody, Todd Peterson, Jack Evans, Council Representative Heidi Gesch Excused: Commissioners Mark Lee, Sue Pilling Others Present: Park Superintendent Jim Fackler, Administrative Assistant Vicki Weber Chair Wilkus called meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Agenda: Wilkus stated the wood signs at some of the parks have started to rot. Discussion followed on the city's sign shop manufacturing signs for the smaller parks. The cost is approximately $70.00 per sign. Fackler stated he will plan to have 10 signs made each year for the next two years at a cost of $700.00 each year. Park improvements will be discussed at the March, 2010 commission meeting. Fackler stated the expenditure for the Seton Park Play Structure was approved by the City Council with up to 30K coming out of the park dedication fund. The structure will be ordered from GameTime for installation in the spring. Removal of the existing play structure has begun. Gesch asked if the neighborhood has been contacted to help out financially and /or for volunteer help. • 5. Review: Mowing Contract -2696- Fackler stated the council requested staff to look at cost of contracting the City's • mowing services. Information was gathered and presented to the Council, and at this time we will continue to hire seasonal staff for summer mowing and park maintenance. 6. Review: Calendar Added to the January, 2010 calendar will be discussions on Adopt -A -Green space and website revisions, and in March, 2010, discussion on Play Structure upgrades will be added to the calendar. 7. Reports: Council Representative Gesch stated the Seton Play Structure was approved by the City Council, and in the following budget year the commission should request money be budgeting in the operating fund for park upgrades. The Public Lands Permit to install an Invisible fence on Aberdeen w approved. Gesch would like to discuss meeting over the summer months a ' ossibly have work sessions at neighborhood parks, and invite neighbors to Park Superintendent Fackler stated th ow obile c ssing at Cottonwood Lane was approved. Staff met with Thr ers Park District regarding the construction of the crossing. The ssing 'I be a mat system constructed with 2x4s to protect the asphalt surfac ra Wilkus stated information par section of our website is minimal and • asked if that can be revi a discussed at the January meeting. MOTION to adjourn by D by Peterson. Meeting adjourned at 8:01 p.m. • 2 2697- 0 [7 • MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION November 17, 2009 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Michael welcomed the public and called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Those present: Chair Geoff Michael; Commissioners: Suzanne Claywell, Becky Glister, Michael Paulsen, Jackie Peters, Eva Stevens, Stephen Ward and Greg Skinner. Absent: Ory Burma; Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Consultant Planner Rita Trapp and Recording Secretary Jill Norlander. The following individuals were present: Dave Kaiser (18 Shorewood La), Kester Batchelor (2933 Cambridge), Todd Landon (1738 Av La), Jeff Danberry (3545 Ivy PI), Anna Weber (2305 Commerce Blvd), Brian B n yzata), Bruce & Judy McKeeman (1744 Avocet La) MOTION by Glister, second by St MTI o ro the minutes of the October 6, 2009 Planning Commission meeting—A, c ied unanimously. MOTION by Glister, seco II, to approve the minutes of the October 20, 2009 Planning Comm iss meet g. OTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Glister, seconded by Ward, to approve the agenda as proposed. MOTION carried unanimously. BOARD OF APPEALS Woodlyn Ridge — Request for extension of approvals Smith introduced the request. Brian Benson (640 Park St E, Wayzata) explained why an extension would make a difference. They are featuring a more reasonable product with lots at a lower price. MOTION by Paulsen, seconded by Stevens, to approve Staffs recommendation. MOTION carried unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 2009 PLANNING CASE NO. 09-15A VARIANCE FOR FRONT SETBACK • 1744 AVOCET LANE BRUCE & JUDY McKEEMAN Smith introduced the case and reviewed the history of the parcel: -- Included in - the - discussion was an explanation of the hardcover issue. In response to Michael's question, Smith indicated that the nonconforming condition is the setback. The deck is already there but changing to an enclosed porch increases the bulk. Bruce McKeeman (1744 Avocet Lane) indicated their intention to redo their driveway with impervious pavers to correct the hardcover issue. A variance for the original deck was approved in the 90's; a building permit for the upper /lower deck was issued in 2002. They request approval for stability of the front corner, as well as aesthetics of the neighborhood. Bob Pierce (1741 Bluebird Lane) pointed out the omis "hs from the hardcover calculations on the building permit and variance rest nd also cited other neighborhood issues. Smith reviewed a document from survey ark nberg explaining the hardcover calculations and also discussed Staffs an h includes the inclusion of approximately 86 SF of additional ov Mr. Pierce expressed doubt re a er's proposed driveway alterations.. Smith explained the City' a rding pervious paver design and installation procedures including the gine g nd certification