The URL can be used to link to this page

2013-03-26 CC Agenda PacketPLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 2013 - 7:00 PM REGULAR MEETING MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *Consent&enda: 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 Open meeting 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approve agenda, with any amendments 4. *Consent Agenda *A. Approve payment of claims 604 -619 *B. Approve minutes: March 12, 2013 regular meeting 620 -622 *C. Approve Public Gathering Permit for for WeCAN for "Wheels for Meals" 623 bike marathon, benefiting Meals on Wheels Program: Mayl8, 2013 *D. Approve Resolution Authorizing Extension of Agreement with Hennepin 624 -636 County for Property Assessment Services *E. Approve Resolution Approving Expansion Permit and Variance for 5346 637 -672 Piper Road *F Approve DCC Commission Appointment — Derrick Hentz 672B 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. (Limit to 3 minutes per speaker) 6. Sarah Smith, Comm Dev Dir, with Planning Commission Recommendations 673 -715 Discussion/action on Variance and Expansion Permit Applications House remodel /Garage addition at 1571 Finch Lane Applicant: Darren Kahmeyer Recommendation: Approval for Expansion Permit Recommendation: Denial for Variance Kandis Hanson, City Manager, requesting action on Ordinances Amending 716 -720 Chapter 78 of the Mound City Code as it relates to Waterways: A. Section 78 -122 Licenses — Villa Slip Priority 721 B. Section 78 -101 Application Procedure — One -time exemption for 722 non - abutters who miss the application deadline PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 8. Kandis Hanson, City Manager, requesting action on Resolution Amending Resolution 724 No. 12 -107 Adopting Fee Schedule 9. Information/Miscellaneous A. Comments /reports from Councilmembers /City Manager B. Minutes: Docks and Commons Comm 03/21/13 (draft) 725 -727 C. Reports: Finance Dept — Feb 2013 728 -730 D. Correspondence: 10. Adjourn Note., 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 ofMound web site. nvww.citvo / mound com. c • • • RMITY1119.1m. 2013 031913UBPOST $ 355.60 2013 032613CITY $ 226,632.81 2013 032613HWS $ 64,406.39 TOTAL CLAIMS 291,394.80 -604- S: \FINANCE DEPT\AP \CITY COUNCIL CLAIMS LISTING 2013.xlsx 3 -26 -13 MOUND, MN Payments Current Period: March 2013 Batch Name 031913UBPOST Payment Computer Dollar Amt $355.60 Posted Refer 103 MOUND POST OFFICE Ck# 043256 3/1912013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -322 Postage MARCH 2013 - UTILITY BILLING POSTAGE Invoice 03 -2013 3/19/2013 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -322 Postage MARCH 2013 - UTILITY BILLING POSTAGE Invoice 03 -2013 3/1912013 Transaction Date 3/19/2013 Due 0 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 602 SEWER FUND $177.80 601 WATER FUND $177.80 $355.60 Pre - Written Check $355.60 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $0.00 Total $355.60 -605- 03/22/13 8:14 AM Page 1 $177.80 $177.80 $355.60 MOUND, MN Payments 03/22/13 8:16 AM Page 1 Current Period: March 2013 Batch Name 032613CITY User Dollar Amt $226,632.81 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $226,632.81 $0.00 In Balance Refer 82 ALPHA RUG AND CARPET CLEANI _ Cash Payment E 101- 49999 -430 Miscellaneous CARPET CLEANING AT FORMER POLICE $855.00 STATION OFFICES Invoice 2828 3/13/2013 Project CH2O13 Transaction Date 3/2612013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $855.00 Refer 85 ASPEN EMBROIDERYAND DESIG _ Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms EMBROIDERY OF MOUND LOGO ON 6 POLO $64.13 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 SHIRTS - RAY HANSON Invoice 03062013 3/6/2013 Project 13 -3 $682.50 Transaction Date 3126/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total W,,..,»,. ......m„�.�.,......w�..�„.�veF. $64.13 Refer 86 ASPEN EMBROIDERY AND DESIG e.,_.....,_ $752.50 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms EMBROIDERY OF MOUND LOGO ON 2 $25.65 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -300 Professional Srvs COATS - JACOB STEWART $250.00 Invoice 03042013 3/4/2013 2/15 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $25.65 Refer BERRY COFFEE COMPANY WATER SUPPLY EMERGENCY $71.00 Cash Payment E 222- 42260 -418 Other Rentals FIRE DEPT COFFEE MACHINE LEASE - MAR- $64.13 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 MAY Invoice 1078178 3/2/2013 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 1/19 TO 2/15 $71.00 Transaction Date 3126/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $64.13 Refer 88 BOLTON AND MENK, INCORPORA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 1/19 TO 2/15 $71.00 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -300 Professional Srvs GENERAL - LYNWOOD WM REPLACEMENT - $357.50 Cash Payment G 101 -23231 6301 Lynwood #10 -07, Wood 1/19 TO 2/15 $60.00 Invoice 02152013 2115/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -300 Professional Srvs GENERAL - MCES ISSUES - 1119 TO 2/15 $247.50 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 43100 -300 Professional Srvs ENGINEERING SERVICES - 1/19 TO 2/15 $682.50 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 675 - 49425 -300 Professional Srvs WCA ADMINISTRATION - 1/19 TO 2115 $752.50 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -300 Professional Srvs 2011 I &1 ANALYSIS /CIPP PROJECT - 1/19 TO $250.00 2/15 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -300 Professional Srvs WATER SUPPLY EMERGENCY $71.00 CONSERVATION - 1119 TO 2115 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23271 KAHMEYER -1571 FINCH -P DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 1/19 TO 2/15 $71.00 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23270 MCCALL - 5346 PIPER -PC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 1/19 TO 2/15 $71.00 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23231 6301 Lynwood #10 -07, Wood DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 1/19 TO 2/15 $60.00 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -300 Professional Srvs 2855 HALSTEAD PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT - $71.00 1/19 TO 2/15 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 •1• Cu L34 Cash Payment E 402 - 43120 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 401 -43101 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 401- 43127 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 675- 49425 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 401- 43112 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 675 - 49425 -500 Capital Outlay FA Invoice 02152013 2/1512013 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -500 Capital Outlay FA Invoice 02152013 2/1.5/2013 Cash Payment E 401 -43113 -303 Engineering Fees Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -500 Capital Outlay FA Invoice 02152013 2/15/201.3 Cash Payment E 401 - 43213 -303 Engineering Fees Invoice 02152013 2/1512013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -500 Capital Outlay FA Invoice 02152013 2/1512013 Cash Payment E 675 - 49425 -500 Capital Outlay FA Payments rrent Period: March 2013 MSA SYSTEM COORDINATION - 1/19 TO 2/1E MCES FLOW ISSUES - 1119 TO 2/15 2011 SW ISLAND AREA PROJECT - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1101 2011 HIGHLANDS ARE PROJECT - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1102 SURFACE WATER MGMT - 1/19 TO 2/15 2010 LIFT STATION - 1/19 TO 2/15 2011 LIFT STATION - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW1103 2012 STREET PROJECT - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1201 2012 STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1205 2012 LIFT STATION - 1/19 TO 2115 Project PW 1203 2013 STREET PROJECT - 1/19 TO 2115 Project PW 1301 2013 MCES &I GRANT PROJECT - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1306 WOODLYN RIDGE IMPROVEMENTS - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1305 2013 LIFT STATION - 1/19 TO 2/15 Project PW 1303 2013 STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - 1119 TO 2/15 03/22/13 8:16 AM Page 2 $497.00 $125.00 $2,884.00 $1,455.00 $1,097.50 $945.00 $138.00 $426.00 $142.00 $401.00 $80,776.00 $4,867.50 $4,910.00 $2,988.00 $495.50 Invoice 02152013 2/15/2013 Project PW 1304 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $104,781.50 Refer 90 CENTERPOINT ENERGY(MINNEG Cash Payment E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1/21 TO 2/19 - $911.64 4812 CUMBERLAND Invoice 03112013 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -383 Gas Utilities GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1/21 TO 2/19 - $987.95 5341 MAYWOOD Invoice 03112013 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -383 Gas Utilities Invoice 03112013 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -383 Gas Utilities Invoice 03112013 3/1112013 GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1/21 TO 2/19 - 5468 LYNWOOD Project 13 -3 GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1/21 TO 2/19 - 2135 COMMERCE -607- $1,777.54 $496.27 MOUND, MN 03/22/138:16 AM Page 3 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -383 Gas Utilities GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1/21 TO 2/19 - $563.66 2415 WILSHIRE (POLICE) Invoice 03112013 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 222- 42260 -383 Gas Utilities GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1/21 TO 2119 - $563.67 2415 WILSHIRE (FIRE) Invoice 03112013 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 45200 -383 Gas Utilities GAS SERVICE CHARGES - 1121 TO 2/19 - $236.05 5801 BARTLETT Invoice 03112013 3111/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,536.78 Refer 89 DUANE S 66 SERVICE _ Cash Payment E 101 - 42115 -210 Operating Supplies TIRE REPAIR - EMERGENCY MGMT $25.00 VEHICLE #949 Invoice 455565 3/13/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $25.00 Refer 106 FIRE INVESTIGATORS NATI ONAL.,.,,,..,.-. a..o,,,,. n...,:,., s,.:,.,.,.,....,...., �M .,.e�:.m,�.,,.M.W,,..,.a..,m Cash Payment E222-42260-433 Dues and Subscriptions 2013 MEMBERSHIP DUES -CERTIFIED FIRE $55.00 & EXPLOSION INVESTIGATOR - TONY MYERS Invoice 2013 5/1/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $55.00 Refer 80 FORTIER, JOHN- HYPOLITE DESIG Cash Payment E101 -49999 430 Miscellaneous PATCH, . SAND, PRIME & PAINT - SARAHS $332.00 OFFICE PRIOR TO KANDIS MOVING IN Invoice 03142013 3/14/2013 Project CH2O13 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $332.00 Refer 91 G &-K SERVICES Cash Payment Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services MAT SERVICE & BATHROOM SUPPLIES - $141.89 3/18 Invoice 1006422246 3/18/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -460 Janitorial Services MAT SERVICE - 3/11 $58.58 Invoice 1006411172 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -440 Other Contractual Servic MAT SERVICE - 2/18 $0.20 Invoice 1006377731X 2/1812013 Cash Payment E 101- 45200 -210 Operating Supplies PARKS SHOP SUPPLIES - 3/11 $61.63 Invoice 1006411178 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -218 Clothing and Uniforms PARKS CLOTHING - 3111 $40.76 Invoice 1006411178 3/1.1/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms PW CLOTHING - 3/11 $24.40 Invoice 1006411177 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms PW CLOTHING - 3/11 $24.80 Invoice 1006411177 3/1112013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms PW CLOTHING - 3/11 $35.59 Invoice 1006411177 3111/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials PW SHOP SUPPLIES - 3/11 $110.01 Invoice 1006411177 3/11/2013 Project 13 -3 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -460 Janitorial Services MAT SERVICE - 3/18 $58.58 Invoice 1006422242 3118/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $556.44 Refer 122 GCR/TDS TIRE CENTERS _ -608- MOUND, MN 03/22/138:16 AM Page 4 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -221 Equipment Parts TIRES FOR JOHN DEERE LOADER $7,111..33 Invoice 521 -13255 3/12/2013 Project 13 -3 2/6/2013 PO 24157 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7,111.33 Refer 116 GFOA NATIONAL Transaction Date 3/26/2013 w.....m Cash Payment E 101- 41500 -433 Dues and Subscriptions 2013 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS $170.00 ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP Invoice 0123003 212712013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $170.00 Refer 146 GOMAN, D.J. �.,. Cash Payment R 601 - 49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenu BALANCE OF OVERPAID UTILITY BILLING $51.47 ACCOUNT -2440 CHATEAU LN. Invoice 031913 3/19/2013 Transaction Date 3/20/2013 Refer 92 HECKSEL MACHINE SHOP _ Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 95441 2/6/2013 PO 24157 Cash Payment E 101- 45200 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 95520 2/28/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Refer 93 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATIO Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -418 Other Rentals Invoice 130238211 2/28/2013 Cash Payment E 222- 42260 -418 Other Rentals Invoice 130238133 2/2812013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Refer 95 HENNEPIN COUNTY SURVEY DIVI Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 03192013 3/19/2013 PO 22804 Transaction Date 3/2612013 Refer 94 HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYERS Cash Payment G 101 -23267 Adult Day Sew. PC #12 -22 Wells Fargo 10100 6 ROLL PINS - 1 /2 " -2" Total $51.47 $3.85 SHAFT, TUBE, PIPE, COUPLER & BEARINGS $203.28 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $207.13 PW RADIO LEASE & ADMINISTRATION FEE - FEB 2013 Project 13 -3 FIRE RADIO LEASE & ADMIN FEE - FEB 2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total AERIAL SURVEYING Wells Fargo 10100 $159.00 $537.50 $696.50 $622.97 Project 13 -3 Total $622.97 MAILING LABELS - ADULT DAY CARE @ 5200 MAYWOOD Invoice 2012 -85 12/10/2012 Cash Payment G 101 -23255 2125 Commerce - Animal Hos MAILING LABELS - WESTONKA ANIMAL HOSPITAL @ 2125 COMMERCE Invoice 2012 -84 12/10/2012 Cash Payment G 101 -23272 SALITERMAN: #13 -04 to #13 MAILING LABELS - VILLAS ON LAST LAKE 2ND ADDITION. Invoice 2013 -13 3/8/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23275 METCOUNCIL: 6270 WEST MAILING LABELS - MCES PROJECT @ 6270 WESTEDGE Invoice 2013 -14 3/13/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23274 AEROTRAVEL - 2630 COM MAILING LABELS - AEROTRAVEL PROJECT @ 2630 COMMERCE Invoice 2013 -16 3/18/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP lm�� .1• $35.00 $117.50 $55.00 $105.00 $87.50 $400.00 MOUND, MN 03/22/138:16 AM Page 5 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23270 MCCALL -5346 PIPER- PC PLANNING REVIEW OF 5346 PIPER ROAD Invoice 007 - 001 -58 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 42400 -300 Professional Srvs PLANNING SERVICES - 2/01 TO 2/28 Invoice 007- 001 -58 3/7/2013 3126/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23269 Jubilee Foods PC #12 -24 PREPARE 2/12 CITY COUNCIL PACKET E 101- 41500 -202 Duplicating and copying MATERIALS - CASE 12 -24 Invoice 007 - 005 -55 318/2013 Cash Payment Cash Payment G 101 -23271 KAHMEYER -1571 FINCH -P REVIEW & PREPARE MARCH PLANNING 3/4/2013 COMMISSION MEETING MATERIALS Invoice 007 - 005 -55 3/8/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -23272 SALITERMAN: #13 -04 to #13 REVIEW & DISCUSS PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SUBMITTALS Invoice 007 - 005 -55 3/812013 Cash Payment E 101- 42400 -300 Professional Srvs MILEAGE /TRAVEL FOR LOST LAKE MEETING Invoice 007- 005 -55 3/8/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $20.75 $643.25 $103.75 $145.25 $373.50 $16.95 $1,303.45 Refer 96 IDVILLE Cash Payment E 101 - 41920 -210 Operating Supplies PRINTER RIBBON FOR ID MAKING MACHINE $122.50 Invoice ML3109033 3/13/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $122.50 Refer 148 INFRATECH _ Cash Payment E 401 - 43112 -500 Capital Outlay FA CURED IN PLACE PIPE REPAIRS - JANUARY $17,920.00 Invoice PR13130A 212812013 Cash Payment E 401 -43112 -500 Capital Outlay FA 2013 Project PW 1201 CURED IN PLACE PIPE REPAIRS - $23,260.00 FEBRUARY 2013 Invoice PR13156 2/28/2013 Project PW1201 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $41,180.00 Refer--- � 121 /STATE TRUCK-CENTER.- ��",>.,. �,,.., n..,.. �..,„, �, �, a.. m, �„ �,,. �.,.,,:, �, „.,.,. �.» .,,... �. �. �.�...�.„„,„„,..m.��s,..,�.:�.� - -. T Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -404 Machinery/Equip Repairs DIAGNOSE AND CORRECT ABS WARNING $244.14 LIGHT ON FREIGHTLINER #312 Invoice R24103907001 3111/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $244.14 Refer 97 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -434 Conference & Training Invoice 180952 3/8/2013 PO 22805 Transaction Date 3126/2013 Refer 98 LOFFLER COMPANIES, INCORPO Cash Payment E 101- 41500 -202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 1534609 3/1/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 1535483 3/4/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 1535483 3/4/2013 SAFETY & LOSS CONTROL WORKSHOP - $20.00 CARLTON MOORE Project 13 -3 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $20.00 FINANCE DEPT COPIER B/W OVERAGE - $28.22 2/10 TO 3/09 COPY ROOM KONICA C652 - B1W $76.64 OVERAGE - 2/14 TO 3/13 COPY ROOM KONICA C652 - COLOR $27.30 OVERAGE - 2114 TO 3/13 MOUND, MN 03/22/138:16 AM Page 6 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 101- 49999 -430 Miscellaneous INSTALL NETWORK CABLES IN PS $675.04 BUILDING FOR CITY HALL MOVE Invoice CW20536 3/4/2013 Project CH2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $807.20 Refer 117 MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSON, L Cash Payment E 101- 49999 -300 Professional Si-vs Invoice 02282013 3/1/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Refer 99 METRO FIRE Cash Payment E 222- 42260 -219 Safety supplies LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES - 2/01 TO 2/28 Wells Fargo 10100 Total REGULATOR ASSEMBLY, FIREHAWK, SLIDE, & HOSE $212.40 $212.40 $2,030.52 Invoice 46639 3/6/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,030.52 Refer 100 MNSPECT Cash Payment E 101- 42400 -308 Building Inspection Fees FEBRUARY 2013 BUILDING INSPECTION FEES Invoice 6000 3/4/2013 Cash Payment R 101 - 42000 -32220 Electrical Permit Fee Invoice 6000 3/4/2013 Cash Payment G 101 -20800 Due to Other Governments Invoice 6000 3/4/2013 Transaction Date 3/2612013 Refer m. 101 MOUND FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIA_TIO a Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -124 Fire Pens Contrib FEBRUARY 2013 - ELECTRICAL PERMIT CREDIT FEBRUARY 2013 - STATE ELECTRICAL SURCHARGE CREDIT Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,778.17 - $202.00 - $90.00 $6,486.17 MARCH 2013 - FIRE RELIEF PENSION $12,98133 CONTRIBUTION Invoice 03 -2013 3/1/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 �, �„ �.,., �.,,,,.,,.,, ��„,,.,.. �, Wells Fargo 10100 Total �.,.,- �� $12,983.33 Refer� 115 MOUND, CITY OF.. Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -382 Water Utilities MUNICIPAL UTILITY SERVICE - 2/06 TO 3/04 $45.26 Invoice 03 -2013 3/1812013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $45.26 Refer 102 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVIC Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -210 Operating Supplies TACTICAL PANTS - 2 PAIRS $93.36 Invoice 00392053 3/6/2013 PO 24235 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -219 Safety supplies RUBBER BOOTS - 1 PAIR $136.61 Invoice 00392050 3/612013 PO 24235 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -219 Safety supplies LT FIRE HELMET W /SHIELD - 6 QTY $894.28 Invoice 00392949 3/8/2013 Transaction Date 3126/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,124.25 Refer 104 MUNICIPALS Cash Payment E 101 -41310 -433 Dues and Subscriptions 2013 ANNUAL MUNICIPAL MEMBERSHIP $25.00 DUES Invoice 2013 1/1/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 �.,,,u.�...�. Wells Fargo 10100 Total $25.00 Refer 105�MYERS, TONY -611- MOUND, MN Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -434 Conference & Training ADVANCED VENTILATION CONFERENCE - TONY MYERS LODGING, MEALS & MILEAGE Invoice 03 -2013 3/3/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 107 NEOPOST Cash Payment R 101.- 49300 -39210 Duplicating Service C RATE CHANGE FOR ON SITE POSTAL SCALE Invoice 13892819 3/6/2013 PO 24091 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 120 NSAMECHANICAL CONTRACTING, Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -400 Repairs & Maintenance REPAIR AIR UNIT MOTOR AT PARKS BUILDING Invoice W27856 3/12/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Refer 108 OFFICE DEPOT Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -200 Office Supplies Invoice 649890080001 3/12/2013 PO 24092 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Refer - -�� -109 PERFORMANCE PLUS LLC Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -305 Medical Services 03/22/13 8:16 AM Page 7 $179.57 $179.57 $304.59 $304.59 $1,908.73 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,908.73 BLACK PENS, COPY PAPER & CALCULATOR $395.33 TAPE Wells Fargo 10100 Total MEDICAL TESTING FOR NEW FIRE FIGHTERS - FARLEY, GRADY, HEITZ, KOBERNUSZ, MORRISON & PATTERSON Invoice 3471 3/512013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Referw w.. 110 Q3 CONTRACTING�w „,.,�mm� Cash Payment Payment E 601 - 49400 -400 Repairs & Maintenance FLAGGERS FOR WATER REPAIRS AT 5800 LYNWOOD BLVD ON 3/8113 Invoice TMN0074249 3/9/2013 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -400 Repairs & Maintenance FLAGGERS FOR WATER REPAIRS AT 518 BARTLETT 15329 WILSHIRE ON 3/8/13 Invoice TMN0074248 3/9/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer ,..