1990-08-28 CC Agenda PacketCITY COUNCIL PACKET - 8 -28 -90 #1
J4
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
10. RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY 1991 PROPOSED BUDGET
AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARINGS. (SUGGESTED DATES:
NOVEMBER 20, 1990 AND NOVEMBER 27, 1990) Pg. 2551 -2552
11. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PARKING FEASIBILITY
REPORT AS PREPARED BY CITY ENGINEER. (REPORT WILL
BE DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY EVENING)
12. SET DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO ACQUIRE AND CONSTRUCT
MUNICIPAL PARKING TO SERVE CENTRAL BUSINESS
• DISTRICT. (SUGGESTED DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 1990)
PAGE 2480
A G E N D A
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
TiAO P.M. TUESDAY AUGUST 28 1990
SCHOOL DISTRICT
1.
BO FDROOM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
2.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 14, 1990
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AND COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 1990. Pg.
2482 -2490
3.
PUBLIC HEARING: DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Pg.
2491 -2492
4.
PUBLIC HEARINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
SEPARATE DOCUMENT (BLUE BOOK)
5.
CASE NO, 90 -9290 CHESTER STUTEVILLE, 4878 EDGEWATER
DRIVE, 10T 14, SUBD. OF LOTS 1 A 32, SKARP A LIND-
QUISTS RAVENSWOOD, PID #13- 117 -24 41 0043.
REQUEST: SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE Pg.
2493 -2502
6.
CASE NO. 90 -926: MELVIN ZUCKMAN, 5012 TUXEDO
BLVD., RLS 1150, TRACT A, PID #24- 117 -24 43 0034.
REQUEST: MINOR SUBDIVISION Pg.
2503 -2528
7.
CASE NO, 90 -927: DENNIS HILDEBRANDT, 5229 WATERBURY
ROAD, WHIPPLE, LOTS 6, 7 & 8 BLOCK 19 PID #25 -117-
24 21 0138.
REQUEST: REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE Pg.
2529 -2537
8.
CASE No, 90 -910! GERALD SMITH, SOS PRINTING,
2361 WILSHIRE BLVD., SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT F, LOTS
29 -36, BLOCK 3, PID #13- 117 -24 34 0051 -- 0058.
REQUEST: SIGN VARIANCE Pg.
2538 -2550
9.
PRESENTATION OF THE PRELIMINARY 1991 PROPOSED BUDGET
SEPARATE DOCUMENT
10. RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY 1991 PROPOSED BUDGET
AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARINGS. (SUGGESTED DATES:
NOVEMBER 20, 1990 AND NOVEMBER 27, 1990) Pg. 2551 -2552
11. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PARKING FEASIBILITY
REPORT AS PREPARED BY CITY ENGINEER. (REPORT WILL
BE DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY EVENING)
12. SET DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO ACQUIRE AND CONSTRUCT
MUNICIPAL PARKING TO SERVE CENTRAL BUSINESS
• DISTRICT. (SUGGESTED DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 1990)
PAGE 2480
13. RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO EXCEED $24,000
FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION,
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF NSA 469, OF THE
. HOUSING AND REDE1' ',OPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY
OF MOUND FOR THE Y%AR 1991 Pg. 2553
14. DISCUSSION: NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS
15. LICENSE RENEWALS
16. PAYMENT OF BILLS
17. INFORMATIO / ISC LLANEOUS
A. JULY 1990 FINANCIAL REPORT AS PREPARED BY
JOHN NORMAN, FINANCE DIRECTOR
B. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO NATIONAL MUNICIPAL
POLICY, NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES IN
RELATION TO ANNUAL CONFERENCE, HOUSTON,
TEXAS, 12/1/90 - 12/5/90. IF WE WANT
TO SUBMIT POLICY PROPOSALS AND RESOLUTIONS
FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE CONFERENCE, WE NEED
TO SUBMIT THESE BY OCTOBER 12, 1990.
C. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 7- 23 -90.
D. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 8- 13 -90.
E. L.M.C.D. MAILINGS
F. PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES OF 8 -9 -90.
Pg. 2554
Pg. 2568
Pg. 2569-2582
Pg. 2583 -2584
Pg.
2585 -2591
Pg.
2592 -259T
Pg.
2598 -2607
Pg.
2608 -2619
Pg. 2620 -2622
G. LETTER FROM DENICE ROGERS WHO HAD WRITTEN
"LETTER TO THE EDITOR" IN A RECENT LAKER
ISSUE. THE LETTER IS A THANK YOU TO CHIEF
HARRELL ABOUT HOW THIS MATTER WAS HANDLED. Pg. 2623
H. REMINDER: THE AUGUST 28 1990 COUNCIL MEETING WILL
BE HELD AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD ROOM AT 5600
LYNWOOD BLVD., PARKING LOT SOUTH OF POND ARENA,
ENTER NORTH DOORS OF DISTRICT BUILDING, FOLLOW SIGNS.
MAP ENCLOSED
I. NOTICE FROM ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN
MUNICIPALITIES, (ANN) ON SPECIAL MEMBERSHIP
MEETING THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1990. PLEASE LET
FRAN KNOW ASAP IF YOU WANT TO ATTEND. Pg. 2624 -2630
J. L.M.C.D. MAILINGS
•
Pg. ?631 -2633
PAGE 2481
120
. August 14, 1990
MUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14, 1990
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in
regular session on Tuesday, August 14, 1990, in the Council
Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Steve Smith, Councilmembers Andrea
Ahrens, Liz Jensen, Phyllis Jessen and Skip Johnson. Also
present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk
Fran Clark, Attorney Curt Pearson, City Enqinear John Cameron,
Building Official Jon Sutherland, and the following interested
citizens: Bill Schumer, Tom Casey, Steve Coddon, Phyllis and
Will Johnson.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in
attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
HNEEF .-
NOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to approve the
minutes of the July 24, 1990, Regular Meeting, as submitted.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.1 TO =ZTEND RESOLUTION 87 -282, PAULINE ADD ROLAND rc
ALLIlTER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1649 BLUEBIRD LANE
There was discussion on whether to extend this resolution again
or require the applicants to reapply when they are ready to
build.
Johnson moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #90 -88 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE EZTENSION OF
RESOLUTION #87 -182 FOR ONE YEAR
The vote was 4 in favor with Jessen voting nay. Motion carried.
1.2 CASE #90-923t _BILLL_SCBUMER. 2885 CAMBRIDGE LANE. LOT 10.
The City Manager gave the background of this item. The Planning
Commission recommended approval of the revised proposal.
Ahrens moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution:
•
d `[ 99)IS
121
August 14, 1990
RESOLUTION #90 -09 RESOLUTION TO Comm RITZ TZE PLANNING
C=MXSSION To ALLOW FRONT AND SIDS YARD
SETBACK VARIANCSS FOR LOT 10, BLOCK 26,
RCKWOOD; PID #24- 117 -24 42 0017 (2005
CAMBRIDGE LAMS); P i 2 CASE #90 -923
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3 ORAL SUSIMEAA DISTRICT LCBD) PARKING AS ZT RELATES To
WITH A=
The City Manager explained that he has now met or spoken to most
of the owners of property in the CBD District. He has obtained
11 of the 25 signatures on a petition for parking facilities.
That is 44% of the property owners. Be further explained that if
the parking areas are purchased by the City, by state statute an
amount not less than 50% must be levied in assessments to
benefiting property owners. The leases with Dakota Rail expire
on September 15, 1990. The Manager has been in contact with Mr.
Mills, owner of Dakota Rail, and he has indicated that he would
continue to lease the lots on a month by month basis for $2, 000
per month.