which are required in that process. Claywell asked about the value of stability of the structure. It was commented that the stability would not be compromised. MOTION by Michael, seconded by Peters, to approve the variance request. Discussion Michael felt the unusable leftover deck is not a great improvement for the neighborhood to see. Peters agreed and added that, as long as the deck line is already there, it's not unreasonable. Skinner said hardship is not there and it could be redesigned to fit. Stevens asked for and received clarification that the owner built the existing load - bearing wall in 2002. • -2699- Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 2009 • MOTION carried. Voting for: Peters, Stevens, Claywell, Ward, Michael Voting against: Paulsen, Skinner, Glister -" -- - - - - -- Cf�atr Mi�heet offered the findings fact in favor - the variance. _ - - _ _ - - - - -- . - - - - -- - continuation of a straight/same line; and - modification of the deck/porch area creates useless space. Michael wanted to emphasize that the work that needs to be done needs to be done in a timely matter. Smith asked for permission to prepare a resolution ahead of the Council meeting based on the Planning Commission's vote in favor if deemed appropriate following discussion with the City Attorney. The Commission requested the item not be on the consent agenda and advised that they would not be opposed to preparation of a draft resolution for Council consideration if deemed acceptable. . PLANNING CASE NO. 09 -16 VARIANCE FO SETBACK 1890 SHOREWOOD LANE SANDRA & BULL K Jeff Danberry (Contractor) re ted that cutting back the depth is not a problem. Doug Kaiser (1880 Shorewood Lane) was concerned that he loses all his view of Shorewood Lane. He didn't see that the driveway steepness was a problem. Skinner asked what he meant by "view ". Kaiser indicated that the view from his kitchen and kitchen eating area would be nothing but garage wall. MOTION by Paulsen, seconded by Stevens, to approve Staffs recommendation with a minimum of 18 feet from curb at the closest point. MOTION carried. Voting for: Claywell, Skinner, Ward, Stevens, Michael, Peters, Paulsen Voting against: Glister Planning Commissioner Glister stated that the project could be reworked. • OLD / NEW BUSINESS _2700 -__ _ _ Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 2009 a. Review of property owner request to extend variance for new house at 2933 • Cambridge Lane -- - Staff- remerfted - z - review of d that Kester Batchelor; owner of the property, was present at the meeting. MOTION by Ward, seconded by Glister, to approve Staffs recommendation. MOTION carried unanimously. b. 2009 Planning Commission term expirations update Deadline for applications is Friday, November 20 th . c. Staff /Council report and update Staff suggested possible review of the current code and riance regulations to see if additional streamlining measures could be implement commented on article included as information regarding City of Independence wh o ' g at their setback/variance regulations. - Staff is working on a mast Ian d wayfinding signage in Auditor's Road District with which is being funded under grant in cooperation with Hennepin County; sign permitting application and review by Planning Commission forthcoming. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Michael, second by Ward, to adjourn seconded and carried by affirmation at 9:29 p.m. Chair Geoff Michael Attest, Planning Secretary -2701- I* I* • Timothy P. Hughes 1780 Lake Lucy Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Wednesday, November 4, 2009 James E. Kurtz Chief of Police Mound Police Department 2415 Wilshire Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Dear Chief Kurtz, Please accept this letter of formal resignation from my position(s) of Reserve Officer and Part-Time Community Service Officer, effective Saturday, November 21, 2009. I feel very fortunate to have been associated with the Mound Police Department and this community for the previous five years. My experiences and training have been quite beneficial and I leave with many pleasant memories. To have worked amongst such a professional, committed and dedicated team of individuals has been an honor. I wish both you and the department, along with the entire city staff and this fine community, the very best success moving forward. Timothy P. Hughes Reserve Officer & P.T. Community Service Officer -2702- Mediacom Theresa Sunde • Community Relations Coordinator Via LISPS November 17, 2009 Dear Community Officials: Effective on or around December 17, 2009, Mediacom Communications will be making the following changes to the channel line up in the Lake Minnetonka areas: QVC from Broadcast Basic channel 14 to Broadcast Basic 18 HSN from Basic channel 18 to Digital Broadcast Basic 14 A reminder that Digital Broadcast Basic channels are included at no extra charge • with Broadcast Basic and Family Cable service. However, a TV with a digital QAM tuner or a Mediacom Digital Converter is needed on each TV to receive the digital broadcast basic channels. Questions regarding this,letter can be directed to my email at tsunde(a)-mediacomcc.com Cordially, Theresa Sunde Mediacom Communications Corporation • 1504 2 °a Street SE • Waseca, MN 56093 • 507- 835 -2356 • Fax 507- 835 -4567 -2703-