�.,,...a., 81 R.C. ELECTRIC, INCORPORATED_�mmmn�TM^ N Cash Payment E 101 - 49999 -430 Miscellaneous DISCONNECT 1 RECONNECT CONDUIT AND 4 -PLEX IN LOBBY AREA Invoice 3715 3/12/2013 Project CH2O13 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 83 SCHMIDT, CLIFFORD a Cash Payment R 601- 49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenu BALANCE OF OVERPAID UTILITY BILLING ACCOUNT - 3001 ISLAND VIEW DR. Invoice 031813 3/18/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer STEWART, ANN Cash Payment R 601- 49400 -36200 Miscellaneous Revenu BALANCE OF OVERPAID UTILITY BILLING ACCOUNT - 2960 HAZELWOOD LN. Invoice 031813 3/18/2013 Transaction Date 3/2612013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 111 STEWART, JACOB -612- $395.33 $1,686.00 $1,686.00 $530.73 $768.73 $1,299.46 $350.00 $350.00 $12.53 $12.53 $7.07 $7.07 Payments 03/22/13 8:16 AM Page 8 Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms 2013 BOOT ALLOWANCE $150.00 REIMBURSEMENT - JACOB STEWART Invoice 03 -2013 2/21/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $150.00 Refer 1.12 SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPER -CITY Cash Payment E 401 43113 -351 Legal Notices Publishing ADVERTISE FOR BIDS - 2013 STREET & $142.31 UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - 3/2 TO 3/9 Invoice 0213128714 3/6/2013 Project PW1301 Cash Payment E 281- 45210 -351 Legal Notices Publishing ADVERTISE FOR DOCK COMMISION $93.19 OPENING - 2/16/1.3 Invoice 0213128714 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 43100 -328 Employment Advertising ADVERTISE FOR ADMIN ASSISTANT JOB $216.02 OPENING - 2/14113 & 2/17/13 Invoice 0213142294 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 41500 -328 Employment Advertising ADVERTISE FOR ADMIN ASSISTANT JOB $216.02 OPENING - 2/14/13 & 2/17/13 Invoice 0213142294 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -328 Employment Advertising ADVERTISE FOR ADMIN ASSISTANT JOB $216.02 OPENING - 2/14/13 & 2/17/13 Invoice 0213142294 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -328 Employment Advertising ADVERTISE FOR ADMIN ASSISTANT JOB $216.02 OPENING - 2/14/13 & 2/17/13 Invoice 0213142294 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -340 Advertising ADVERTISE - WINE SALE - 2/9/13 $856.91 Invoice 0213129298 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -340 Advertising ADVERTISE - 10TH ANNIVERSARY ONE DAY $856.91 SALE - 2/09/13 Invoice 0213129298 3/3/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -340 Advertising ADVERTISE -WINE SALE - 2123113 $856.91 Invoice 0213129298 3/3/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,670.31 Refer 118 TRUE VALUE, MOUND (PW PKS) Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -210 Operating Supplies FURNACE FILTER, LID FOR 25 GALLON PAIL $18.14 Invoice 102443 3/7/2013 Project 13 -3 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -322 Postage SHIPPING FOR METER PARTS $18.15 Invoice 102605 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply SEAL TAPE, BRS NIPPLE, BRS ELBOW $17.71 Invoice 102575 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 49999 -430 Miscellaneous HANDY BOX COVER $4.14 Invoice 102309 3/1/2013 Project CH2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $58.14 Refer w. 119 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION, LLC Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -440 Other Contractual Servic REPAIR WATERMAIN AT 2120/2128 $4,282.98 GRANDVIEW BLVD. ON 2114/13 Invoice 3459 3/12/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,282.98 Refer.,�,,,.n.,..,..,,., 113 XCEC ENERGY Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -381 Electric Utilities ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2126 $145.41 Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 -613- Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 101- 45200 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 43100 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 42110 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3113/2013 Cash Payment E 285- 46388 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3113/2013 Cash Payment E 101- 42115 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 361255669 3/13/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Refer_ 114 XCEL ENERGY - -..- Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -381 Electric Utilities Invoice 461545040 3/2/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 285 MOUND HRA 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 - DEPOT ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1128 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1128 TO 2/26 ELECTRIC SERVICE - 1/28 TO 2/26 03/22113 8:16 AM Page 9 $60.13 $3,267.24 $2,369.28 $3,948.72 $1,285.17 $2,085.88 $2,085.88 $876.61 $2,560.99 $38.40 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $18,72171 STREET LIGHT ELECTRICAL - 2/03 TO 3102 $5,465.14 Wells Fargo 10100 10100 Wells Fargo $29,725.00 $21,309.85 $93.19 $2,560.99 $131,773.31 $497.00 $10,307.41 $23,363.97 $4,514.59 $2,487.50 $226,632.81 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $226,632.81 Total $226,632.81 -614- Total $5,465.14 MOUND, MN 03/22/138:17 AM Page 1 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Batch Name 032613HWS User Dollar Amt $64,406.39 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $64,406.39 $0.00 In Balance Refer 124 AMUNDSON, M. LLP Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -256 Tobacco Products For R TOBACCO $615.02 Invoice 149013 3113/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -210 Operating Supplies CANDY DUM DUM POPS $36.00 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $615.02 Refer 125 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE Invoice 88138800 3/18/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $81.44 Invoice 437307002 3111/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $1.00 Invoice 437307002 3/11/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 �m..„..-...,..,.., Wells Fargo 10100 Total $82.44 Refer 126 BELLBOY CORPORATION wm,.,,.,.....».,_.,.,,...,... w�, .W...._.�„w_,�....,w�.,,,....,. Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $35.75 Invoice 88105700 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $18.95 Invoice 77292400 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $144.00 Invoice 77292300 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $5,040.64 Invoice 77292200 3111/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,402.00 Invoice 77274000 3/8/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $18.45 Invoice 77274000 318/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR CREDIT - $120.00 Invoice 77323000 3/12/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT CREDIT -$1.55 Invoice 77323000 3112/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR - REPLACEMENT BOTTLES AT NO $0.00 COST Invoice 77255400 3/8/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $4,235.31 Invoice 77395000 3/18/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -210 Operating Supplies CANDY DUM DUM POPS $36.00 Invoice 88138800 3/18/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $19.25 Invoice 88138800 3/18/2013 Transaction Date 3/2 612 01 3 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $10,828.80 Refer 127 BERNICKS BEVERAGES AND VEN Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $67.34 Invoice 48657 3114/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $92.09 Invoice 48658 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT - $71.05 Invoice 46473 3/4/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Far_615- 10100 Total $88.38 MOUND, MN 03/22/138:17 AM Page 2 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Refer 128 COCA COLA BOTTLING - MIDWEST Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa SOFT DRINKS $163.60 Invoice 0138054909 3/14/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $163.60 Refer 129 DAHLHEIMER BEVERAGE LLC Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $277.60 Invoice 10896 3/11/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $277.60 Refer 130 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,767.70 Invoice 692252 3/12/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $7.50 Invoice 692253 3/12/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $43.90 Invoice 693115 3119/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,222.75 Invoice 693116 3/19/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,041.85 Refer 131 EXTREMEBEVERAGE �. Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $263.50 Invoice 181 -1324 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX CREDIT - $21.00 Invoice 181 -1325 3/13/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $242.50 Refer 132 HOHENSTEINS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $383.50 Invoice 639350 3/14/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $38150 Refer 133 JJ TAYLOR. DISTRIBUTING MINN Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $4,832.20 Invoice 2049294 3/12/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT - $32.00 Invoice 2049296 3/12/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT - $38.00 Invoice 2049297 3112/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $78.80 Invoice 2049341 3/1912013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,807.68 Invoice 2049340 3119/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT - $45.00 Invoice 2049344 3/19/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,603.68 Refer 134 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $24.13 Invoice 1523220 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT -$8.28 Invoice 569865 3/13/2013 -616- MOUND, MN 03/22/138:17 AM Page 3 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $8,471.98 Invoice 1522737 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,442.55 Invoice 1522738 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR - NO COST $0.00 Invoice 1522740 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT - $57.90 Invoice 569405 3/8/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $30.25 Invoice 1522739 3/13/2013 Transaction Date 3/2612013 �� DELIVERY Wells Fargo 10100 Total $9,902.73 Refer 150 MARLIN S TRUCKING Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $22.40 Invoice 27567 3/4/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $278.60 Invoice 27582 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $61.60 Invoice 27592 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $242.20 Invoice 27611 3/14/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $604.80 Refer _ 135�PAUSTIS AND SONS WINECOMPA Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $72.00 Invoice 8391110 -IN 3111/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $731.26 Invoice 8391111 -IN 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $10.00 Invoice 8391111 -IN 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $144.00 Invoice 8391521 -IN 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $48.00 Invoice 8391880 -IN 3/18/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $943.58 Invoice 8391882 -IN 3/18/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $16.25 Invoice 8391882 -IN 3/18/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total. $1,965.09 Refer X136 PBK INVESTMENTS, INCORPORAT Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -412 Building Rentals APRIL 2013 - HWS AREA MAINTENANCE $977.50 Invoice 04 -2013 3/14/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $977.50 Refer 137 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS, INC Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $998.60 Invoice 2391544 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,122.85 Invoice 2391545 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT - $12.41 Invoice 3500745 3/11/2013 -617- MOUND, MN Payments 03/22/13 8:17 AM Page 4 Refer 139 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M Cash Payment Current Period: March 2013 LIQUOR - 1"7i�'a E+t',Yl4;w'�S;tit�eaa+; 2/21/2013 WS2u7t Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2109.04 Refer 138 RJM DISTRIBUTING INC Invoice 1012048 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $378.00 Invoice 22900 3/6/2013 Invoice 1012047 3/1412013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $378.00 Refer 139 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $454.28 Invoice 1005344 2/21/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $3,320.88 Invoice 1012048 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $409.83 Invoice 1012047 3/1412013 Transaction Date 3126/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,184.99 Refer 140 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $232.00 Invoice 00770389 318/2013 Invoice 0073838 -IN 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $168.40 Invoice 741101 3/12/2013 Invoice 0073838 -IN 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $6,104.20 Invoice 741102 3/12/2013 Refer 142 WINE COMPANY- ��_ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $18.55 Invoice 742285 3119/2013 Invoice 324103 -00 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $6,807.50 Invoice 742286 3/19/2013 Invoice 324103 -00 3/7/2013 Transaction Date 3126/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $13,330.65 Refer 141 VINOCOPIA, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $134.00 Invoice 0073422 -IN 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $160.00 Invoice 0073422 -IN 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $5.00 Invoice 0073422 -IN 3/712013 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $212.00 Invoice 0073838 -IN 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $88.00 Invoice 0073838 -IN 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $5.00 Invoice 0073838 -IN 3/14/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $604.00 Refer 142 WINE COMPANY- ��_ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $368.00 Invoice 324103 -00 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $8.40 Invoice 324103 -00 3/7/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $448.00 Invoice 324674 -00 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $8.40 Invoice 324674 -00 3/1412013 _618_ MOUND, MN 03/22/138:17 AM Page 5 Payments Current Period: March 2013 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $64,406.39 Total $64,406.39 Transaction Date 3/2612013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $832.80 Refer 143 WINE MERCHANTS Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $84.95 Invoice 447254 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Rosa SOFT DRINKS $17.75 Invoice 447255 3/13/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $102.70 Refer 144 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MN BEER Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $3,120.00 Invoice 1090014950 3/11/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $43.00 Invoice 1090016088 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $787.50 Invoice 1090016086 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $240.00 Invoice 1090016087 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,647.15 Invoice 1090019442 3/20/2013 Transaction Date 3/26/2013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,837.65 Refer WIRTZ BEVERAGE MN WINE SPIRt Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT - $63.48 Invoice 2080000788 212612013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR CREDIT - $195.45 Invoice 2080000786 2/26/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $48.00 Invoice 1080014572 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $500.00 Invoice 1080014571 3/14/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR - NO CHARGE $0.00 Invoice 1080013756 3/13/2013 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT - $40.00 Invoice 2080001454 3/9/2013 Transaction Date 312612013 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $249.07 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $64,406.39 $64,406.39 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $64,406.39 Total $64,406.39 MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 12, 2013 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, March 12, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members present: Mayor Mark Hanus; Council members Kelli Giilispie, Mark Wegscheid, and Heidi Gesch. Members absent: Councilmember Ray Salazar Others present: City Manager Kandis Hanson, Finance Director /Clerk/Treasurer Catherine Pausche, LuAnn Fransen, Cheryl Martin, Mark Ruff. 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 7:00 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approve agenda MOTION by Gillispie, seconded by Gesch to approve the agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 4. Consent agenda MOTION by Giilispie, seconded by Gesch to approve the consent agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $316,599.64. B. Approve minutes of February 26, 2013 regular meeting. C. RESOLUTION NO. 13 -27: RESOLUTION APPOINTING JILL NORLANDER AS ACTING CITY CLERK D. Approve application for exempt permit for Mound Fire Auxiliary for bingo /raffle dates: March 26, June 1, and November 19, 2013, E. RESOLUTION NO. 13 -28: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF EASEMENT WITH 60 -DAY NOTICE 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. LuAnn Fransen, Director of WeCAB, presented the status of the program, including the area served, number of drivers and riders, and number of miles driven to date. Ridgeview Medical Center nominated WeCAB for a Jackson Healthcare Hospital Charitable Service Award. WeCAB received one of the Program of Promise Awards at the February award ceremony. Fransen stated they are currently in need of more drivers and dispatchers who can sign up at www.wecab.orq or by calling (952)472- 3222. Mound City Council Minutes — February 26, 2013 6. Mark Ruff from Ehlers and Associates requesting action on resolution calling for the sale of bonds to finance the following: • $ 2,870,000 Street Improvement Project and Retaining Walls • $ 1,575,000 Watermain Capital Improvements • $ 635,000 Storm Water Capital Improvements • $ 1,390,000 Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvements • $ 1,550,000 Current Refunding of 2003C Taxable TIF Bonds • $1,030,0000 2010 Lift Station Improvements Reimbursement Ruff stated that the refunding will save approximately $17,500 per year for the remaining 10 years of the bond. The sale will take place on April 9, 2013, and the environment of low rates is expected to continue. MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Gillispie, to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 13 -29: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $6,470,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION UTILITY AND IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2013A AND $2,580,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2013B. 7. Catherine Pausche, Finance Director /Clerk/Treasurer requesting action on three resolutions related to the budget and audit. A. Request to transfer funds to close -out debt service funds. MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Gillispie, to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 13 -30: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS. B. Request to purchase SUV for duty officer program to provide flexibility and reduce wear and tear on more expensive apparatus. MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Gillispie, to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 13 -31: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF DUTY OFFICER VEHICLE. B. Request to increase contribution from $3,000 to $4,500 for 2013 to the LIMA Milfoil Treatment Program. MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Gillispie, to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. -621- Mound City Council Minutes — February 26, 2013 RESOLUTION NO. 13 -32: RESOLUTION TO INCREASE CONTRIBUTION TO LMA FOR MILFOIL TREATMENT STUDY FOR 2013. 8. Information /Miscellaneous A. Comments /reports from Councilmembers /City Manager City Manager Hanson highlighted that 4 new businesses are opening now or in the near future: Main Street Covenant Church, Westonka Animal Hospital, Walgreens and Dakota Junction. B. Minutes: Planning Commission: Jan 15, 2013 C. Reports: Harbor Wine & Spirits: Feb 2013 Fire Commission Agenda: Feb 27, 2013 D. Correspondence: Letter to MCWD: February 28, 2013 Letter from MN State Fire Dept Assoc: Jan 24, 2013 9. Adjourn MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Gillispie to adjourn at 7:30 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk -622- Mayor Mark Hanus CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 PUBLIC GATHERING PERMIT Use of a public park or commons by any group consisting of 15 or more individuals. Use is not to interfere with traffic and general use of the park or commons or to be beyond the ability of the police in maintaining order. NO LIQUOR OR BEER MAY BE USED IN ANY OF THE CITY PARKS OR BUILDINGS. Group is to remove all litter and trash and provide a deposit to insure cleaning up of the park area. PERMIT FEE: $300 /DAY TO $600 /DAY* RCA wzsl f o w i�2 �ev DAMAGE DEPOSIT: $500 TO $1000 /DAY* C - k -- *Permit fee and damage deposit amount to be determined by City Manager and City Staff upon receipt of application stating specific use and requirements. Date(s) of Use Area to be Used :114 S a Time Frame Intended Use Expected Attendance � I (7 D ' 1 5 D/ DoT Organization Representative's Name Address l l'Iv Telephone No. Herne: iD �)n qlo �7 4% 7 W ,r : O� - 6 q z Drivers License Number t I b y a j 110 De artmental Approval City Clerk Police Dept. Fire ay r- Fanson V CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 13- RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT (A090393) WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY WHEREAS, the City of Mound entered into an Agreement with Hennepin County to provide property assessments on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.072 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 permit the County Assessor to provide for the assessment of property; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County has expressed their desire to extend the Assessment Agreement through July 31, 2017; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County's charge for the service has not exceed the stated contract amount of $96,000 per year in the first four years of the contract thereby providing the City budget stability; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, approves the extension of Hennepin County's Assessment Agreement A090393 through July 31, 2017. Adopted by the City Council this 26th day of March, 2013. Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk -624- Mayor Mark Hanus Hennepin County Assess ®r Department A -2103 Government Center www.co.hennepin.mmus 300 South Sixth Street Minneapolis,MN 55487 -0213 March 13, 2013 Bonnie Ritter Mound City Clerk 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Ms. Ritter: Assessment Agreement A090393 Assessment Agreement A090393 between the County of Hennepin and the City of Mound expires on July 31, 2013. Section I 1 of this agreement provides that this agreement may be extended for a term of four (4) years by either party giving the other written notice of its intent to so extend no less than 150 days prior to the termination of this agreement. We would appreciate a written notice of your intent at your earliest convenience so we may start planning for the 2014 assessment. We truly appreciate our professional relationship with the City of Mound and look forward to continuing assessment services for the City. If you or the city council has any questions concerning the assessment contract, feel free to contact me at (612) 348 -3046. truly yours, James R Atchison Hennepin County Assessor JRA J s 7 625- Are Eoucl Oppartunity Emp;oyet Pe<ydea Paper Contract No. A090393 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY ", and the CITY OF MOUND, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "CITY"; WHEREAS, said CITY lies wholly within the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN and constitutes a separate assessment district; and WHEREAS, under such circumstances, the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.072 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 permit the County Assessor to provide for the assessment of property; and WHEREAS, said CITY desires the COUNTY to perform certain assessments on behalf of said CITY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY is willing to cooperate with said CITY by completing the assessment in a proper manner; NOW, THEREFORE; in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed as follows: 1. The COUNTY shall perform the 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 property assessment for the CITY OF MOUND in accordance with property assessment procedures and practices established and observed by the COUNTY, the validity and reasonableness of which are hereby acknowledged and approved by the CITY. Any such practices and procedures may be changed from time to time, by the COUNTY in its sole judgment, when good and efficient assessment procedures so require. The -626- property assessment by the COUNTY shall be composed of those assessment services which are set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, provided that the time frames set forth therein shall be considered to be approximate only. 2. All information, records, data, reports, etc, necessary to allow the COUNTY_to carry out its herein responsibilities shall be furnished to the COUNTY without charge by the CITY, and the CITY agrees to cooperate in good faith with the COUNTY in carrying out the work under this Agreement. 