The City Attorney suggested that
accept the petitions and order a
appraisal of the property. He
maintain discussions with Mills
The feasibility study will give
known costs.
the Council do two things: 1)
feasibility study; and 2) get an
further suggested that the City
during the feasibility study.
the merchants some idea of the
Smith moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #90 -90
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING
PARKING FACILITIES
BU8INE88 DISTRICT
FEASIBILITY REPORT
THE PETITIONS ON
IN THE CENTRAL
AND ORDERING A
The Council asked that appraisals be done on each parcel.
They also asked that this feasibility report and appraisals
be priority projects.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.4 (LOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Jessen to authorise the
City Manager to hire an appraiser to appraise each parking
lot parcel individually. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
LJ
02gY3
0
122
August 14, 1990
The Council discussed the timing of the assessment hearings and
decided to pre - publish the hearing notice on August 27 and
September 3 in order to hold a hearing on September 12, 1990.
Steve Coddon, owner of property in the CBD, suggested the Council
get an option on the parking lots from Dakota Rail and ask that
any lease payments be applied to the purchase.
The City Manager explained that one bid was received from B i B
Sheetmetal and Roofing, Inc. in the amount of $16,800.00. The
Engineer's estimate was $22,000.00. Staff recommended approval
of the bid.
Jensen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #90 -91 RESOLUTION AWARDING TEE BID FOR THE ROOF
L[PROVEMEMT AT ISLAUD PARE OAR&GE
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
•�.� • ,. '�•i-., 4• ' 4:1 . - er
The City Manager explained three bids were received for this
project. They were:
1. Shingobee Builders
2. Great Scapes, Inc.
3. Palm Construction
$ 13,518.00
$ 13,962.00
$ 17,958.35
The City Engineer recommended approval of the bid from Shingobee
Builders.
The City Manager further explained that reinforcing of the
existing walls and floor of the depot building needs to be done
also. The Engineer estimates the cost of this to be about
$6,000.00. He will be requesting a proposal from Shingobee for
this additional work.
Jensen moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #90 -92 RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID FOR THE
MOUND BAY PARIS DEPOT DECD RECONSTRUCTION
TO SHINGOBEE BUILDERS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$13,518.00
•
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
C�114?Y
123
August 14 1990 •
There were none.
1.7.
There vere no comments on this item.
1.8 COMAEYTS ON = APPLICATION
Bann TO SNORIUIN=
#91 -6003 2130 NOAL sr= -
There vere no comments on this item.
1.9 REBOLOTiON RELATING
TO CITY PARTXCIPATiON iN MARCOTICE
Jensen moved and Ahrens
seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #90 -93
RESOLUTION RELATING TO CITY
PARTICIPATION Ix NARCOTICS CONTROL
PROGRAM
The vote vas unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
1.10
= III 029 ZEM
Kim TASK rms join Pawns
Johnson moved and Jessen
amaxim
seconded by following resolution:
RESOLUTION 090 -94
REBOLVTION AUTNORISING THE xAYOR AND
CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO TEE
BOUTRWROT METRO TASK FORCE JOINT
POWZRB AGRZIURNT
The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
1.11 RESOLUTION APPOINTING
nIxARY AND GENERAL
ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED FAR sU
ELECTIONS - sEPTExBER il. 1990 i
AMMRR 6, 1990
Jensen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #90 -96
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES AS
RECOMMENDED FOR TSE PRIMARY AND GENERAL
ELECTIONS - BEPTEMBER 11, 1990 i
MOVE WSR 6, 1990
The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
0 1 4 far
• 124
August 14, 1990
1.12 APPROVAL OF QASDEN LEASE POS LEO a BEVERLY WALLIS. J
1.2.3 a 22. SLOG S. 02E 00D
NOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to approve a
garden lease for Leo a Beverly Wallis, for Lots 1,2,3 a 22,
Block S, Dreamvood, for one year, expires August 14, 1990.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.13 FINAL PAYMENT REQO22T - 1990 SEAL COAT PBOJECT
The Engineer recommended approval.