3. The CITY agrees to furnish, without charge, office space needed by the COUNTY at appropriate places in the CITY's offices. The keys thereto shall be provided to the COUNTY. The CITY assures that such areas shall not be unattended, during or after work of any kind by or on behalf of the CITY, in any area occupied by the COUNTY as provided herein, or if unattended, the CITY shall make certain that such areas are locked and secured. Such office space shall be sufficient in size to accommodate reasonably two (2) appraisers and any furniture placed therein., The office space shall be available for the COUNTY's use at any and all times during the CITY's business hours, and during all such hours the COUNTY shall be provided with levels of heat, air conditioning and ventilation as are appropriate for the seasons. 4. The CITY also agrees to provide appropriate desk and office furniture as necessary, clerical and secretarial support necessary and reasonable for the carrying out of the work herein, necessary office supplies and equipment, copying machines and fax machines and their respective supplies, telephone service and WEB access to the COUNTY, all without charge to the COUNTY. -6�z- 5. It shall be the responsibility of the CITY to have available at the CITY's offices each CITY working day a person who has the knowledge and skill to be able to answer routine questions pertaining to homesteads and property assessment matters and to receive, evaluate and organize homestead applications. It shall also be the responsibility of the CITY to promptly refer any homestead application which needs investigation to the COUNTY. 6. in accordance with Hennepin County Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' policies against discrimination, no person shall be excluded from full employment rights or participation in or the benefits of any program, service or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status; sexual orientation, public assistance status, ex- offender status or national origin; and no person who is protected by applicable Federal or State laws, rules and regulations against discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to discrimination. 7. it is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of joint venturers or co- partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the CITY as the agent, representative or employee of the COUNTY for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Any and all personnel of CITY or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any activity under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the COUNTY and shall not be considered employees of the COUNTY and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf, of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of -6?38- employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the CITY, its officers, agents, CITY or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the COUNTY, and CITY shall defend, indemnify and hold the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the COUNTY, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Re- employment Compensation, disability, severance pay and retirement benefits. 8. CITY agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the COUNTY, its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any and all liability (statutory or otherwise) claims, suits, damages, judgments, interest, costs or expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees, witness fees and disbursements incurred in the defense thereof) resulting form or caused by any act or omission of the CITY, its officers, agents, contractors, employees or duly authorized volunteers in the performance of the responsibilities provided by this Agreement. 9. The COUNTY shall endeavor to perform all services called for herein in an efficient manner. The sole and exclusive remedy for any breach of this Agreement by the COUNTY and for COUNTY'sliability of any kind whatsoever, including but not limited to liability arising out of, resulting from or in any manner related to contract, tort, warranty, statute or otherwise, shall be limited to correcting diligently any deficiency in said services as is reasonably possible under the pertinent circumstances. -6V 10. Neither party hereto shall be deemed to be in default of any provision of this Agreement, or for delay or failure in performance, resulting from causes beyond the reasonable control of such party, which causes shall include, but are not limited to, acts of God, labor disputes, acts of civil or military authority, fire, civil disturbance, changes in laws, ordinances or regulations which materially affect the provisions hereof, or any other causes beyond the parties' reasonable control. 11. This Agreement shall commence on August 1, 2009, and shall terminate on July 31, 2013. Either party may initiate an extension of this Agreement for a term of four (4) years by giving the other written notice of its intent to so extend no less than 150 days prior to the termination of this Agreement. If the party who receives said notice of intent to extend gives written notice to the other party of its desire not to extend within 110 days prior to termination of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate on July 31, 2013. Nothing herein shall preclude the parties, prior to the end of this Agreement, from agreeing to extend this contract for a term of four (4) years. Any extended term hereof shall be on the same terms and conditions set forth herein and shall commence on August 1, 2013. Either party may terminate this Agreement for "just cause" as determined by the Commissioner of Revenue after hearing for such a determination is held by the Commissioner of Revenue and which has been attended by representatives of COUNTY and CITY or which said representatives had a reasonable opportunity to attend, provided that after such determination, any party desiring to cancel this Agreement may do so by giving the other party no less than 120 days' written notice. If the CITY should cancel this Agreement, as above provided, before the completion of the then current property assessment by the COUNTY, the -6319} CITY agrees to defend and hold the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and duly authorized volunteers harmless from any liability that might ensue as a result of the non- completion of a property tax assessment. For the purpose of this Agreement, the term "just cause" shall mean the failure of any party hereto reasonably to perform a material responsibility arising hereunder. 12.A. In consideration of said assessment services, the CITY agrees to pay the COUNTY the sum of Ninety -six Thousand dollars ($96,000) for each annual assessment, provided that any payment for the current year's assessment may be increased or decreased by that amount which exceeds or is less than the COUNTY's estimated cost of appraising new construction and new parcels for the current year's assessment. The amount of any increase or decrease shall be specified in the billing for the current year's assessment. 12.B. Regarding each assessment, in addition to being subject to adjustment in the above manner, said assessment cost of $96,000.00 may also be increased by the COUNTY if: (1) The COUNTY determines that any cost to the COUNTY in carrying out any aspect of this Agreement has increased, including but not limited to the following types of costs: new construction and new parcel appraisals, gasoline, postage, supplies, labor (including fringe benefits) and other types of costs, whether similar or dissimilar; and/or 2) The COUNTY reasonably determines that other costs should be included in the costs of assessment work. If the COUNTY desires to increase the assessment cost pursuant to this paragraph 12(B), it shall give written notice thereof by June 15 of any year and such increase shall apply to the assessment for the calendar year next.following the current calendar year. Any such notification shall specifically set forth the amount of any new -6i�1- construction and new parcel appraisal charges. Notwithstanding any provisions herein to the contrary, if any such increase, exclusive of any charge for the'estimated costs of new construction and new parcel appraisals, exceeds ten (10 %) percent of the amount charged for the assessment for the then current calendar year, exclusive of any charge for the estimated costs of new construction and new parcel appraisals, the CITY may cancel this Agreement by giving to the COUNTY written notice thereof, provided that said cancellation notice must be received by the COUNTY not later than July 24 of the then current calendar . year and said cancellation shall be effective no earlier than five (5) days after the receipt of said notice by the COUNTY and not later than July 31 of said current calendar year. Supportive records of the cost increase will be open to inspection by the CITY at such times as are mutually agreed upon by the COUNTY and CITY. Failure of the COUNTY to give the CITY a price - change notice by June 15 shall not preclude the COUNTY from giving CITY such notice after said date but prior to September 1 of any year, provided that if such price increase exceeds said ten (10 %) - all as above set forth - the CITY may cancel this Agreement if the COUNTY receives notice thereof not later than thirty -nine (39) days from the date of receipt by the CITY of any said late price- change notice, provided further that any such cancellation shall be effective not earlier than five (5) days after COUNTY's receipt of said cancellation notice and not later than forty -six (46) days after the CITY's receipt of any said price - increase notice. Payment for each assessment shall be made in the following manner: Any bill from the COUNTY for the current year's assessment which is received by the CITY before August 18 of the current year shall be due on September 7 of said year, provided that the CITY may elect to pay said bill before said date. Any said bill received by the CITY after August 18 shall be due no later than twenty -one (21) days after the CITY's receipt thereof. 13. Any notice or demand, which may or must be given or made by a party hereto, under the terms of this Agreement or any statute or ordinance, shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party addressed as follows: TO CITY: Mayor, City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 TO COUNTY: Hennepin County Administrator 2300A Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 copies to: County Assessor Hennepin County 2103A Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 Assistant County Assessor Hennepin County 2103A Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 Any party may, designate a different addressee or address at any time by giving written notice thereof as above provided. Any notice, if mailed, properly addressed, postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, shall be deemed dispatched on the registered date or that stamped on the certified mail receipt and shall be deemed received within the second business day thereafter or when it is actually received, whichever is sooner. Any notice delivered by hand shall be deemed received upon actual delivery. -03- 14. It is expressly understood that the obligations of the CITY under Paragraphs 7, 8, 11, and 12 hereof and the obligations of the CITY which, by their sense and context, are intended to survive the performance thereof by the CITY, shall so survive the completion of performance, termination or cancellation of this Agreement. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank.] -6�4- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf, this 17-It day of Acu4 _ , 2009. Reviewed by the County Attorney's Office UC �,f t )- Date: City organized under: _ - Statutory COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINWESOTA By: Chair ` epu / erk o County B rd Date: / t7 12 /0 C) And: Assistant/Deputy /Count � d min istrator Date: 10 /s . u `I CITY OF MOUND Its An Its Option A X Option B -611 - Charter ` 9 � a Contract No. A090393 EXHIBIT A CITY OF MOUND During the contract term, the County shall: 1. Physically inspect and revalue 20% of the real property, as required by law. 2. Physically inspect and value all new construction, additions and renovation. 3. Conduct valuation reviews prior to Board of Review - approximate dates: March through May 15, 4. Attend Board of Review. Per Board request, make all necessary review appraisals. Approximate dates: April 1 - May 31 . 5. Keep updated field card file - current values, homestead and classification data. 6. Print, mail and post valuation notices and homestead cards. 7. Respond to taxpayers regarding assessment or appraisal problems or inquiries periodically. 8. Make divisions and combinations periodically, 9. Administer the abatement process pursuant to Minn. 5tat. § 375.192 (2000). 10. Make appraisals, defend and /or negotiate all Tax Court cases. 11. Post values from appraisal cards to assessment rolls. 12. Adjust estimated market values on those properties not physically inspected as needed as per sales analysis. -03$- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director City of Mound Planning and Building Department DATE: March 21, 2013 SUBJECT: Expansion Permit and Variance Applications — Detached Garage Remodel /Addition ADDRESS: 5346 Piper Road APPLICANT: Larry McCall PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 13 -02 and 13 -10 ZONING: R -1 Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential Request. At its March 26, 2013 meeting, the City Council will consider expansion permit and variance applications from Larry McCall to allow a detached garage remodel /addition project at 5346 Piper Road. The expansion permit is being requested to enable the replacement of the existing roof with a new gambrel roof on the detached garage to allow for an accessory hobby space /wood working shop. The existing garage is nonconforming due to a deficient front setback. A variance is requested as the height of the detached garage, as proposed, will be higher than the existing house which is currently not allowed by code. Details regarding the proposed project are outlined in the Planning Report and supporting Addendum Reports along with the submittal applications and materials. Planning Commission Review — March 5, 2019 and March 19, 2013 Meetings Staff provided preliminary building height for the existing house and remodeled garage in the Planning Report but included mention that additional information regarding building height determination would be discussed at the meeting. Based on additional review of the site and analysis of available material, revised building height information was prepared and presented at the meeting. A copy of this information has been included as an attachment. Staff also informed the Planning Commission that the owner had commented to Staff that it was mentioned to him that there was an Indian mound on the property. Staff contacted State Archeologist Scott Anfinson who indicated that nothing is recorded on the subject location in their files. While there always can be scattered mounds that the State is not aware of, in this case there are no issues with proceeding with construction unless more definitive informative would become available at which time the State Archeologist would be contacted. Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the expansion permit and variance applications based on Staffs recommendation. As part of the Planning Commission's discussion of the next variance application for 1571 Finch Lane that was on the March 5th agenda, it was determined that previous criteria for granting variances was mistakenly included in the Planning Reports for both the Piper and Finch cases on the agenda. There was also discussion about differing versions in some of the City Code books and the online version. -637- So as to have the Planning Commission's review of the expansion permit and variance applications for the proposed garage alteration project at 5346 Piper Road be done using the correct review criteria, Staff brought the case back for additional consideration by the Planning Commission at a special meeting held on March 19th. Staff informed the Planning Commission that, at the March 5, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the motion was made by Linkert and seconded by Wiechert, to approve the expansion permit and variance for 5346 Piper Road, with conditions as recommended by Staff, and was carried unanimously. Staff also explained that options available to the Planning Commission included rescinding or amending the motion made at the March 5th so as reference use of the "correct" variance criteria contained in Sec. 129 -39(a) of the Mound City Code. it was also noted that neither procedure required the original motion maker or seconder to undertake either of these actions. Following review and discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to amend the previous motion to reference that its recommendation for approval was based on the current criteria contained in Sec. 129 -39 (a) of the City Code. A resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included for consideration by the City Council. -638- Accessory Garage With Roof Remodel /Addition Grade for garage (at building line facing street) 958.00 Grades for garage (at building line facing lake) — (964.0 and 962.0) 963.00 "Average grade" 960.5 Elevation of remodeled garage with gambrel roof (top) 978.0 Building height for proposed remodeled structure: 17.5 FT Existing House Grade elevation for house (at building line facing street): 966.0 Grade elevation for house (at building line facing lake): 960.0 "Average grade" 963.0 Elevation of house at "top of peak" 977.7 ( -) less three 3 feet for mid -point Building height for existing house: 11.7 FT -639- RESOLUTION # 13- RESOLUTION APPROVING EXPANSION PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR 5346 PIPER ROAD WHEREAS, the applicant, Larry McCall, submitted expansion permit and variance applications to allow a garage remodel /addition project at 5346 Piper Road; and WHEREAS, the expansion permit is being requested to enable the replacement of the existing roof with a new gambrel roof on the detached garage to allow for an accessory hobby space /wood working shop. The existing garage is nonconforming due to a deficient front setback of approximately 23 feet. The City Code requires front setback of 30 feet for a front - loaded, detached structure in the R -1 District; and WHEREAS, the subject property fronts Piper Road on the east side and Lake Minnetonka on the west side and includes a single family house which is located near the rear of the property and a detached garage near the road. The existing 22' x 24' detached garage, is located approximately 23 feet from the front property line. The proposed roof addition, which is being constructed over the existing building footprint, will maintain the same setback; and WHEREAS, a variance is being requested as the height of the detached garage, as proposed, will be higher than the existing house which is currently not allowed by code; and WHEREAS, per code, the building height established for the existing house is 11.7 feet and is measured from average grade to mid -point of the hipped roof. The top of peak elevation for the existing house is 977.7 feet; and WHEREAS, per code, the building height established for the proposed remodeled detached garage is 17.5 feet and is measured from average grade to the top of the gambrel roof. The top of peak elevation for the proposed remodeled garage is 978.0 feet; and WHEREAS, according to City Code Section 129 -2, "Expansion Permit" is defined as follows: and Expansion Permit means a permit which is granted by the City Council for the expansion or enlargement of a nonconforming structure in accordance with Section 129 -40. .�1 WHEREAS, City Code Section 129 -40 (a) outlines the criteria for granting expansion permits which are provided below: (a) Criteria. An expansion permit for a nonconforming structure may be issued, but is not mandated, to provide relief to the landowner where this chapter imposes practical difficulties to the property owner in the reasonable use of the land. In determining whether practical difficulties exist, the applicant must satisfy the City Council that the following criteria exist: (1) the proposed expansion is a reasonable use of the property considering: a. function and aesthetics of the expansion. b. absence of adverse off -site impacts such as from traffic, noise, odors and dust. c. adequacy of off - street parking. (2) exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion are unique to the property and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have had no control. (3) the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) the expansion would not adversely affect or alter the essential character of the neighborhood. (5) the expansion requested is the minimum needed. and; WHEREAS, City Code Section 129 -39 (a) outlines the criteria for granting variances permits which is provided below: (a) Criteria. A variance to the provisions of this chapter may be granted, but is not mandated, to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where this chapter imposes practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of the owner's land. No use variances may be granted. A variance may be granted only in the event that the following circumstances exist: (1) The variance proposed meets the criteria for Practical Difficulties as defined in City Code Sub. 129 -2. (2) Granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district nor be materially detrimental to property within the same zone. (3) The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty. MOM (4) A variance shall only be permitted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan. and; WHEREAS, according to City Code Sec. 129 -2, "Practical Difficulties" is defined as follows: Practical Difficulties, as used in conjunction with a variance, means that (i) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstance unique to the property including unusual lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances not created by the landowner; and (iii) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. and; WHEREAS, details regarding the requested expansion permit and variance for the proposed project are contained in Executive Summary No. 13-02 and 13 -10, Planning Report No. 13 -02 and 13 -10, Addendum to Planning Report No. 13 -02 and 13 -10, Addendum No. 2 to Planning Report No. 13 -02 and 13 -10 and the submitted application and supporting materials from the applicant; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the expansion permit and variance applications subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the expansion permit and variance applications were reviewed by the Planning Commission at its March 5, 2013 and March 19, 2013 meetings; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend Council approval of the expansion permit and variance applications, as recommended by Staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the expansion permit and variance: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. 2. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the expansion permit and variance are approved. 3. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 4. An expansion permit granted will automatically expire and be of no further force and effect if no building permit has been issued within one year of the date of approval of the expansion permit unless an extension is approved pursuant to the regulations contained in City Code Section 129 -40 which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 5. Applicant shall ensure that runoff from the roof does not drain on to neighboring properties. 6. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 8. No building permit will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided unless an escrow of sufficient amount is on file with the City. The applicant may also direct the City to record the resolution with the fees to be taken out of the escrow. 9. Effective September 1, 2011, new Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules related to wetlands, fioodplain, erosion control and others are in effect. These rules are now under the jurisdiction of the MCWD as regulatory authority and permitting was officially turned back to the District by the Mound City Council on August 23, 2011. Applicant is directed to contact the MCWD related to the new regulations and applicable permits that may be needed to undertake the proposed project. Evidence from the MCWD in the form of a permit or waiver must be provided before release of any future building permit. 10. All new construction shall take place at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) or 3 feet above a wetland. The RPFE for Lake Minnetonka is 933.0. 11. No materials shall be stockpiled in the 50 -FT lakeshore setback or 100 -year floodplain area(s). 12. Roof remodel project shall include gutters are recommended by the City Engineer. -643- In approving the requested expansion permit, the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact: 1. The requested construction is being constructed within the existing footprint of the existing detached garage. 2. Conditions of City Code Section 129 -40 (a) are being met. In approving the requested variance, the City Council hereby makes following findings of fact are provided: 1. Criteria in City Code Section 129 -39 (a) are being met. 2. There is considerable distance between the existing house and detached accessory structure and the top ridge elevations for the proposed garage of the existing house and proposed garage will appear similar. The expansion permit and variance are hereby approved for the following legally described property: (to be inserted) Adopted by the City Council this 26th day of March 2013. Attest: Catherine Pausche, City Clerk Mark Hanus, Mayor Um MINUTES EXCERPTS MARCH , 0 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, David Goode, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Kelvin Retterath and Councilmember Mark Wegscheid. Absent: Wiechert and Gawtry. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander and Planning Consultant Rita Trapp. Others present: Larry McCall, 5346 Piper Rd; Mike Behr, Behr Design. BOARD OF APPEALS A. Review of Expansion Permit /Variance Application —Garage Remodel /Addition 5346 Piper Road Applicant: Larry McCall Smith reviewed the case as presented in the p permit and the variance were both recommen Commission meeting, the variance criteriaiincl current criteria from City Code so additional consideration and evali motion from the March 51h meeU Although the expansion it the last Planning the Planning Report was not the plications to this meeting for ect criteria. Staff explained that the be rescinded or amended. MOTION by Ward, second by Penner, to amend the previous motion to reference the correct variance criteria. MOTION carried unanimously. -645- MINUTE EXCERPTS MARCH 5, 2013 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, Douglas Gawtry, David Goode, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Kelvin Retterath, Pete Wiechert and Councilmember Mark Wegscheid. Absent: none. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander and City Manager Kandis Hanson. Others present: Larry McCall, 5346 Piper Rd; Darren Kahmeyer, 1571 Finch La. BOARD OF APPEALS A. Review of Expansion Permit/Variance Application — 5346 Piper Road Applicant: Larry McCall Smith explained that the expansion permit is the existing roof with a new gambrel roof on The existing garage is nonconforming due to requested as the height of the proposed garc which is currently not allowed by code. Smit information for the house and garage followi went over the information with the`Commiss conditions. jested to enable the replacement of ied garage to allow hobby space. front setback. A variance is being higher than the existing house, presented updated building height preparation of the Planning Report and n. Staff recommends approval with Ward asked which variance criteria were being met. She indicated that, at a minimum, Code Section 129 -39 (a) (1), (4), and (5) were being met. Larry McCall (applicant) —the gambrel roof gives him adequate work space without excessive height. Retterath felt the applicant did a good job at designing a work space. He supports the project. Ward asked if Retterath agreed that requirement (1) was being met. Retterath felt that (5) was more appropriate. MOTION by Linkert, second by Wiechert, to approve the expansion permit and variance with conditions as recommended by Staff. MOTION carried unanimously. 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 PLANNING REPORT — ADDENDUM 2 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: March 19, 2013 SUBJECT: Expansion Permit and Variance Applications — Detached Garage Remodel /Addition ADDRESS: 5346 Piper Road APPLICANT: Larry McCall PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 13 -02 and 13 -10 ZONING: R -1 Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential Summary of Planning Commission Recommendation from March 5, 2013 Meeting At the March 5, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, a motion was made by Linkert and seconded by Wiechert, to approve the expansion permit and variance for 5346 Piper Road with conditions as recommended by Staff, and was carried unanimously. As the Planning Commission is aware, `old" variance criteria was included in the Planning Report by mistake. Options available to the Planning Commission include rescinding or amending the motion so as reference use of the "correct" variance criteria contained in Sec. 129 -39(a) of the Mound City Code. Neither procedure requires the original motion maker or seconder to undertake either of these actions. -647- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 PLANNING REPORT - ADDENDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: March 15, 2013 SUBJECT: Expansion Permit and Variance Applications — Detached Garage Remodel /Addition ADDRESS: 5346 Piper Road APPLICANT: Larry McCall PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 13 -02 and 13 -10 ZONING: R -1 Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential Background. At its March 5, 2013 meeting, Planning Commission considered expansion permit and variance applications from Larry McCall to allow a detached garage remodel /addition project at 5346 Piper Road. The expansion permit was being requested to enable the replacement of the existing roof with a new gambrel roof on the detached garage to allow for an accessory hobby space /wood working shop. The existing garage is nonconforming due to a deficient front setback. A variance was also requested as the height of the detached garage, as proposed, would be higher than the existing house which is currently not allowed by code. March 5, 2013 Planning Commission Recommendation. Following review and discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the expansion permit and variance applications based on Staffs recommendation. As part of the Planning Commission's discussion of the variance application for 1571 Finch Lane that was also on the March 5, 2013 agenda, it was determined that previous criteria for granting variances was mistakenly included in the Planning Reports for the 2 cases that were included on the agenda. There was also discussion about differing versions in some of the City Code books and the online version. So as to have the Planning Commission's review of the Expansion Permit and Variance Applications for the proposed garage alteration project be done using the correct review criteria, Staff has brought the case back for additional consideration by the Planning Commission and will go through the Expansion Permit and Variance review criteria at next Tuesdays meeting. 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: March 1, 2013 SUBJECT: Expansion Permit and Variance Applications — Detached Garage Remodel /Addition ADDRESS: 5346 Piper Road APPLICANT: Larry McCall PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 13 -02 and 13 -10 ZONING: R -1 Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential REQUEST The Planning Commission will review expansion permit and variance applications from Larry McCall to allow a remodel /addition project at 5346 Piper Road. The expansion permit is being requested to enable the replacement of the existing roof with a new gambrel roof on the detached garage to allow for an accessory hobby space /wood working shop. The existing garage is nonconforming due to a deficient front setback. A variance is being requested as the height of the detached garage, as proposed, will be higher than the existing house which is currently not allowed by code. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property fronts Piper Road on the east side and Lake Minnetonka on the west side and includes a single family house which is located near the rear of the property and a detached garage near the road. The existing 22'x 24' detached garage, is located approximately 23 feet from the front property line. The proposed roof addition, which is being constructed over the existing building footprint, will maintain the same setback. REVIEW PROCEDURE Expansion Permit. City Code Section 129 -40 outlines the criteria for granting expansion permits in the City of Mound. As the Planning Commission may recall, these are new provisions which were adopted and went into effect in October 2010. Per City Code Section 129 -2, an expansion permit is defined as follows: Expansion permit means a permit which is granted by the City Council for the expansion or enlargement of a nonconforming structure in accordance with City Code Section 129- 40. Variance. City Code Section 129 -39 (a) 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. A variance can only be granted if one of the following conditions exist: (1) 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 chapter have no control. (2) The literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this chapter. (3) The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) Granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. (5) The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. (6) The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this chapter 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 in accordance the state regulations. The expansion permit application was submitted on January 30, 2013. The variance application was submitted on March 1, 2013. NOTIFICATION City policy requires that abutting property owners are notified by mailed notice. Planning Commission members are advised that this activity was completed on March 1, 2013. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Copies of the application were forwarded to all City departments for review. All written comments which were received are summarized below: City Engineer Dan Faulkner Recommend that the garage continue to have gutters particularly on the easterly side so that roof runoff doesn't flow on neighboring property. Was notable to determine if the existing gutters are remaining or not. HKGi Consultant Planner Trapp I don't have any comments on what was submitted. Public Works Superintendent Ray Hanson Applicant is advised of pending seasonal road restrictions. Also, there are overhead wires in the vicinity of the garage that will need to be addressed. -650- City Attorney Melissa Manderschied Owner is applying for two permits: (1) expansion permit and (2) building permit. Regarding the expansion permit, Section 129 -35 (a)(5)(b), it doesn't appear from the application that the expansion will further intrude into the setback. Does the height exceed district standards? The application suggests 150 inches of additional height. if this exceeds the district standards, then a variance is required. Per Section 129 -40, the discussion and findings in the resolution need to consider the criteria set forth in (a). Are there any conditions that should be imposed per (b)(2)? Note the recording requirement in (f) to include in the resolution as well. The building permit needs to comply with Section 105 -22 et seq. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS A copy of the application and related materials were forwarded to involved agencies for review and comment. DISCUSSION 1. The applicant submitted a building permit for a roof addition to an existing detached garage on January 22, 2013. As part of zoning review, it was found that the existing garage was nonconforming due to a deficient front setback therefore an expansion permit was needed. As part of land use application review, was determined that a variance was also needed as the proposed new height of the detached structure exceeds the height of the existing house based on the determination of the building height per code. 2. The 1988 submitted survey was deemed acceptable for land use application review following a site visit by Public Works Superintendent Ray Hanson. Per Planning Commission policy, applicant is advised that Staff, the Planning Commission and /or City Council reserve the right to require the submittal of additional information, as necessary, including but not limited to, supplemental and /or updated survey information to be provided by a professional surveyor. 3. The property was part of a subdivision waiver and variance approved in 1988. An approximate 8'x 12' bump -out was depicted on the survey (north side). According to the waiver /variance resolution, removal of the bump -out was required so as to make the detached garage conforming. According to the zoning regulations, a front setback of 30 feet is required. In thi., location, a four (4) foot side setback is allowed for lakeside lots. 4. Per code, accessory buildings cannot exceed total gross floor area of 3,000 or 15 percent of the total lot area, whichever is less. Each individual building shall not exceed 1,200 square feet of gross floor area. Proposal is consistent with these regulations. -651- 5. Using information from the 1988 survey, the submitted materials and conducting a site visit with Public Works Superintendent Ray Hanson, Staff has preliminarily estimated the new building height for the remodeled garage at 17 feet using and the building height of the existing house at approximately 15.7 feet thus triggering the need for a variance as the overall height of the detached structure would exceed the overall height of the existing house. ® Gambrel roofs are measured from average grade to the top of the roof ® Hip roofs are measured from average grade to the mid -point of the highest peak ® At the 962.0 elevation at the SE corner of the house, the height from grade to the peak is approximately 15.7 feet with a top roof ridge elevation of 977.7. ® At the 958.0 elevation in front of the existing garage, the height from grade to the peak is approximately 20 feet with a top roof ridge elevation of 978.0. Planning Commissioners are advised that Staff is continuing to evaluate building height including average grade determination for front /rear building lines and will provide further comment at the meeting. 6. There is a significant amount of space between the garage which is located near street and the house which is further back towards the lake. 7. Planner Commissioners are reminded that eaves are allowed to encroach 2 feet into setback areas. Gutters are exempt. A complete list of encroachments is contained in City Code Section 129 -197. 8. Effective September 1, 2011, new Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules related to wetlands, floodplain, erosion control are in effect; also others. These rules are now under the jurisdiction of the MCWD as rules regulatory authority and permitting was officially turned back to the District by the Mound City Council on August 23, 2011. Applicant is advised to contact the MCWD related to the new regulations and applicable permits that may be needed to undertake the proposed remodel /addition project. Future building permit release will be conditioned upon the applicant providing receipt of the MCWD permit(s) issuance, as applicable, and or receipt of written confirmation from the MCWD that no permit(s) is needed for the project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the expansion permit and variance for construction of an roof remodel /addition at 5346 Piper Road subject to the following list of minimum conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. 2. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the expansion permit and variance are approved. 3. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. -652- 4. An expansion permit granted will automatically expire and be of no further force and effect if no building permit has been issued within one year of the date of approval of the expansion permit unless an extension is approved pursuant to the regulations contained in City Code Section 129- 40 which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 5. Applicant shall ensure that runoff from the roof does not drain on to neighboring properties. 6. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 8. No building permit will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided unless an escrow of sufficient amount is on file with the City. The applicant may also direct the City to record the resolution with the fees to be taken out of the escrow. 9. Effective September 1, 2011, new Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules related to wetlands, floodplain, erosion control and others are in effect. These rules are now under the jurisdiction of the MCWD as regulatory authority and permitting was officially turned back to the District by the Mound City Council on August 23, 2011. Applicant is directed to contact the MCWD related to the new regulations and applicable permits that may be needed to undertake the proposed project. Evidence from the MCWD in the form of a permit or waiver must be provided before release of any future building permit. 10. All new construction shall take place at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) or 3 feet above a wetland. The RPFE for lake Minnetonka is 933.0. 11. No materials shall be stockpiled in the 50 -FT lakeshore setback or 100 -year floodplain area(s). 12. Roof remodel project shall include gutters are recommended by the City Engineer. In recommending approval of the requested Expansion Permit, Staff offers the following findings of fact: 1. The requested construction is being constructed within the existing footprint of the existing detached garage. 2. Conditions of City Code Section 129-40 (a) are being met. In recommending Staff approval of the requested variance, the following findings of fact are provided: 1. Criteria in City Code Section 129 -39 (a) are being met. 2. There is considerable distance between the existing house and detached accessory structure and the top ridge elevations for the proposed garage of the existing house and proposed garage will appear similar. -653- CITY COUNCIL REVIEW In the event recommendations are received from the Planning Commission at its March 5, 2013 meeting, it is anticipated that the applications will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at its at its Tuesday, March 12, 2013 or March 26, 2013 meeting. -654- nAL EXPANSION PERMIT CITY OR MQlIND _ APPLICATION 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952- 472 -0600 FAX 952 -472 -0620 Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. Case No. /� L'ol Please Woe or orint ieoibiv SUBJECT Address PROPERTY LEGAL Lot Block DESC. Subdivision PID# Zoning: R1 RiA R2 R3 B1 B2 83 (Cirdeone) PROPERTY Name „4; a a ' tt -, �1 �C L= Z- Email �� l ?7 OWNER Address C Phone Home /5 � O J�� Work 7�.3 -,(/,3F- 25 0 a Fax APPLICANT Name? Email (IF OTHER Address THAN OWNER) Phone Home Work Fax Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No ( ). If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 2. Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): e Expansion Permit Information -655- (6l2712011) Page 4 of 6 .l Case No. / N, 3. Please complete the following information related to the property and building's conformity with the zoning regulations for the district in which it is located including the expansion permit request. rl G/% 1 f1 l LfC�L�E G� �� A %� /j ,l 1 - 1 S -_ �� SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED EXPANSION 12, _,)j,'� (or existing) r Front Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft Side Yard: (N S E W) ft, ft. ft. Side Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. Rear Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. Lakeside: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. Street Frontage: ft. ft. ft. Lot Size: J _60 sq ft sq ft sq ft Hardcover: 2�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( 4 No ( ). If no, specify each non- conformity: 5. Are there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion unique to the property such as lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have no control? Please check all that apply: ( ) too narrow (YA topography ( ) soil ( ) too small () drainage ()� existing situation ( ) too shallow shape ( ) other: specify Please describe: Expansion Permit Information -656- (6/27/2691) Page 5 of 6 Case No. 1 ()C)� 6. Were the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes ( ), No (. If yes, explain: 7. Were the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances created by any other person -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No (X). if yes, explain: 8. Are the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances for which you request an expansion permit peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes �X, ), No ( ). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? 9. Comments: 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. ®ate l Applicant's Signatu — Date Expansion Permit Information -657- (6/27/2011) Page 6 of 6 . . Planning Commission Date City Council Date ER SUBJECT 1R"1 wf 13- �_:X�5 Case No. Block LEGAL " DESC. Subdivision PID# Zoning: R1 R1A R2 R3 131 B2 B3 (Circle one) PROPERTY Name Email Ili) r^ - €l T q OWNER J� /% / ii •�l ti� �` .� �9L�. Address gu Phone Hom y %l'�'� V% e /� Fax APPLICANT Name Email (IF OTHER THAN Address OWNER) Phone Home Work Fax 1. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No ( E). If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 2 Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): Variance Information -658- (1/18/2013) Page 4 of 6 Case No. 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 (�f. If no, specify each non - conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): SETBACKS: ) topography REQUIRED drainage Front Yard: (N S E W) ft. Side Yard: (N S E W) ft. Side Yard: (N S E W) ft. Rear Yard: (N S E W) ft. Lakeside: ( N S E W) ft. (NSEW) ft. Street Frontage: ft. Lot Size: sq ft Hardcover: sq ft REQUESTED (or existing) ft ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. sq ft sq ft VARIANCE ft ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. 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 �/ ), 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 ) topography ( ) too small drainage ( ) too shallow shape Please describe: Variance Information -659- (1/18/2013) Page 5 of 6 ( ) soil (� existing situation ( ) other: specify Case No. 6. Was the practical difficulty described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes ( ), No N. If yes, explain: 7. Was the practical difficulty created by any other human -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No If yes, explain: 8. Are the conditions of practical difficulty for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes 0), No( ),If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? Q 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. Owners Signature .. Variance Information 66� (1/18/2013) Page 6 of 6 Date l /O a _� / � /roPe!<J �� ..�9 � Pxrrh;,1 Jfm `` �-'� --••�, ". / \ \ v, 4S ��``__ '� 30 Roy ° �D onne!/ 0 %fal 1,74 ryrGa' 34, boo OO cor prr o14,44 0 Y �q N Q -661- 'o-------------- !4Z Existing Legal Descriptions 1.Lawrence N. McLane Lots 40 and 41; the northerly 112 of Lot 42, described as follows: Beginning at the nortfe3sterly corner of said Lot 42, thence in a northwest- erly direction along the northerly line of the lot to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, thencf. in a southerly direction along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point which is equally distant from the northwesterly and the southwesterly corners of the lot, thence in a southeasterly dir- ection to a point in the easterly line of said lot distant 15 feet from the northeasterly and southeasterly carriers of the lot, thence in a northwesterly direction along the easterly line of Said lot to point of beginning, Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. 2. Roy O'Donnell Lot 43 and the Southerly 112 of Lot 42 of Whipple Shores described as follows: Beginning at the southeasterly carrier of the Lot; thence in a westerly direction along the southerly line of the Lot to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, thence northwesterly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point which is equally distant from the southwesterly and northwesterly corners of the Lot; thence in a southeasterly direction to a point in the easterly line of said Lot distant 15 feet from the southeasterly and northeasterly corners of the Lot; thence in a southeasterly direc- tion along the easterly line of said Lot to point of beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Regis- trar of Titles in and for said County. Proposed Legal Descriptions ( Check with Torrens office) 1. Lawrence N. McLane Lots 40 and 41; that part of Lot 42 which lies northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence southerly along the easterly line of said Lot 42 a distance of 15.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence westerly deflecting right 115 degrees 51 minutes 10 seconds to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; all in Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. 2. Roy O'Donnell Lot 43 and that part of Lot 42 which lies southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence southerly along the easterly line of said Lot 42 a distance of 15.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described: thence westerly deflecting right 115 degrees 51 minutes 10 seconds to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; all in Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. 3. McLane (Parcel A) Those parts of Lots 40, 41, and 42 which lie northerly of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Lot. 41 and its northerly extension a distance of 45.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence westerly deflecting left 64 degrees 09 minutes a distance of 33.34 feet; thence west- erly deflecting left 1 degree 15 minutes to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; all in Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. 4. McLane (Parcel B) ihose parts of Lots 40, 41 and 42 which lie southerly of the tollowing described line and its extensions: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence northerly m any the easterly line of said Lot 41 and its northerly extension a distance of 45.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence westerly detecting left 64 degrees 09 minutes a distance of 33.34 feet; thence westerly deflecting left 1 degree 15 minutes to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; Except that part of said Lot 42 which lies souther4 ofthe fo ire w ;n9 described line: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence southerly along the easterly line of said Lot 42 a distance 15.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described: thence westerly, deflecting right 115 degrees 51 minutes 10 seconds to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; all in Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly registered Land Surveyor and Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Date : 11- 23-0/, 12- 28-87 a -4 -ae P,rof,.,h�✓. Scale: 1" - 20' o Iron marker arTi ronberg Datum: Mean Sea Level Engineers, Land '�urveyur,, Planners Lung Lake:, Minnesota 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952 -472 -0607 ty:yOpMOUND FAX 952 -472 -0679 uildinq� Rer it Apylicati ®n X13 A 2 y 0 License Verification ❑ -Lead Verification - Checked By SITE Property Address or PID J 6 17S. 7ffadvI5 IRA) COPIED Business Name/Tenant ZONING Applicant is: Owner ❑ Contractor ❑, Tenant OWNER Name AARVI _i /�C ( -ALL E -Mail /d%NV %Ail 6DaLq 4r =.f6 CITY ENG/DPW Address �/3.� /z City /State /Zip,�a�, d/%% 553' iQA Phone sue- 2 - Fax CeII . `_z%3 - 502- - CONTRACTOR Company Name License # PERMIT FEE Address City /State /Zip ASSESSING /UTIL BILL Contact Person E -mail UTIL Phone Fax Cell EPA SECTION 1) Was the home constructed before 1978? (if YES, continue with question 2; if NO continue without I=—/ completing EPA Sect on) 2) Will the work disturb 6 sq ft or more of interior painted surfaces of 20 sq ft or more of exterior painted surfaces? (If YES, go to line 4; ifNO line 3); 3) Are there any windows being replaced? (If YES, go to line 4; if NO continue without completing EPA Section) Certified 4) Has this home been Lead Free? (If YES; you MUST Attach Certification Info; if NO go to line 5) 5) EPA Certified Firm Name; Zip Code; s Phone: ARCHITECT Name - Phone Fax CON /�la AND /OR ENGINEER Separate permits are required for electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilating or air conditioning. Permits become null and void If work or construction authodzed is not commenced 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 Bulldino Completion. The exterior of a structure or portion of a structure, located in a residential zoning district, must be completed in accordance with city- approved plans within 180 days after the date of permit issuance. Seeding, sodding or other planted ground cover must be viable 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 ceri fy 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 complied 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 construction or the performance of construction- I agree to pay all plan review fees even if 1 choose not to proceed with the work. 1 certify all taxes and City fees owed in connection with this property are current. See reverse side for an important statement reaardino Indian Mounds. - PRINT APICANT'S NAME APPL A T'S 5 Gtf 7u DATE (OFFICE USE ONLY) RECEIVED BY &DATE Pji'7 %�?j ` v" COPIED APPROVED ZONING PLANS CHECKED BY CITY ENG/DPW PUBLIC WORKS PERMIT FEE PLAN REVIEW FEE ASSESSING /UTIL BILL UTIL TAX OTHER BUILDING OFFICIAL I=—/ Revised 8/11 -663- L 9 � � :� � d }} f .. 'Y; f kY L�� yQe # � y yv � h �i d y44°, : w' %'1 i t `.3/*ary .�i $� �1 k Y ^w )� 11yyt' �r "£ � �µ S" � , t pL' ?4 �+ i r ` -665- �__. �,�: �. �: ;< �. w ,, �,; ? ;; .�„ ��a; �: s� s. R � •�• I y!' -. .�-- ...............- ..�..�'. '"yam �y�._..�».....�... -N, "° _�r� I a> >. �. x, �.. �: �., �.._ �° �:W �°:�_ s AnL- HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) IOPERTY ADDESS: VNER'S NAME: IT AREA SO. FT. X 30% = (for all lots) ......... ............................... F 1TAREA-24700 -7=— SO. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record) ............................. doting Lots of Renard may have 10 percent coveroge, provided drat techniques are usllzed as outlined In ZonI g Ordinance Soml 9-M (aee k). A plan must be submitted and approved by die Building Official. LENGTH WIDTH SO FT p� )USE X _ _ .8 aw 5 TACHED BUILDINGS ra,9, X _ . gag ARAGE/SHED) x - TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS ............................... 5� 8 UVEWAY, PARKING X �/T = lI 9 7 'EAS. SIDEWALK x = rrII� . TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETCC .... ..... .......... ..................... _/ _ :CKS Open decks (114' ndn. wi Z91. ' X 3 erdrg bebvee under am %4th not a �� x vious surface under are not rated as hardcover. X = TOTAL DECK ............................... X - X - TOTALOTHER ..............-- .................-- .........- 2 Q rTAL HARDCOVER I IMPERVKIUS SURFACE ............. ..................... I ...... ... JSQ �a JDER / OVER (indicate d"tffevence) ..................................... ............................... tEPARED aY DATE vised 01/71110 -667- 16 January 12, 1988 RESOLUTION NO. 88 -14 RESOLUTION SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 87 -218 TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 330:185 OF THE MOUND CODE OF ORDINANCES AND A VARIANCE OF LOT WIDTH FOR LOTS 40, 41, THE NORTH 1/2 FRONT AND REAR OF 42, WHIPPLE SHORES; PID# 25- 117 -24 21 011 (5346 PIPER ROAD) (P & Z CASE NO. 87 -680 A & B) WHEREAS, the conveyance of Lots 40, 41 and the North 1/2 front and rear of 42, Whipple Shores has been submitted in the manner required for platting of land under the City of Mound Code of Ordinances, Section 330 and under Chapter 462 in the Minnesota State Statute and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder; and WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in Section 330 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound; and a lot width variance has been requested for the R -1 Single Family Residential District:; and WHEREAS, said request for waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council;and WHEREAS, it has been determined that there are special circumstances affecting said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; and that the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property rights; and that granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners. NOW THEREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota; the request of the applicant for the waiver from the provisions of Section 330 of the City Code, and lot width variance; Lots 40 and 41; the Northerly half of Lot 42 described as follows: PARCEL A - Those parts of Lots 40, 41, and 42 which lie northerly of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Lot 41 and its northerly extension a distance of 45.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence westerly deflecting left 64 degrees 09 minutes a distance of 33.34 feet; thence westerly deflecting left 1 degree 15 minutes to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; all in Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. PARCEL B - Those parts of Lots 40, 41 and 42 which lie southerly of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Lot 41 and its northerly extension a distance of 45.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to -668- µ 17 January 12, 1988 be described; thence westerly deflecting left 64 degrees 0. a distance of 33.34 feet; thence westerly deflecting left 1 15 minutes to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line th14 ending; Except that part of said Lot 42 which lies southerly d the following described line: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence southerly along the easterly line of'said Lot 42 a distance of 15.00 feet to the point of beginningy) of the line to be described; thence westerly deflecting right 1 115 degrees 51 minutes 10 seconds to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and said line there ending; all in Whipple Shores, according to the plat thereof on.file or of record in the office of the ®` Registrar of Titles in and for said County. A. It is hereby granted to allow waiver of subdivision requirements and variance subject to the following conditions: 1. Non — conforming portions of the garage and principal structure on Lot A as shown on Exhibit 1 shall be removed. 2. Property owners shall provide and record all necessary utility easements. 3. Lot B will be assigned I park charge at the current applicable amount, but not less than $300. 4. The applicant shall prepare and submit a new drawing Showing conforming lot width on Lot B and appropriate legal descriptions. 5.. This lot conveyance is to be filed and recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this resolution. 6. If shed on Parcel B is below the flood plain, it must be removed. B. The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the applicant for filing in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds, or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the subdivivision regulations of the City. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Jessen and seconded by Councilmember Abel. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Abel, Jensen, Jessen and Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Councilmember Johnson was absent and excused. Attest: City Clerk Major W CC O LJJ U) LLJ h v r Y /RI N1N ®—J IL LL! > Q w e uj- - -- —___ \\ / ® d" U' 11 \1 i \11114x' d � \I 1 it I I 1 ® 1 l Il 1 1 1 11 I f I I 1 •J / pb Ifi N�t,ii iifl!I111.1 Ir cL Lu ® 11 11 IIII it r" a ri iI iiil III li � , F t1 I �111I iltl�i l4 _ .i- 1' 0 \ 1�1 J �oy -670- RESOLUTION #88 -14 EXHIBIT A / W w Road Y / ,. IN a II. a 0 Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map Parcel 25- 117 -24 -21 -0163 ID: Owner L J & C M Mccall Trustees Name: Parcel 5346 Piper Rd Address: Mound, MN 55364 Property Residential Lake Shore Type: Nome- stead: Homestead Parcel 0.54 acres Area: 23,639 sq ft A -T -B: Torrens Market Total: $792,000 Tax $12,078.32 Total: (Payable: 2012) Sale $180,000 Price: Sale 11/1987 Date: Sale Code.- Deed -671- Map Scale: 1 "= 50 ft. Print Date: 3/1/2013 Page i of 1 �t �1 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT© HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 -: ti,reeni I http:// gis. co. hennepin .mn.usIPropertylprintldefault. aspx ?C= 447965.15996381756,4974278.... 3/1/2013 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD V or ®ILI MOUND, MN 55364 -1687 PH: (952) 472 -0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com February 13, 2013 Larry McCall 5346 Piper Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Determination of Completeness — Expansion Application This letter is in regard to the Expansion Permit application submitted on January 30, 2013 for a proposed garage addition project at 5345 Piper Road. Please be advised that the application is hereby deemed to be complete. With regard to the application, Staff respectfully offers the following comments: e Staff requests preparation of separate building height calculation forms for the house and garage to include the proposed addition. As we may have discussed, Sec. 129 -194 (b) of the City Code states that no accessory structure can be higher than a principal structure based on the calculation of the height regulations and Staff needs to evaluate this requirement as part of our review of the request. You are advised that additional staff, consultant and /or agency comments regarding the Expansion Permit application may be forthcoming following the City's routing of the application. Also, questions regarding the application may come up as we proceed with preparation of the Planning Report in advance of the Planning Commission meeting. At this time, the tentative date for the Planning Commission's review of the application is at its Tuesday, March 5, 2013 meeting at 7PM. Be advised, however, that this meeting could be subject to change. e Upon recommendation from the Planning Commission, the application will be forwarded to the City Council for review and action at a future meeting date yet to be determined. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at (952) 472 -0604 or by email atsarahsmith@citvofmound.com. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. P 72 - fes o,,,oydedpaper MEMORANDUM Date: March 22, 2013 To: Mayor Hanus and Council Members From: Kandis Hanson, City Manager Catherine Pausche, Director of Finance and Administration Subject: Docks and Commons Commission Appointment Cliff Schmidt, a non - abutting Commissioner, resigned from the DCC on January 17, 2013. The Docks and Commons Commission interviewed three candidates at the March 21, 2013, DCC meeting. All written ballots of the Docks and Commons Commission members were in favor of Derrick Hentz' appointment by the Council. Mr. Hentz resides at 4655 Cumberland Road, has been a resident for 14 years, in the dock program for 3 years and served on the Parks and Opens Spaces Commission from 2000 — 2006. The appointee will serve the remainder of Mr. Schmidt's 3 year term, which ends on December 31, 2013. --672B- CITY COUNCIL REPORT 9i TO: City Council FROM: Rita Trapp, Planning Consultant Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: March 21, 2013 SUBJECT: Request for Expansion Permit and Front Yard Setback Variance APPLICANT: Darren Kahmeyer LOCATION: 1571 Finch Lane (PID NO. 12- 117 -24 -43 -0001) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential ZONING: R -1A Single Family Residential BACKGROUND The applicant and property owner, Darren Kahmeyer, has requested an expansion permit and a 15 foot front yard setback variance. The applicant is proposing to do a remodel to his home and garage to increase both the living area and garage. The proposal will involve removing and raising the existing roof on the home to increase the size of the upper floor. An expansion permit is needed as the southwest corner of the home is located only 14.3 feet from the rear property line. The applicant is also proposing to remove the existing, attached garage and replace it with a new, attached garage with upper floor living space that will be accessed from the house. The existing front - loaded garage is non - conforming, located only 10 feet from the street. The proposed side - loaded garage and living area is proposed to be located 5 feet from the property line SITE INFORMATION The property is located at the end of Finch Lane directly adjacent to Jennings Bay in the Woodland Point Addition. According to Hennepin County records, the more than 12,000 square foot property has a home that was constructed in 1920s. The former Waurika Commons, about 5,000 square feet in size, is located along the shoreline of the property and is shown on the included survey. None of the activities proposed in the application will occur within the former commons area. -673- 1571 Finch Lane Variance City Council Report The house is not located squarely on the property so the northern building corner is located closer to the street than the southern building corner. The front of the lot is Finch Lane given that it is the only part of the lot that is located on a public street. The rear of the lot is therefore the west property line, while the south is a side and the north is lakeshore. The property slopes over 10 feet from the southern end of the property to the northern end where the street ends. This slope has contributed to difficulties for the applicant in utilizing their current driveway. The following are the proposed dimensions for the application: PROPOSED DIMENSIONS REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 129 -40 (a) states that an expansion permit for a nonconforming structure may be issued when the City Code imposes practical difficulties for the property owner in the reasonable use of a property. The following are the criteria that should be satisfied for the issuance of an expansion permit: (1) the proposed expansion is a reasonable use of the property considering: a, function and aesthetics of the expansion. b. absence of adverse off -site impacts such as from traffic, noise, odors and dust. c. adequacy of off - street parking. (2) exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion are unique to the property and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have had no control. (3) the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) the expansion would not adversely affect or alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 674- Page 2 March 21, 2013 Required Proposed /Existing Variance Lot Area 6,000 sq. ft. 12,578 sq. ft. Lot Width 40 feet 80.44 feet Front Yard (east) 20 feet 5 feet 15 feet (proposed) Lakeshore (north) 50 feet 66.8 feet Rear Yard (west) 15 feet 14.3 feet 0.7 feet (existing) Side Yard (south) 6 feet 17.1 feet Hardcover (maximum 40 %) 5,031 sq. ft. 3,692 sq. ft. REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 129 -40 (a) states that an expansion permit for a nonconforming structure may be issued when the City Code imposes practical difficulties for the property owner in the reasonable use of a property. The following are the criteria that should be satisfied for the issuance of an expansion permit: (1) the proposed expansion is a reasonable use of the property considering: a, function and aesthetics of the expansion. b. absence of adverse off -site impacts such as from traffic, noise, odors and dust. c. adequacy of off - street parking. (2) exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion are unique to the property and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have had no control. (3) the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) the expansion would not adversely affect or alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 674- Page 2 March 21, 2013 1591 Finch Lane Variance City Council Report (5) the expansion requested is the minimum needed. City Code Section 129 -39 (a) states that a variance may be granted to provide relief to a landowner where the application of the City Code imposes practical difficulty for the property owner. According to Section 129 -2, practical difficulty means that the property owner proposes to use the property owner in a reasonable manner, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, and the variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. In evaluating the variance the City Council must consider whether: (1) The variance proposed meets the criteria for Practical Difficulties as defined in City Code Sub. 129 -2. (2) Granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district