MOTION made by Jensea, seconded by Johnson to approve a
final payment request for the 1990 Seal Coat Project in the
mount of ;29,934.74, to Bituminous Roadway. The vote was
unaaimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.14 APPROVAL OF PAYMENT RZOOEST 64 - CITY NALL ADDITION ADD
The Engineer recommended approval of payment request #4 in the
amount of $135,815.17.
• NOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Jensen to approval
payment request #4 from Shingobee Builders for the City Mll
Addition and Remodeling in the amount of =135,615.17. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
• i . • ! _
NOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Jessen to set September
25, 1990, for a public hearing on the following assessments:
CBD Parking Maintenance= delinquent utility bills= Denbigh
Road Improvements sanitary sever connection= water
connection= weedst clean -ups hazardous buildings and tree
removal. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.16 PAYMENT OF BILI
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Jensen to authorise the
payment of bills as presentc3 on the pre -lint in the amount
of =203,194.92 when funds are available. A roll call vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
125
August 14, 1990
1.17
The City Attorney reported that after a meeting with Mr. i Mrs.
Luger, a concrete contractor, the City Engineer and the Street
Superintendent, Mr. Luger has a bid of $1,300 to remove the curb
that is at 6195 Sinclair Road and replace it with a surmountable
curb that will match the existing concrete driveway and
bituminous street. He proposes that the City pay one half
($650.00).
The City Engineer suggested that
feet of bituminous work (at the
for the permit; grant a variance
(waiving that fee also); and 1
leaving $1,000 for Luger to pay.
the City do the approximately 40
City•s expense); waive the fees
for the over -size driveway width
gay $300.00 of the $1.,300 bid,
=flow Mae by Johnson, seconded by J seen authorise the
City Attorney to make the following pro sal to Mr. Luger:
the City will ao the approzimately 40 Viet of bituminous
Work (at the City expense) the City will naive the fees
for the permit; the City Will grant a variance for the
oversize arivewaT width (waiving that fee also); and the
City will pay $300.00 of the $1,300 bid, laving $1 for
Mr. Luger to pay. The vote Was 4 in favor With emits voting
nay. lotion carried.
I. -7r1 I I .r
=?ION made by JOhnsom, seconded by Smith to authorise the
Mayor and City Manager to enter into Solid Waste Management
agreement #7102640 With Sennepin County. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.19 C�l ORDERS - CUT FALL ADDITZON i RMDELIltg
The City Manger explained that Change Order #12 is for additional
drywall required in elevator and equipment room, and suspended
gypsum ceiling in interrogation room and toilet, Room 103. The
amount is an ADD $898.00.
The City Engineer explained that Change Order #13 is for site
work for the proposed parking lot as follows (these are budgetary
numbers and cost will be billed on actual yardage):
1. Import bearing soil for fill at
$10.00 /yard (approx. 1,000 yds) $10,000.00
•
C�
2il7
126
.
August 10, 1990
2. Export unusable soil fill within 2 miles
of job site at $3.00 /yard (approx. 1,000
yards) 3,000.00
3. Export unusable soil fill outside of 2
miles of job site at $5.00 /yard (approx.
1,000 yds) 5,000.00
TOTAL #1, #2 or #3 $15,000.00
Johnson moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLOTIon #90-96 REEOLOTION SO APPKME cxxma ORDER #12 -
CITZ ZAL% ADDITION i REMODELING - ADD
$890.00
The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
The
Council asked if there was a deduct for the sprinkler head
that
was to be in the elevator shaft. Staff will check.
1.20
Johnson moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
REAOLOTION #90 -97 LOTION TO APPAM CRUM ORDER #11 -
CIT? NALL ADDITION i REMODELING - ADD
•
`15
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
A.
Department Head Monthly Reports for July 1990.
B.
Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 1990.
C.
L.M.C.D. Mailings.
D.
1989 Annual Report of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District.
E.
Commercial and Multiple Dock Inspection Report - 1990 from
Dell Rudolph, Dock Inspector.