nor be materially detrimental to property within the same zone. (3) The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty. (4) A variance shall only be permitted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 60 -DAY PROCESS The date of submittal /completeness of the variance request is February 25, 2013. The date of submittal /completeness for the expansion permit request is March 14, 2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, the City of Mound has sixty (60) days to approve or deny the land use request unless an extension is executed by the City in accordance with state rules. CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and supporting materials were forwarded to all City departments for review and comment. Comments received are summarized below: Scott Qualle, Building Official Dan Faulkner, City Engineer Ray Hanson, Public Works Supt. No comments, no concerns Reasonable request. Appears to be a safety improvement for both the homeowner and anyone using the public road in this area Proposal will be an improvement as vehicles will no longer be parked in driveway which extends into ROW. -675- Page 3 March 21, 2013 1571 Finch Lane Variance City Council Report DISCUSSION • The Planning Commission reviewed this case at their March 5, 2013 meeting which included a variance request for a garage addition. The case was tabled at the March 5th meeting to allow the applicant the opportunity to provide additional information about the request as it was discovered at the meeting that the applicant intended on raising the roof of the home. The Planning Commission also requested clarification from Staff about the variance review criteria as there were differing versions online and in some City Code books. From the information submitted after the March 5th Planning Commission meeting it was determined that an expansion permit was needed due to the nonconforming rear setback of the house (14.3 feet). Both the variance and expansion permit were subsequently reviewed at the March 19th meeting as the two land use requests are related to the same remodeling project. The expansion permit application was submitted on 3 -14 as the rear setback is located 0.7 feet too close to the rear property line. As can be seen from the existing and proposed floor plans, the applicant will be expanding the upper level living space over the existing lower level floor footprint. The lower floor is currently nonconforming with a rear setback of only 14.3 feet instead of 15 feet. While the footprint of the house remains the same, the applicant will be raising the roof in that area, therefore expanding the volume of the nonconformity. City Code Section 129 -35 (a) (5) (b) states: an expansion permit is required if the expansion or enlargement will not further intrude (as measured at the point of greatest intrusion) into the required setback beyond the distance of the existing structure or the proposed new height /stories is within City Code requirements. For example: (i) if the building currently has a setback of 15 feet when 20 feet is required and the proposed expansion will have a setback of 15 feet an expansion permit will be needed, (2) a second floor area is expanded into the nonconforming setback over an existing nonconforming first floor. • As shown in the included photo, the driveway for the current front -load garage is about 13 feet long at its shortest point and results in cars overhanging into the street. The replacement of the garage with a side -load garage will allow the construction of a longer driveway that can fully accommodate off - street parking. 676- Page 4 March 21, 2013 1571 Finch Lane Variance City Council Report The garage is proposed to be 25 feet wide and 34 feet long with the lakeside corner being located only 5.2 feet from the street property line. The applicant has indicated in his included narrative that the length of garage is sought to allow for the inclusion of a staircase at the lakeside end of the garage to reach the lower level. The garage lower level will be used for storage and will have shed doors that open into the yard (See sheet A3 lakeside elevation plan). The applicant's representative at the 3 -19 Planning Commission meeting also indicated that the length of the garage would allow the applicant to pull the cars deeper so as to provide more guest parking when needed. Both Finch Lane and the driveway have a steep slope that can be challenging for parking. In addition, there are areas along Finch Lane that are signed for no parking. • The applicant's representative also indicated at the 3 -19 Planning Commission meeting that the width of the garage was, in part, to allow the shifting of a garage door away from the house and the proposed entry for safety reasons (see sheet A2 garage front elevation). • As shown on the included surveys, hardcover coverage has not been nor will be a concern for this property given its more than 12,000 square foot size. Please note that City Code Section 129 -385 (c) states that land above the ordinary high water level (OHWL) may be used in the calculation of lot area. While hardcover is not of concern, that applicant has indicated that they will be removing the existing retaining walls, walkways and concrete area under the deck as part of this remodel project. The applicant is advised that hardcover will be reviewed again as part of the building permit process to ensure that they are staying under the 40% maximum for an existing lot of record. • Building height determinations are provided on each of the elevations. These dimensions show that the home will remain under the maximum 35 feet allowed in the residential districts. The applicant has indicated that the existing home has a height of 24 feet on the lakeside. • The applicant is also advised that the hot tub as shown on the survey is located too close to the adjacent property. The applicant has indicated that the location shown is temporary. The hot tub will be moved once construction has completed. The applicant is advised to review the regulations in Section 129 -196 (b) (1) to ensure placement of the hot tub follows City regulations. "677" Page 5 March 21, 2013 1571 Finch Lane Variance City Council Report • Section 113 -53 (b) (4) states that all structures shall be constructed so that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation, which for Lake Minnetonka is 933.0 feet. The existing low floor elevation for the house is 940.5 and the proposed lowest garage floor is 935.3. • Applicant is advised of pending seasonal road restrictions. • Property is subject to the provisions of the Woodland Point Settlement Agreement. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION — March 19, 2013 Meeting Following the tabling action at the March 5, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission scheduled and held a special meeting on March 19th. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the expansion permit. The Planning Commission then voted 4 in favor and 2 against a recommendation of denial for the variance request. The draft meeting minutes have been included for reference. Planning Commissioners expressed particular concern about whether the size of the garage resulted in the minimum variance needed to alleviate the practical difficulty. The front yard setback is of particular concern given that the curb is located close to the property line. Commissioners did compliment the applicant on the appearance of the remodel. In recommending approval of the expansion permit, the Planning Commission recommended the following conditions: Hardcover for the site shall not exceed 40% as allowed by the R -1A Zoning District. The applicant shall remove all structures as identified on the proposed site plan. 2. All structures shall be constructed so that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation, which for Lake Minnetonka is 933.0. 3. Building height of the new structure shall be less than 35 feet as required by City Code. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. 5. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the expansion permit application is approved. 6. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit March 21, 2013 -678 Page 6 1571 Finch Lane Variance City Council Report application. 7. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 9. No building permit will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided. 10. No building permits will be issued until any and /or all fees associated with the land use application have been paid unless an escrow deposit of sufficient amount is on file with the City. 11. Effective September 1, 2011, new Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules related to wetlands, floodplain and erosion control are in effect; also others. Applicant is advised that these rules are now under the jurisdiction of the MCWD as rules regulatory authority and permitting was officially turned back to the District by the Mound City Council on August 23, 2011. The applicant is requested to contact the MCWD regarding the new regulations and applicable permits that may be needed to undertake the proposed project. Any future building permit release will be conditioned upon the applicant providing receipt of the MCWD permit(s) issuance (as applicable) and /or receipt of written confirmation from the MCWD that no permit(s) is needed for the project. 12. Applicant is advised of pending seasonal road restrictions. APPLICANT RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMISSION The applicant has indicated to Staff that his team is working on a modified plan to be presented at the City Council Meeting. The revised plan is intended to respond to some of the issues raised by the Planning Commission. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW Given the Planning Commission's split vote on the expansion permit and variance requests, Staff has not prepared resolutions for your consideration. Staff will prepare resolutions at your direction for consideration at a follow -up City Council Meeting. 679- Page 7 March 21, 2013 Sarah Smith From: Kandis Hanson Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 9:40 PM To: Mark Hanus; Heidi Gesch; Kelli Gillispie; RAY SALAZAR Cc: Sarah Smith; mark.wegscheid @gmail.com Subject: FW: 1571 Finch permit / Planning Commission Liaison Recommendation Attachments: SKMBT_C65213031512520.pdf I sent this earlier on my handheld. I wasn't certain it made it so am sending it again. Kandis Hanson City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 w: 952- 472 -0609 kandishanson @citvofmound.com From: Mark Wegscheid [mark.wegscheid @gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 4:59 PM To: Kandis Hanson Subject: Fwd: 1571 Finch permit / Planning Commission Liaison Recommendation Kandis, Thinking about this, In the interest of time, I would ask that the below e-mail be distributed to the Council as soon as possible to allow adequate time for them to visit the location. Forwarded message From: Mark Wegscheid <mark wegscheid@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:56 PM Subject: 1571 Finch permit / Planning Commission Liaison Recommendation To: Kandis Hanson <kandishanson cityofmound.com> Kandis, i am sending this correspondence due to my absence at the next Council meeting scheduled for March 26th and my desire to not impede the applicants progress. In regard to the permit application for 1571 Finch Lane discussed at the March 5th planning meeting and the March 19th planning meeting that will come before the council on either March 26th or the first meeting in April. I attached the packet of the planning commission from Tuesday March 19th. Here is a brief description of the happenings and then I'll pose my recommendation to Mayor and Council. On March 5th the Planning commission met over th68ri^ requests; The Piper permit and Finch Permit. The Piper issue was passed unanimously; the commission moved on to the Finch request for a variance on the street side of the property. After some conversation and discussion with the applicant, Chair Ward identified that the code given to the planning commission in the packet (I think it was 129 -40 or 39) was actually an out dated code. The code in question outlines the criteria a variance needs to meet in order to be passed. it was also noted by staff that the property was additionally going to ask for a variance /expansion on the opposite side of the property for the house and suggested the board consider tabling to allow staff to add the additional request and insert the current code. Commissioner Retterath identified the fact that the previous Piper request was passed under the same "old code ". A new meeting for March 19th was scheduled to readdress both requests. On March 19th the Planning commission reconvened; the Piper request was readdressed and again unanimously passed. The Finch request was reviewed again against the new code. The garage as proposed will be 5.2 feet from the curb, code sites 15' if I am not mistaken. After some discussion in regards to "is the garage too big" could it be reduced? Commissioner Linkert pointed out that even if the garage was reduced per the conversations it might gain 1 to 2 feet of land between the garage and property line which he stated seemed an irrelevant distance and he supported passing the permit. Commissioner Retterath questioned the size of the garage and didn't feel the applicant tried hard enough to make the garage conform to the code. Couple relevant side notes: the height of all structures will be far under the limit and the ground cover is also far under the limits. My recommendation to the Council is to grant the permit My reasons for supporting passage of the permit is as follows; at the point that the garage corner will be 5.2 feet from the property line, it is also roughly 10 to 20 feet from the end of the street. Finch is a dead end street that ends at the lake and this is the last house on that street. In the first meeting staff noted that Public Works had seen the plans and had no issue with it in fact thought it was a good idea because it allowed cars to be farther off the street. 1 strongly urge that the members of council visit 1571 Finch Lane prior to the meeting; while it was evident to me that it was close to the end of the street in the prints, it screamed volumes when I visited it in person. The garage corner in question does not encroach any other private property, it comes close to the last 10 to 20 feet of a dead end street. It was hard to tell the exact distance because there is a lot of snow piled up at the end of the street from plowing. Chair Ward asked staff to make a recommendation, staff declined. I do want to note that in the March 5th meeting packet staff recommended granting the request. Ward made a resolution to recommend to the council that the permit request be denied. My self and Mr Linkert voted No, the 4 remaining votes were yes. -68L- As City Council liaison to the Planning commission it is my recommendation to Mayor and Council to approve the application for a permit variance street side at 1571 Finch Lane. Thank you. Mary Wegscheid Council Member ... ITUATES EXCERPTS MARCH 19, 2013 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, David Goode, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Kelvin Retterath and Councilmember Mark Wegscheid. Absent: Wiechert and Gawtry. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planning Commission Secretary Jill Noriander and Planning Consultant Rita Trapp. Others present: Larry McCall, 5346 Piper Rd; Mike Behr, Behr Design. BOARD OF APPEALS A. Review of Variance Application —House Addition 1571 Finch Lane Applicant: Darren Kahmeyer Trapp reviewed the proposed addition in detail Retterath asked if there was any criteria alteration will be addressed with the bu erosion control permit from the MCWD. ed. Smith said the grading and will also be required to pull an Linkert was concerned about the size of the garage. He likes the overall design plan but would like to know the decidingfactors in the size of the garage. Mike Behr (Behr Design, 3496`'22& St, Jordan, MN) responded that there were not a lot of areas for parking. They were trying to create more guest parking. The additional 25 foot width was needed to make room for the house entryway and the added depth of the garage is to allow room for the interior stairway to the lower level. Ceiling height of 8' for the lower garage was confirmed. Linkert finds it a good design, an improvement to the exterior, and a nice master bedroom addition. To shorten the garage by a foot wouldn't improve the roadside setback significantly. Retterath, after surveying the neighborhood, disputed that the 3 car garage is the norm. This is a two level garage with 4 stalls. The expansion request is a no- brainer. The 'skew` of the property is a factor, but, even if the house was squared with the lot, this garage would still be more than the buildable area would allow. He felt that criteria #2 and #3 weren't met. The street is 7 feet from the corner of the proposed building. He is strongly opposed because of the size of the garage. It's too close to the property line. Bergquist left the Planning Commission meeting at 7:42. .: Goode said this community has a wide variety of ages of housing stock. The fact that there aren't many 3 car garages in the neighborhood doesn't reflect on current garage standards. MOTION by Ward, second by Linkert, to approve the expansion permit with conditions 1 -12 in the Planning Report dated March 1, 2013. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Ward, second by Retterath, to deny the variance request. Voting for: Ward, Penner, Retterath and Goode; Voting against: Linkert and Wegscheid Goode asked the Chair to change the order to: motion, second, open for discussion, and vote. He also asked what he thought the cure would be for this property. Ward said that his obligation isn't to recommend a cure; however, he thought the project should be brought more into scope with the property. Retterath added that the cure would be a standard garage size 24 x 24 or 26; the master suite would still be generous. MINUTE EXCERPTS MARCH 5. 2013 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, Douglas Gawtry, David Goode, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Kelvin Retterath, Pete Wiechert and Councilmember Mark Wegscheid. Absent: none. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander and City Manager Kandis Hanson. Others present: Larry McCall, 5346 Piper Rd; Darren Kahmeyer, 1571 Finch La. BOARD OF APPEALS Review of Variance Application — House Addition 1571 Finch Lane Applicant: Darren Kahmeyer Smith introduced the application. The applicant has requested a 15 foot front yard setback variance. It is proposed to remove the existing, attached garage and replace it with a new garage with upper floor living space that will be accessed from the house. The existing front - loaded garage is non - conforming, located only 10 feet from the street. The proposed garage and living area is to be located 5 feet from the property line. However, it will be side - loaded instead of front - loaded allowing a driveway that better accommodates off - street parking and improves safety. Hardcover will be improved with the project. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Ward felt that the proposal met most of the criteria in City Code Section 129 -39 (a). Discussion took place about criteria included in the Planning Reports and the City Code which were not consistent. Smith also inquired about remodeling activities within the house. Retterath said that the oversized garage bothers him and that the applicant is asking for more than the minimum. Bergquist requested clarification of the front setback requirement. Smith indicated that it is 20 feet by code. Gawtry brought up the obstructed view. The applicant said that because the garage is turned from its present location it doesn't impact views of the neighbors significantly. Retterath can't support the plan because of the excessive storage and garage space. Linkert appreciates that the parking situation will be improved, however this is not the minimum variance required to alleviate the hardship. Penner feels that it's a reasonable use of his property. Goode asked Retterath how he would cure the situation. Retterath would end the addition at the end of the garage section bringing the building 2 feet farther from the front setback line. MOTION by Ward, second by Linkert, to table the request for further consultation with Staff. MOTION carried unanimously. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: HK 3i Planning Commission Rita Trapp, Planning Consultant Sarah Smith, Community Development Director March 15, 2013 Front Yard Setback Variance Request & Expansion Permit Request Darren Kahmeyer 1571 Finch Lane (PID NO. 12- 117 -24 -43 -0001) SYNOPSIS A front yard setback variance was considered by the Planning Commission at their March 5, 2013 meeting. The item was tabled so as to allow the applicant to provide additional information to clarify the nature of the request and project scope. Additionally, discussion took place about the variance criteria to be applied due to some inconsistencies between information contained in the Planning Report and the provisions included in the City Code books and online version. SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The applicant has provided the following additional information for the Planning Commission's consideration: 1) Letter narrative 2) A proposed Removal Plan Survey 3) A revised Proposed Garage Addition Survey 4) Elevations for each side of the home and garage (Sheets Al -A4) 5) Proposed Floor Plans (Sheets A5 -A6) 6) Existing Floor Plan (Sheet A7) DISCUSSION Staff review of the supplemental materials has determined that the applicant must also request an expansion permit for the proposed project. See submitted application. As can be seen from the existing and proposed floor plans, the applicant will be expanding the upper level living space over the existing lower level floor footprint. The lower floor is currently nonconforming with a rear setback of only 14.3 feet instead of 15 feet. While the footprint of 571 Finch Lane Variance PC Report the house remains the same, the applicant will be raising the roof in that area, therefore expanding the volume of the nonconformity. City Code Section 129 -35 (a) (5) (b) states: an expansion permit is required if the expansion or enlargement will not further intrude (as measured at the point of greatest intrusion) into the required setback beyond the distance of the existing structure or the proposed new height /stories is within city code requirements. For example: (i) if the building currently has a setback of 15 feet when 20 feet is required and the proposed expansion will have a setback of 15 feet an expansion permit will be needed; (2) a second floor area is expanded into the nonconforming setback over an existing nonconforming first floor. The applicant has clarified that the width of the proposed attached garage is for 2 cars with extended space at the rear. The applicant has further noted that the garage space will include room at the lakeside end for a staircase leading to the lower level so guests can reach the lake. He also noted that there will be room for storage in the lower level. The Planning Commission may wish to seek clarification on the location of these as they are not shown on the floor plans. The lakeside elevation also shows a garage /shed door that is not shown on the floor plan. The applicant has indicated there will be grass immediately adjacent to these doors. Building height determinations are provided on each of the elevations. These dimensions show that the home will remain under the maximum 35 feet allowed in the residential districts. The applicant has indicated that the existing home has a height of 24 feet on the lakeside. Staff continues to work with the applicant to clarify the extent of impervious surface on the site. It is important to note, however, that the project will be well under the 40% maximum allowance for a lot of record given the size of the property. City Code Section 129 -385 (c) states that land above the ordinary high water level (OHWL) may be used in the calculation of lot area. Upon additional review it was determined that the applicant was previously only including the area to the survey line rather than to the OHWL. A diagram showing what will be removed and what is to be impervious will be provided at the meeting for clarification. REVIEW PROCEDURE Staff will review and discuss the Expansion Permit and Variance review criteria with the Planning Commission at next Tuesday's meeting. March 15, 2013 Page 2 EXPANSION PER hqh MAP 14 APPLICATION ^41 Ma',V,;— d Rxid f0nurid MN 7`3� 4 .; F AX :F52A Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. Case No Please type or print legibly SUBJECT Address" PROPERTY LEGAL Lot Block-, DESC. Subdmsion PI # Zomng RI R2 P3, W G' E`,(% PROPERTY I Name �. , I r _e �" Address—' Phone Home work - `�Fax APPLICANT Name Email ifF OTHER THAN Address_— 0 e" VVNERi Phone Hoare work __Fax_ Has an application ev been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this prcipertv%' Yes j ) No If yes, list dates} of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of'resolutions I " Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration gsize, number of stones, type of use, etc �5 f Case No 3 Please complete the following information related to the property and building's conformity with the zoning regulations for the district in which it is located including the expansion pert-nit request. /1/ 3j,(,!._ ie Ir All 7/ SETBACKS REQUIRED REQUESTED EXPANSION tat exrstang� Front Yard N S E W) ft ft, ft. Side Yard IN S E W) ft ft. ft Side Yard: IN S E W) ft ft. ft Rear Yard, N S EN > ft, ft ft lakeside . ,YS E W) = ft, ft. f, (NSEW) ft --ft ft Street Frontage, ft. ft. ft Lot Size sq ft ---,sq ft -sq ft , � � �, V, � ,1 -L �,—sq ft �–,` � Hardcover ( �sq ft _sq it 4 Does the prese I use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is locate0 Yesf�f No ( I If no. specify each non-conforrnjty t, ire there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion unique to the property such as lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over Mich the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have no controP Please check all that apply too narrow soil f, , topography - ) too small ( ) drainage J14 existing situation f too shallow ( ) shape f i other specify Please describe: e, -690- 6. Were the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning "ordinance was adapted (1982)? Yes ( }. No ?. If yes. explain '. Were the exceptional or extraordina traumstances created by any other person -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes i ? Nf If yes. explain. 6 Are the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances for which you request an expansion permit pecuirar only to 'he property described in this petttior)9 Yes,{ ) No t } 'tf no list some other properties which are similarly affected? k n x-k f �' _ t... .p._,' ,. -..�.T .• �'"i t� 9 Comments q ...:f Certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained to any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate t acknowledge that l have read all of the vanance information provided i consent to the entry /in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the Clt,f 61' uttdf r=the purpose of inspecting, or of Posting, maintaining and removing such notices as y be required bg } owner's Signature',- br �' Date Applicant's Signaf6re� - r Date t.d ?"�k i &QrF " "3;: 1t4�?fS7k xti�i -691 Darren Kahmeyer 1571 Finch Lane, Mound, MN 55364 March 11, 2013 Planning Commission Garage Addition To whom it may concern: I wanted to follow up with some detail of the garage size for my proposed project. We are turning the garage to the side for safety reasons, and to get a driveway, and to have a larger garage. The area of lake front properties and the size of homes in the area, generally have a 3 car garage. The standard 3 attached 3 car garage is 32 x 22. Our proposed garage is 2 cars wide and will allow for storage area in front. The reason for my 3 car garage being slightly larger in size is to allow for a staircase in the rear of the garage to allow for guests to get to the back yard from the driveway area. The garage will be attached to the house and will require a staircase to get to the back yard. The proposed garage will have a lower garage area that will be used for storage of trailers, and snowmobiles, but with a lower ceiling height the area will be limited. The garage is not overly large and would not be an over improvement for the area. Sincerely/ Darina meye r -692- °%°L®% N_ o P O. c o R N (S) 0 41 N � U � 0 O s�° z O w :N ssN, B♦ 1 Off\ � ° N c p33a l -3 d' -• � A sn autmn \ql8 � f 0-0 h I N jti 08 3 19Z.tiZotia N m um . 0 = C4 in IT 0 10 3 ° N Cl) G ° N 0 m G 3 - R L WO N N N w0 C o c m A N � N U N w T = m a ° " o 7 cy C w T N w II O m a 3 U ice- n. —.0 cl) U y o o D O Q U J4p 0 O Z J ®° C) Z ° F o F- E =._ a2 n. m3m F Q.% O N N U W w f� oaU��3 0 < z L7 CA a R w C 9 ro y Qi P N H P V / er / / v m N N� II N L voN mi x 0 0 0 p W y/ / / / / / / / / a\ / 3A, r >O / 7 /' p 5 �l � _ _sa6p ,7N o P O. c o R N (S) 0 41 N � U � 0 O s�° z / w :N ssN, B♦ 1 Off\ � ° /// t/8•LZ6 M 8Z,S5 p33a l -3 9NIV7 40N1=1 � q. N � A sn autmn \ql8 � f O G O C N I -iY) jti 08 3 19Z.tiZotia N m um . 0 E ° N Cl) C w U � w u w Lt WO O G 3 - R L WO N N N w0 C C A N � N U N w T = m a ° w a T"O S T UI E p 7 cy C w T N w C) O m a 3 U ice- n. —.0 cl) N y Q U J4p P V / er / / v m N N� II N L voN mi x 0 0 0 p W y/ / / / / / / / / a\ / 3A, r >O / 7 /' p 5 �l � _ _sa6p ,7N / o � 0 c o R N (S) 0 41 N � U � 0 O s�° z / w :N ssN, B♦ 1 Off\ � ° /// t/8•LZ6 M 8Z,S5 p33a 9NIV7 40N1=1 � q. N � A sn autmn \ql8 � f m C N I -iY) jti 08 3 19Z.tiZotia N m um . / /Z/- I r- V. J IUD u \ I L I 3 � I I I � � I � � I I / gAk I h O o c o R N (S) N 0 O s�° z / w :N ssN, B♦ O Off\ � ° /// t/8•LZ6 M 8Z,S5 g O 'Ot�"�` -'`� o /Z/- I r- V. J IUD u \ I L I 3 � I I I � � I � � I I / gAk I h O o c o R N (S) N 0 O s�° z / w :N ssN, B♦ O Off\ /Z/- I r- V. J IUD u \ I L I 3 � I I I � � I � � I I / gAk I h O �– F — �p O � l "Sl o c o R E a / N / / sa6 H £ pa A8 c � ° /// t/8•LZ6 M 8Z,S5 g '344, N -iY) m� o 0 E ° N Cl) C w U \ w u w Lt WO O G 3 o `o >, R L WO N N N w0 C N E w N U N w T = m a ° w a T"O S T UI E p 7 cy C w T N w O m a 3 U ice- n. —.0 cl) N Q U �– F — �p O � l "Sl o c o R E a c � ° o a�m N -iY) m� o 0 E ° N Cl) C w U \ w u w Lt WO O G 3 N m / o c o R E a c � ° o a�m N N N 3°00 E ° N O C w U \ w u w Lt WO O G 3 o `o >, R L WO N N N w0 C /y E w N U N w T = m a ° w a T"O S T UI E p 7 cy C w T N w O m a 3 U ice- n. —.0 cl) N m V N O z v M ° E N N O N z ¢ _, 3 N 0 E 0 O N 8 U N i � m � Y � m s a �g �j• _ v ` O N � 0 N C d E m y U N T d � T'O m N L o ON � m m 3 Z II N N N W o o a m o a? N c G b U o c Z J • 0 0 10 U G n O O ° > Z E° o V ¢ x b G G T'� T O O G O G O N m3� ws a: W � W y A z w zo bIJ F Z � a z l co O� N ,� s E tC y ra � ci z O �3 CL a. Q t J O � pro o y p ° U 3 � � C. n w ° o `0 0 0 0 LL LL O O d v LL � m m m m - 0 0 0r P �0O ` � U � C1 � O P / r O U 0 n. _ O C P U fe / � N S 0 E 0 O N 8 U N i � m 3 0 Y � m s a �g �j• _ v ` O O C P U fe / � N S X09 / / c r / / W � U1 �"N N U S it @ l 0 ,,� 2 O U p � Q � / / / 1 �\ / v O / � Of r 0 _ m NQ a oN O � Ga p , i / r o y h •,9.9 9NV7 sno ✓iwnpg 1 ry T 0 E 0 O N 8 U N i � m 3 0 Y � m s a N _ v ` O d X09 / / c r / / W � U1 �"N N U S it @ l 0 ,,� 2 O U p � Q � / / / 1 �\ / v O / � Of r 0 _ m NQ a oN O � Ga p , i / r o y h •,9.9 9NV7 sno ✓iwnpg 1 ry T 0 V I / / y iJ m 3 I i i 1 I I,I I :e s rO.I IIII �/ 11 9k2 9 Ak' b8'LZl M „EZ,99ob0 S 0 � 9 �9k6 / 6 f I m N b�U � O � R M V' O OD OD JA I� U � 0 o � off` 0 E 0 O N 8 U N i � m 3 0 Y � m s a _ v ` O d 0 0 V I / / y iJ m 3 I i i 1 I I,I I :e s rO.I IIII �/ 11 9k2 9 Ak' b8'LZl M „EZ,99ob0 S 0 � 9 �9k6 / 6 f I m N b�U � O � R M V' O OD OD JA I� U � 0 o � off` m 0 a >. c a� m O a° d o ° J � � T O � N O O o O O d N N T U N d y L U L E d N J O U ti 3 a 0 at m `m m a N 0 0 O 6 0 m N � N N p z 3 0 0 8 U N i 3 0 Y � m s a E O d 0 N C d E m y U N T d � T'O m 02 L o m 0 a >. c a� m O a° d o ° J � � T O � N O O o O O d N N T U N d y L U L E d N J O U ti 3 a 0 at m `m m a N 0 0 O 6 0 m N � N N p z 3 AVERA6E HEIGHT OF GRADE _ STREET SIDE ELEVATION lNE16' • I'C � E Oz r° Vr C �u f ^ V N N � N � C 'WWw L ccD v N N O L O O vt L h P N T ® V J J ^ d V W U Y ^ P J W Q J U � LL LL W � �J Oz �ioC grc =sue >C3F Vr W �u ® LU V C Cie U LLJ ^/ z L W ccD � L O .d = V x � N� 5mgqm � Eli `o eh e�+l �ioC grc =sue >C3F �iI O yUy ��Roy� O p �u 6'O yNC�Om � 6 MEAN HEIGHT OF _ _ _ - — - — — - — TALLEST GABLE n v' ENTRY LEVEL FLOOR GARAGE FRONT ELEVATION Y 6)v.i'c 1 SHEET N4. A2 ELEVATION W N M zO Lu u V >-z LU W U d ce ® � N d N N r. O LLJ L _ LW ^_ L ®® ® ~ D J cc v U = N U Y ^ E m Q O SHEET N4. A2 ELEVATION W Oz LL- Lu Q V >-z LU W U d ce ® W W O LLJ L _ Y SHEET N4. A2 ELEVATION 8 O'\ m MEAN HEIGHT OF TALLEST GABLE RM EL. 941A LOWER LEVEL�I FLOOR - - - —u - AVERAGE HEIGHT OF GRADE LAKE 510E ELEVATION SLHE. W • I'd PC9U � M O ® r• ;F V �Q LU in t � N � P 9 w Q m p ® d wU L T O � t � a ® � - N V � E E OW bd SCm ® W ;F V �Q LU in w w �Zz ® WU- =) �g,U a tJ O LZ O � Y SCm WS W ;F g3�YQ LL OO J in �g,U a tJ REAR SIDE ELEVATION x V•w U O E is 0 U- LU LU V) >- z V -< � LU t.n LU LU LL 0 syl Ln ril ri I E Polo LL 0 c I ge F5� Lu U ® MY U- LU LU V) >- z V -< � LU t.n LU LU LL 0 syl Ln ril ri MY ..sw zd�< 9-siz Lo syl ril ri � � � � � � � � \� \� � � \� \\ � � \� \\ / r----- -------- / /.^' - - ---_---------' r / / � ----------- -----_- . _~. / �'---� � / / / / / / � � � -------_---^��--- � , . -/ -- LL--,--- / ---------------------------- / / / -----------------T---r ----- / &ARA61 / / '------@ / r � / �-------�� r--� ``.-____.-^^' --------------- OFFICE ) \ / / ~~~--' / ------�� M LAWNY DATH / M4 ROOM � FRO DiO�NER LFVFL FLOOR ! / SCALE: 1/5*, LA- Lu LU af m co , „�,�� ._,-- •- -� - -�. » SCAM « .V-O" �_ } [® %z K w ®$ LLJ D �kD � \9 0 L.Lj L Lw ,u« \\\ / . 0 ( ~ �_ w LL- %z w ®$ LLJ D �kD � \9 0 L.Lj L �_ •w =q« � 2!° it I� I I I w ROM BEDROOM I Q II AT I 6AFA6E II 0 I I h I BATH I _ -_ _ 0 0 __ ® rarm�xva °b � d -- - - - - -- UL KIT N --T- T �� I 1 I I MKS ROOM J D1H1* ROOM LIVIKS ROOM EXI5TING UFFER LEVEL FLOOR i EXISTING LOWER LEVEL FLOOR Al cECAM 1/8' - I'•O' me v r O LL- ttGN d'�� LU Y`G W ® Z � G L O Ln Q (:D� V/ SHEET NO. 7 EXISTING FLOOR PLAN N IV r U IiO J ttGN d'�� ®�o 4c��44JJJi�g rc� NI�VCdV Y`G SHEET NO. 7 EXISTING FLOOR PLAN TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: ZONING: Planning Commission Rita Trapp, Planning Consultant Sarah Smith, Community Development Director March 1, 2013 Front Yard Setback Variance Request Darren Kahmeyer 1571 Finch Lane (PID NO. 12- 117 -24 -43 -0001) Low Density Residential R -1A Single Family Residential 0 The applicant and property owner, Darren Kahmeyer, has requested a 15 foot front yard setback variance. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing, attached garage and replace it with a new garage with upper floor living space that will be accessed from the house. The existing front - loaded garage is non - conforming, located only 10 feet from the street. The proposed garage and living area is proposed to be located 5 feet from the property line. However, it will be side - loaded garage instead of a front - loaded garage. SITE INFORMATION The property is located at the end of Finch Lane directly adjacent to Jennings Bay in the Woodland Point Addition. According to Hennepin County records, the more than 8,000 square foot property has a home that was constructed in 1920s. The former Waurika Commons, about 5,000 square feet in size, is located along the shoreline of the property and is shown on the included survey. None of the activities proposed in the application will occur within the former commons area. The house is not located squarely on the property so the northern building corner is located closer to the street than the southern building corner. The front of the lot is Finch Lane given that it is the only part of the lot that is located on a public street. The rear of the lot is therefore the west property line, while the south is a side and the north is lakeshore. The property slopes over 10 feet from the southern end of the property to the northern end where the street ends. This slope has contributed to difficulties for the applicant in utilizing their current driveway. The following are the proposed dimensions for the application: -702- 1571 Finch Lane Variance PC Report REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 129 -39 (a) 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. A variance can only be granted if one of the following conditions exist: (1) 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 chapter have no control. (2) The literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this chapter. (3) The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) Granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. (5) The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. (6) The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this chapter or to property in the same zone. 60 -DAY PROCESS The date of submittal /completeness of the variance request is February 25, 2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, the City of Mound has sixty (60) days to approve or deny the land use request unless an extension is executed by the City in accordance with state rules. 703 February 28, 2013 Page 2 Required Proposed /Existing Variance Lot Area 6,000 sq. ft. 8,285 sq. ft. Lot Width 40 feet 80.44 feet Front Yard (east) 20 feet 5 feet 15 feet Lakeshore (north) 50 feet 66.8 feet Rear Yard (west) 15 feet 14.3 feet 0.7 feet (existing) Side Yard (south) 6 feet 17.1 feet Hardcover (maximum 40 %) 3,314 sq. ft. 3,082 sq. ft. REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 129 -39 (a) 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. A variance can only be granted if one of the following conditions exist: (1) 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 chapter have no control. (2) The literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this chapter. (3) The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) Granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. (5) The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. (6) The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this chapter or to property in the same zone. 60 -DAY PROCESS The date of submittal /completeness of the variance request is February 25, 2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, the City of Mound has sixty (60) days to approve or deny the land use request unless an extension is executed by the City in accordance with state rules. 703 February 28, 2013 Page 2 1571 Finch Lane Variance PC Report CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and supporting materials were forwarded to all City departments for review and comment. Comments received are summarized below: Scott Qualle, Building Official No comments, no concerns Dan Faulkner, City Engineer Reasonable request. Appears to be a safety improvement for both the homeowner and anyone using the public road in this area Ray Hanson, Public Works Supt. Proposal will be an improvement as vehicles will no longer be parked in driveway which extends into ROW. DISCUSSION • As shown in the included photo, the driveway for the current front -load garage is about 13 feet long at its shortest point and results in cars overhanging into the street. The replacement of the garage with a side -load garage will allow the construction of a longer driveway that can fully accommodate off- street parking. • According to the proposed site plan provided by the applicant, the following structures will be removed as part of this project: retaining wall on the south side of the property, the retaining wall adjacent to Finch Lane, the existing walkway extending from the driveway around the house, the concrete patio under the deck at the back of the house, and a retaining wall under where the new garage is being proposed. • As shown on the included survey the percent of hardcover on the property is to improve through this project from 44% to 37 %. The applicant is advised that both the proposed retaining wall and the hot tub should be included in the hardcover calculations. Staff will confirm the hardcover calculations prior to the meeting. Staff recommends that hardcover for the site be maintained at or below 40% as required by City Code. • The applicant is also advised that the hot tub as shown on the survey is located too close to the adjacent property. The applicant has indicated that the location shown is temporary. The hot tub will be moved once construction has completed. The applicant is advised to review the regulations in Section 129 -196 (b) (1) to ensure placement of the hot tub follows City regulations. • Section 113 -53 (b) (4) states that all structures shall be constructed so that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation, which for Lake Minnetonka is 933.0 feet. The existing low floor elevation for the house is 940.5 and the proposed lowest garage floor is 935.3. ® According to the applicant the proposed height of the addition will be just over 26 feet. This meets the maximum building height regulations in the R -1A Zoning District of 35 feet. The building height shall be confirmed as part of the building permit application. February 28, 2013 -704 Page 3 1571 Finch Lane Variance PC Report • Applicant is advised of pending seasonal road restrictions. • Property is subject to the provisions of the Woodland Point Settlement Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION In accordance with City Code Sec. 129 -39 (a), Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a 15 foot front yard variance as requested by the applicant subject to the following conditions: 1. Hardcover for the site shall not exceed 40% as allowed by the R -1A Zoning District. The applicant shall remove all structures as identified on the proposed site plan. 2. All structures shall be constructed so that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation, which for Lake Minnetonka is 933.0. 3. Building height of the new structure shall be less than 35 feet as required by City Code. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. S. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the expansion permit application is approved. 6. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 7. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 9. No building permit will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided. 10. No building permits will be issued until any and /or all fees associated with the land use application have been paid unless an escrow deposit of sufficient amount is on file with the City. -705 - February 28, 2013 Page 4 1571 Finch Lane Variance PC Report 11. Effective September 1, 2011, new Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules related to wetlands, floodplain and erosion control are in effect; also others. Applicant is advised that these rules are now under the jurisdiction of the MCWD as rules regulatory authority and permitting was officially turned back to the District by the Mound City Council on August 23, 2011. The applicant is requested to contact the MCWD regarding the new regulations and applicable permits that may be needed to undertake the proposed project. Any future building permit release will be conditioned upon the applicant providing receipt of the MCWD permit(s) issuance (as applicable) and /or receipt of written confirmation from the MCWD that no permit(s) is needed for the project. 12. Applicant is advised of pending seasonal road restrictions. In recommending Staff approval, the following findings of fact are offered. 1. The criteria included City Code Section 129 -39 (a) are met. 2. The orientation of the house on the property and its location at the end of Finch Lane limits the ability of the applicant to locate the proposed garage in a different location on the lot. 3. The replacement of the existing front -load garage with a side -load garage will enable the applicant to construct a driveway that better accommodates off - street parking and improves safety for the neighborhood. 4. The replacement of the garage and associated structure improvements to the landscape will reduce hardcover to at or below 40 %. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW In the event a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission, It is anticipated that the variance request will be reviewed at an upcoming City Council meeting. At this time, possible dates are Tuesday, March 12, 2013 or Tuesday, March 26, 2013. -706 - February 28, 2013 Page 5 Evil. -;. Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required Planning Commission Date I City Council Date 3[2-0)-5 Please type or pri t legibly at time of application. Case No. SUBJECT Address !�_7 ( f r ti � t'il-,1 Lot ��C)C l' �G G ! D�S i r G / /� Block 2– PROPERTY LEGAL DESC. Subdivision �t�Ll I4' PID # —, 1666 + zoning: R1 ( R2 R3 Bt B2 B3 (Circle one) PROPERTY Name �Y /d L`6i7P11ZL Email u-/e'L /Te g %) OWNER l Address—/ Phone Home iP1Z, Z�ir- /Gr.'b WorkSZ `7di /8 Fax j�2 7�� °�s APPLICANT Name Email (IF OTHER THAN Address OWNER) Phone Home Work Fax Has an application ever been a e for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No ). If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and p v' a copies of resoluti ns. vJ� � �yY✓ctcti� o�y�Pi� Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): Variance Information -707- (2/29/2012) Page 4 of 6 oxn Case No. 3. Do the existing structures comply with all r , height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes ( ) No ) If no, specify each non - conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot ar , etc.): L i')I �%; a d0' o far /UZCi rah Ciose- P6')nk du (f SETBACKS: topography REQUIRED ( ) drainage REQUESTED ( ) shape (or existing) Front Yard: ( N 015W ft. Side Yard: (N S E W) Side Yard: ('O: W ) ft. 7, 1 ft. Rear Yard: (N S Eg) ft. ft. Lakeside: & E W) ft. Q ,S2 ft. (NSEW) ft. ft. Street Frontage: ft. ft. Lot Size: _ �7 z_ 3 sq ft sq ft Hardcover: sq ft sq ft VARIANCE J ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. sq ft sq ft 4. Does the prese;;I,,use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? YesC V ), No ( j. If no, specify each non - conforming use: -% houS-e a,tid road ctrc° afasi r,� ale. » 71ca dfalfe i2f ft(e h;11 r'Ylc,kP¢ ,, nn , C, k rfrei clviU :rxt i.S j© 5. Which unique physi al cha acteristics of the subject property uses permitted in that zoning district? ftoo narrow} topography ( ) too small ( ) drainage ( ) too shallow ( ) shape Please describe: Variance Information -708- (2/29/2012) Page 5 of 6 its reasonable use for any of the ( j soil ( ) existing situation ( ) other: specify Case No. 6. Was the practical difficulty described above created by the action o a yone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No If yes, explain: J / % 7. Was the prac�(i�al difficulty created by any other human -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes( ),No ). If yes, explain: 8. Are the conditions of practical difficulty 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? a 4 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 ilior upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of M t purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be re uired by .. Variance Information -709- (2/29/2012) Page 6 of 6 Date l% �I / Date f -�1 /3 how N 0 � O O G °z (I U p J O Z Q > m U Z u cn N c CC c C 3 ti p1 > pcp c4 u7 ' Q V1 N N gg (r O ® O 0 U O ^U tl o d x b m h o tl a U 3 w tl U O sT o C O` y0 F G` d II tO� o a co �r W N , a� H L rTo 0 n N $A p+ry LL Li n C O O COO o z 0 gOeg O /d uLpi rt�rt d Y C) pj o� n m W ®5 � O .a � b 3 Ln •�yCq .^� � T N �-�..� � Lr) � Cd z \ ap � N N b U c E d N Fj N U q .= N ry r a .L• >. � o Itz 9 O Z 43 O Fa d O o m � a b m h o tl a U 3 w tl U O sT o C O` y0 F G` d II tO� o a co �r W P pigs /Ii' A Ae � N O� II �h njN II�L =tea OUQCL s. 's / /1 /1 / r� ry4] / Q S. I / b — / ,3�Cps �^,, / / / �O A N , a� H L c 0 LL Li O. J .spy C O O .15 bA 0 gOeg O /d uLpi rt�rt d Y C) pj o� n m m Co 3 � Ln •�yCq .^� � T N �-�..� � Lr) � Cd ' c '. U p p O \ ap � N N b U c E d N Fj N U N v r a .L• >. � o Itz 9 O Z 43 O Fa d O o m � P pigs /Ii' A Ae � N O� II �h njN II�L =tea OUQCL s. 's / /1 /1 / r� ry4] / Q S. I / b — / ,3�Cps �^,, / / / �O A N , c S. I / b — / ,3�Cps �^,, / / / �O A ` 9NV7 40NI� \ N , c O. J .spy C ` 9NV7 40NI� \ R2 ' 9 / 9kk k6' , ,9 I / I �3" i I I I I 44-1 --J II I I I jC> 9� " R s* �t ca6paN 19k8'. V° ��b8'LU M,,£Z399 °b0 S o B ' i o r a v! V • 0 m O O N c O. J .spy 3 O N 0 `o JS t0 2 _aina N �-�..� c d N LL E $ Lr) ` \ \ c \ \ ' c '. U p p O \ ap � N N c E d N Fj N R2 ' 9 / 9kk k6' , ,9 I / I �3" i I I I I 44-1 --J II I I I jC> 9� " R s* �t ca6paN 19k8'. V° ��b8'LU M,,£Z399 °b0 S o B ' i o r a v! V • 0 m O O N c O. J .spy 3 O N `o JS t0 2 _aina N �-�..� c d N LL E $ o V ` \ \ c \ \ ' c '. U p p O Z � N N c E d N Fj N U N v r a .L• >. � 9 O Z 43 O Fa d O o m � to m a N 5 c f .�I a m m m m d 0 2 a N O c N -710- dAWN M. GQC MIE - 7 ... CUSTOM DESIGN FOR_ KAHMEYER o¢SIeN INC MOUND, MN ELL psi�n, I I — / Rp \J L J �1 RI I I I I, I I rr 6vwre CUSTOM DESIGN FOR_ M _ rex Wrz tmv O KAHMEYER DESIGN xNc 0 vO �4m MOUND, MN cE t9 :z�xnblgzz�l� �' :xl >.dnoz \ � � t � � � j ��/ u u l -IMENi1111►�1 Date: March 22, 2013 To: Mayor Hanus and Council Members From: Kandis Hanson, City Manager Catherine Pausche, Director of Finance and Administration Subject: Proposed Changes to the City Code - Waterways Please read the minutes from the Docks and Commons Commission from March 21, 2013, for additional background related to this topic. The minutes are included in section 9B of your packet. In addition, supplemental information supporting the need for an increase in the Villa Dock fees to help fund the bonds that were issued to pay for Lost Lake improvements are included in the pages that follow: Exhibit A. Dock Fund — Sources and Uses Related to Villa Docks Exhibit B. Comparable Rates for Slips in Area Marinas & Villa Escrow Balances Exhibit C. Debt Service on Bonds Issued to Fund Lost Lake Improvements Two Ordinances are proposed to amend Chapter 78 of the Mound City Code as it Relates to Waterways as well as a resolution to amend the 2013 fee schedule. It should be noted from the DCC minutes from March 21s`, 2013, the Commission supports all of these changes as presented in this packet. 1) Sec 78 -22 (e). License Priorities for the Villas on Lost Lake Slips. The original proposal to split the slips available to non -Villa residents — % at one rate and %z at a higher rate — was too cumbersome to administer. Working with one priority list means potentially no slips will be rented at the higher non -Mound resident rate. Therefore, in conjunction with adopting this proposed priority list, Staff is proposing to increase the Mound/non -Villa Resident Rate from $1,600 to $1,950. As the Villas are built and the number of slips in the pool decreases, we would like to see Mound residents served over non -Mound residents, but we need the additional revenue to support the debt service on the bonds. 2) Sec 78 -101 (c). Late Applications. Staff has received requests for the Council and Commission to consider a revision to the section of the City Code regulating late applications to allow for a one -time exception for missing the deadline for non - abutters. Staff feels they can administer the one -time -716- exception without a problem. Three residents who were non - abutters unintentionally missed the deadline in 2012, and Staff is aware of 2 residents this year. The DCC proposed assessing a $100 late fee and limit the exception period to March I" through March 3151 3) Assuming the Council approves the proposed Ordinances outline above, Staff requests the corresponding changes to the fee schedule be adopted. Thank you for your consideration in these matters. Please let Kandis know if any additional information is required to make this decision prior to Tuesday's Council meeting. -717- I 1J .r{ A w O N h O 0 0 O 00 0 0 0 d 40 O 0 0 o co 0 0 0 0 0 00 m o 0 co a uio0, 0w vv n �o UtI lD O to m O O t 0 0 W W M N row M m ti m N I'� O ti w w M w G N b to � N d• N C M N J Vt LY N ihth to 1R VF iA Ll iA 4} Ll m a F- N N o 3 3 0 0 0000�0000 0 a �o 0 0 O O c0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0t O �p �p ui O O O ul 0 0 0 0 00 d' �' h N HN pOppp � C Y' 0 0 tp O w w M O N M iri NI,Na, Nt O Tt a N M O N@ N C U O •� O N O N C O C L O> w w? s� N O N h O O O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d 40 O O O o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol O � h h moo�oo °w � m m M M row N eil N !V u) N N M d� V' N b to � N d• N C M N J Vt LY N ihth to 1R VF iA Ll iA 4} Ll V N F- M o 3 3 0 0 0000�0000 0 a �o 0 0 O O c0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0t O �p �p ui O O HN N � C Y' N C LI C LL II iri NI,Na, O O N h O v � h h a M M N X X p N N N !Z a C M N J em-I o 3 3 o 0 0 O HN N � C Y' N C LI C LL II O O N@ N C U O •� O N !6 V C O C L O> w w? s� N a u C (o w C w 0 r fL C VI W . - � O 0 w o 0 F- E .� u a -718- Pa A L >C W C a a N a C E a r U O w- V C v a N Q 0 a u C a a U .Q 0 Z ai U ro a c ro Q ro U N Y C a C m C O. s U Y C v Y O a 0 0 O N o° O 0 Q -719- h h N Ci V W m O N O O O 7 O m m h V a a h O O W o a O J V O O L3 a� N a M O y — L N 001 ID QOl O N i C N H E O U ro L U N to Ot V1 Ol Ol Ol ro 3 LL O .c cn y 2 O Z c v a J +- C a v v� ry O Q C a a N a C E a r U O w- V C v a N Q 0 a u C a a U .Q 0 Z ai U ro a c ro Q ro U N Y C a C m C O. s U Y C v Y O a 0 0 O N o° O 0 Q -719- h h N Ci V W m O N I ai •r{ A „i W N V^ N N p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P V r h 0�;� � C d ti N N N N N O O O O O O O M M M M M M M M a `w N � 9 ^ ad N — ._..... ^ N h h —N -- . -- - -.M-i N� N — — rr N^ N N N N N M M t1 N N N N N N N N F d � o t� ^ C Y y�h y�0 �n 'n oao �noa00000000�nmm M^ m V W U � r M W CO " �0" OO N V� V V M N .% P m [i] C� M V r'i ••.•" M^ `/� O o ,Y, M C W c ^ Y w Q V m N N N N N N N N N O O 6 O O S O C S O 0 0 0 O O O O O O S O O O O O O P O O O O C O W ai n P O N �O 07 W H O N �l Vl n N P O � C `w N � 9 ^ ad N — ._..... N� N rr N^ N N N N N M M t1 N N N N N N N N F d � o O U � v , L L C S O O O Q O O O L G V m N N N N N N N N N W ai m c 'p c0 N O V O O O O O O O O O O O O S S Q p O O S 6 C u L v v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K m o v o 0 o P o P o 0 0 0 O O O N O M ,n C C U N N N N N O R N N N N N N N N N N M vww 5 -720- CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. -2013 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 78 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE AS IT RELATES TO WATERWAYS The City of Mound does ordain: That Chapter 78, Section 78 -122, Licenses, be amended to read as follows: Sec. 78 -122. Licenses. (e) License Priorities for Villas on Lost Lake Slips. The Dock Administration shall assign all locations to the applicants upon compliance with this ordinance and subject to reasonable conditions. The number of slip licenses available in each of these categories will be determined by the Dock Administration on an annual basis. Every Villa resident who occupies a townhome located on Lost Lake Lane or Lost Lake Court in Mound, Minnesota, will be assigned one slip to be charged at the Villa Resident Rate for Primary Slip as established in the City of Mound Fee Schedule and the resident may choose whether or not they want to rent the slip on an annual basis If they decline the slip it will be included in the pool of slips rented at the higher rates as established in the City of Mound Fee Schedule. The following priorities govern the issuance of Villas on Lost Lake slip licenses available in the pool to be issued on a (1) First Priority: Mound Rresidents of the Villas T . on the current wait -list who rented a Villa Slip in the prior season based on seniority on the wait -list. (2) Second Priority. "Mound residents en eurrer" wait- « Villa Residents wanting a second slip who rented a second Villa Slip in the prior season. (3) Third Priority: Mound residents net on current wait list who did not rent a Villa Slip in the prior season based on seniority on the wait -list. (4) Fourth Priority: The general publie, with r_: _:,, b:.. r_ v i; w � iao. based on qenierit,. Villa Residents wanting a second slip who did not rent a second Villa Slip in the prior season. (5) Fifth Priority: Mound residents not on the wait -list, with priority given to those who held a Villa Slip in the prior season. (6). Sixth Priority: The general public including non -Mound residents, with priority given to those who held a Villa Slip in the prior season Passed by the City Council this 26`x' day of March, 2013. Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk Published in The Laker on 30" day of March, 2013. Effective on the 3151 day of March, 2013. -721- Mayor Mark Harms CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. -2013 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 78 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE AS IT RELATES TO WATERWAYS The City of Mound does ordain: That Chapter 78, Section 78 -101, Application procedure, be amended to read as follows: (c) Late Applications. (3) Non - Abutting Applicants: Primary Site Holders will be given a one -time exception for missing the deadline The Primary Site Holder will be required to pay a $100 late fee for applications received between March I" and March 31". If the application is received after March 31" or if this is the second time late the Primary Site Holder will not be allowed to retain their Second Priority status and must relinquish their dock 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 DCC meeting. Passed by the City Council this 26`h day of March, 2013. Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk Published in The Laker on 30`h day of March, 2013. Effective on the 31" day of March, 2013. -722- Mayor Mark Harms CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 13- RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 12 -107 ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, on December 11, 2012 the City Council approved Resolution 12 -107 adopting a fee schedule; and WHEREAS, on March 26, 2013, the City Council approved changes to the way Lost Lake slips would be licensed; and WHEREAS, the new method of licensing requires a change in fees for Lost Lake slips in order to achieve the desired outcomes; and WHEREAS, Villa residents will be allowed to rent a second slip at the non -Mound resident rate; and WHEREAS, a late fee has been established for late applications from non- abutters that needs to be added to the Fee Schedule; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota hereby adopts Resolution No. 13 -_ to amend City Resolution No. 12 -107 Adopting Fee Schedule for the following fees: DOCKS: 78 -101 Late dock license application fee for applications received between March 1" and March 3151(non- abutters only) $100 78 -121 Lost Lake Villa Multiple (Villa of Lost Lake Residents primary slip) $1,148/yr 78 -121 Lost Lake Villa Multiple (to Mound /non -Villa residents) $1,6081yr $1,950/y r 78 -121 Lost Lake Villa Multiple (to Non - Mound residents/ Villa residents for second slip) $2,600 /yr Adopted by the City Council this 26th day of March, 2013. Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk -724- Mayor Mark Hanus MOUND DOCKS AND COMMONS COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 21, 2013 The Mound Docks and Commons Commission met on Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Present: Vice Chair Mark Drahos, Commissioners Susan Gardner, Rodney Beystrom, Council Representative Kelli Gillispie Excused: Chair Jim Funk, Vacant Seat (Cliff Schmidt) Others Present: Director of Finance and Administration Catherine Pausche Public Present: Bill Stone, Pat Buffington, Derrick Hentz, Mark Hanus, Heidi Gesch, Mark Wegscheid Vice -Chair Mark Drahos called meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. 1. Approval of Agenda. Catherine Pausche requested item 6A be added to the agenda. MOTION by Gillispie, seconded by Gardner, to approve agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. ►N MOTION by Gillispie, seconded by Gardner, to approve the minutes as written. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3. Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present: Npne 4. Interview Candidates for Vacant Dock Commission Seat (Non- Abutter) & Vote The candidates were interviewed from the podium in the following order: Bill Stone, Pat Buffington, Derrick Hentz. The Commissioners voted on the ballots, votes were were tallied, and the following motion was made: MOTION by Drahos, seconded by Gillispie, to recommend Derrick Hentz for appointment by the Council for the vacant Docks and Commons Commission Seat. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Rodney Beystrom arrived at 8:10 p.m. 5. Ordinance Amendment —Villa Slips Pausche gave background on the changes that were discussed in 2012 to increase Villa slip fees for non -Villa residents in order to help pay the bonds that were issued for the Lost Lake Improvements. Originally, the number of slips available to non -Villa residents was going to be split 50/50 with half offered to Mound residents at $1,600 and half offered on the open market, including non -Mound residents at $2,600. This would achieve the desired revenue increase to help pay the debt service on the bonds. Pausche stated the proposed split creates problems in administering the -725- program, particularly when the Villas are built up and the number of docks available to non -Villa residents decline. Pausche proposed one priority list but increasing the Villa slip fee for Mound residents who are not Villa residents from $1,600 to $1,950 and leaving the "open market" non - Mound fee at $2,600. This will result in less revenue than previously projected, but will be much easier to administer. At the request of the Villa developer, Villa residents will also be able to rent a second slip at the open market /non -Mound fee of $2,600. Mark Hanus, Mayor, reminded the Commission that the original intent was for the Villa slips to only be for Villa residents, but because of the slow development, the option to rent to non -Villa residents was included. Now only 27 units will be built and non -Villa residents renting slips will always be a factor. Gardner asked for competitive rates for other slips and Pausche indicated the proposed fees were well below Chapman Place in Mound and Howard's Point in Shorewood for the same size slip. Drahos stated Lost Lake presents some challenges, but he thought the City will have no trouble renting the slips at the proposed rates. -726- MOTION by Drahos, seconded by Gillispie, to approve the proposed changes as amended to Sec. 78 -122 Licenses. All voted in favor. Motion carried. MOTION by Drahos, seconded by Beystrom, to approve the proposed changes to the Fee Schedule, as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 6. Discuss Dock /Slip Lottery for 2013 1) Frenette, Therese 25) Johnson, Jesse 2) Morast, John 26) Cich, Robert 3) Whitmore, Jeff 27) Rydrych, Cbris 4) Emry, Terri 28) Maruska, Matthew& Julie 5) Raye, Anthony 29) Beystrom, Rodney 6) Stickney, Josh & Rebecca 30) Kryck, Roger & Heather 7) Lawrence, Kimberly 31) Davis, Heidi 8) Weigman, Andy 32) Cox, Jane 9) Madden, Steve 33) Washleski, Jim 10) Leycano, Eric - 34) Hamlin, Peter 11) Lescarbeau, Susan 35) Bowles, Walter 12) Wagner, Richard & Carol 36) McAtee, Jennifer 13) Davis, Steve & Jane Ann 37) Nobs, Bryan 14) Overbo, Gordon 38) Grathwol, Tim 15) Anderson, Douglas 39) Eischens, Kolay 16) Kuiper, Jeff 40) Seidlitz, Brian 17) Boehle, Ann 41) Wiggert, Lance & Anne 18) Penn, Tom 42) Maloney, Gregg 19) Houghton, William 43) LeMire, Andre 20) Morimoto, Susan 44) Tronsgard, Derek 21) Skor, David 45) D'Arpino, Dominic 22) Johnson, Jason 46) Holt, Lori 23) Page, Benjamin 47) Lundeen, Richard & Joan 24) Libke, Robert & Karen 48) Dauwalter, Peter -726- 6A. (added) Ordinance Amendment — Late Applications Pausche stated she had received requests for the Council and Commission to consider a revision to the section of the City Code regulating late applications to allow for a one -time exception for missing the deadline for non - abutters. Pausche stated no exceptions to her knowledge have been made in the past, but felt Staff could administer the one -time exception without a problem. She stated 3 residents unintentionally missed the deadline in 2012, and she is aware of 2 residents this year. The Commission discussed the proposed language and Beystrom said it should be on a go- forward basis beginning with 2013 applications and not be retroactive. Gardner recommended creating a cut -off date and March 31ST of each year was agreed upon. Drahos stated he has long thought there should be some provision in the Code for non - abutters who were late. Mark Hanus, Mayor, stated that although he is not sympathetic to people who merely forget, there are circumstances that would warrant an exception. Drahos suggested the reason be documented. Pausche said it is difficult to define /verify the reasons that an exception would be justified, and treating everyone the same, regardless of reason, is easier to administer. The Commission recommended increasing the late fee to $100 from $50 in order to deter late applications. MOTION by Drahos, seconded by Gillispie, to approve the proposed changes to late non - abutting applications, as amended. Ail voted in favor. Motion carried. Review: 2013 Calendar Pausche will request an April meeting if needed. Pausche did not anticipate making any recommendations to change dock fees in May, Pausche plans to work on the long -term capital plan for improvements and conduct a fund balance analysis to see what fee changes are warranted, if any, but stated that will take time. Drahos stated deferred maintenance needs, particularly with dredging, have to be considered. 8. Reports City Council Representative: Kelli Gillispie stated the Westonka Animal Hospital will be opening sometime this week. Staff: Pausche stated Ron Stanchfield will be returning as the Part -Time Dock Inspector and will work with the Finance Department on sending violation notices. Pausche will be publishing an article in the next newsletter to inform residents in the program to comply or expect stricter enforcement of fines. Commissioners: None. MOTION by Drahos, seconded by Gillispie, to adjourn at 9:10 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. -727- CITY OF MOUND EXPENSES - BUDGET REPORTING FEBRUARY 2013 16.67% FEBRUARY 2013 YTD PERCENT FUND BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED GENERALFUND Council Promotions City Manager / City Clerk Elections Finance Assessing Legal City Hall Building Computer Police Emegency Preparedness Planning & Inspections Streets Parks Cemetery Transfers Cable TV Contingency TOTALS OTHER FUNDS Area Fire Services Docks Transit District Maintenance Capital Projects MSA Construction Sealcoating TIF 1- 2- Metroplains TIF 1 -3 - Mound Harbor Water Utility Sewer Utility Liquor Store Recycling Utility Storm Water Utility Indian Knoll Public Housing ,f,P 78,715 8,654 10,600 68,115 13.47% 67,500 - - 67,500 0.00% 185,166 13,493 25,105 160,061 13.56% 1,555 - - 1,555 0.00% 350,045 22,352 39,720 310,325 11.35% 96,600 3 8 96,592 0.01% 105,500 2,688 2,688 102,812 2.55% 88,500 5,532 10,168 78,332 11.49% 31,848 1,629,909 2,430 12,323 8,654 797,854 23,194 832,055 27.17% 48.95% 8,150 846 846 7,304 10.38% 336,536 22,823 39,592 296,944 11.76% 887,094 69,467 92,761 794,333 10.46% 503,807 76,739 98,196 405,611 19.49% 11,118 - - 11,118 0.00% 396,165 28,847 57,694 338,471 14.56% 57,133 - - 57,133 0.00% 73,000 18,331 18,331 54,669 25.11% 4,908,341 284,528 1,202,217 3,706,124 24.49% 1,082,461 105,129 167,376 915,085 154,724 8,463 15,248 139,476 50,800 2,620 2,383 48,417 - 142,638 (37,773) 37,773 - 453 453 (453) 1,756,250 349,960 426,085 1,330,165 1,811,688 220,462 316,701 1,494,987 618,116 45,179 71,388 546,728 198,581 13,967 14,907 183,674 379,408 77,537 95,129 284,279 243,600 26,704 39,238 204,362 &W-1 15.46% 9.85% 4.69% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 24.26% 17.48% 11.55% 7.51% 25.07% 16.11% SAFINANCE DE PT\REPORTS\2013 \EXP ENS ES.XIs FEB CITY OF MOUND REVENUE - BUDGET REPORTING FEBRUARY 2013 16.67% FUND BUDGET FEBRUARY 2013 REVENUE YTD REVENUE VARIANCE PERCENT RECEIVED GENERALFUND OTHER FUNDS Property Taxes 3,589,611 - - 3,589,611 0.00% Business Licenses & Permits 18,800 425 825 17,975 4.39% Non - Business Licenses & Permits 109,500 3,782 9,130 100,370 8.34% Intergovernmental 30,000 30,000 30,000 - 100.00% Charges for Services 197,116 15,201 33,430 163,686 16.96% Fines & Forfeitures 50,000 3,852 3,992 46,008 7.98% Special Assessments 10,000 - - 10,000 0.00% Street Lighting Fees 90,589 6,713 13,323 77,266 14.71% Franchise Fees 411,641 - - 411,641 0.00% Transfers 63,515 7,002 7,002 56,513 11.02% Miscellaneous 133,000 13,527 102,870 30,130 77.35% TOTALS 4,703,772 80,502 200,572 4,503,200 4.26% OTHER FUNDS Area Fire Services 857,758 138,886 167,877 689,881 19.57% Docks 155,597 78,468 116,947 38,650 75.16% Transit District Maintenance 50,800 3,500 3,500 47,300 6.89% Water Utility 1,591,000 144,995 267,438 1,323,562 16.81% Sewer Utility 1,583,905 124,072 249,439 1,334,466 15.75% Liquor Store 2,800,000 198,800 383,317 2,416,683 13.69% Recycling Utility 225,276 15,190 29,734 195,542 13.20% Storm Water Utility 436,758 35,460 70,428 366,330 16.13% Indian Knoll Public Housing 240,300 19,272 38,201 202,099 15.90% Investments - 243 1,022 (1,022) n/a -729- SAFINANCE DEPTIREPORTS\2013 \1REVENUESALS FEB a 0 0 ow a, o, O �w� 0 i O � � N U a_ dJ Z N Q U M� N w W r � W M t0 w r Y V' O O m N W Y w (O N O M1 m r W M O M H w m m W tD t7 r N M W W V 1 h m O W O� �e w r v rn v N« W m N S W W NON O W V r r m N N N f 7 m w W f 0 M T O r w M O V 'P m m^ M O �O f0 N t0 O O N M1` R f0 O V f0 m ❑ U O c_ m .00 Q Q m< m< Q Q j f0 r W m P N �O W O H O d d O G "5 t N C C 7m= a 2 E E E E E E E c c v - O '5 E m m O m m m m m m a a o' m n n a o o >o0 0 0 >> >> X X m a 6 6 6 2 6 X a CO m N M (n C E ym�'�wwFm- I -EEEEE EEK�Fm- n� w�u�a�i O d o T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 LL B+- p16 m Q m 8> 0 O h 0 C7000000'U 00000 C 730- H>MJxWE O N a �n v of 0 i r W W � � M N N Y N N � T w T d C O O N O � W � � z 2'g J a LL LL Z Q W N N °�w33�a 2 W ro W N W W W J 0 O