F. Letter from Senator Rudy Boschwitz's Office re: invitation
to City of Mound officials, service organization leaders,
festival royalty, etc. to make an appearance at the State
Fair with Senator Boschwitz. The day selected would be
billed as "Mound Day ". Are you interested? The Council
asked that 10 tickets be acquired.
2q9&
127
August
G. Attached is a letter I sent to Dr. Jim Smith re: Meeting •
dates for the end of August, all of September and all of
October. PLS1SS =13KBER "M? CITY WALL WILL NOT as =D
VOB PUBLIC MRSTIWOS BsaIMSIla AIIOOst 27 TURV TEN ssp OF
OCTOM. ALL Mss I INGO WILL BE ULD Is TQ scaDOL ROOM BODY
OR CONFERMCS ROOM AT 5600 LYNWOOD BLVD. Articles will
appear in the newspaper notifying the public of the location
change.
H. Letter dated August 3, 1990 and previous correspondence re:
Complaint by Mary Pacholke, 2624 Vestedge Blvd. on mosquito
spraying in the Lake Langdon area.
I. Minutes from the Joint Meeting of the Economic Development
Commission, City council and Planning Commission held August
7, 1990.
J. LHCD Representative Monthly Report for July 1990.
1(. ANIUM: C.O.W. meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August
21, 1990. Meet at Anthony•s Floral at 6:00 P.M.
RMIOS made by Jessen, seoomded by Johnson to adjourn at
9:05 P.Y. The vote was unanimously is favor. Notion
oarsied. •
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Fran Clark, CMC, City Clerk
•
MINUTES — COMMITTEE OF THE YHOLE — ADGOST 21, 1990
The meeting was called to order at 6 PM at the Anthony's Floral
site. Members present: Smith, Ahrens, Jensen, Jensen and
Johnson. Absent: none. Also present: John Cameron City
Engineer, Ed Shukle City Manager and Parker Hodges of the Sailor
Newspapers.
The Anthony's Floral Site was looked at in terms of possible
storage site for Public Works materials. Following a visual
inspection of the property, the Council returned to City Hall.
Skip McCombs, McCombs Frank Roos, was present to discuss the
preliminary engineering report for water system improvements that
had been done previously by McCombs' firm. He explained in
simplistic terms how water treatment is handled. The Council
&sited questions with regard to the City of Mound's water system,
the type of treatment that could be done in a system, advantages,
disadvantages, etc. Greg Skinner, Water and Sewer
Superintendent, was also present and indicated that he was not
clear as to what the problems were with the water system that
would require a water treatment plant. After considerable
discussion, the consensus was to continue to explore a water
treatment plant in terns of iron and manganese removal. Also,
continue to investigate lime soda softening. The issue is
scheduled to be discussed at the September 12, 1990 regular
meeting.
• An update was given on the status of the excavation and parking
lot improvements at the City Hall site.
Discussion was then held on Anthony's Floral site in terms of
Public Works materials storage. Council consensus was to
continue to explore this issue by contacting Anthony VanDerSteeg
to see if he is at all interested in selling his property.
The Downtown Study of Mound was briefly discussed. The consensus
was to have copies of the report given to the businesses that
were surveyed in the report and perhaps it could be mailed and
then followed up with a phone call by the EDC. It was emphasized
that all feedback was needed and is important in setting the
direction of the City with regard to the report recommendations.
Briefly discussed were rummage sale signs. The City Manager was
asked to have the staff investigate this.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
9 :20 PM.
R ctfully submitted,
nd �uk I
City Manager
4QO
.22 2380 451
11 0010 151
11 0190 421
U 0190 511
11 0220 272
11 0250 242
11 0250 633
11 0250 663
11 0280 332
11 0280 453
11 0280 541
11 0310 271
11 0340 092
11 0640 243
11 0672 361
11 0730 061
11 0760 123
11 0850 511
11 0852 542
11 0882 391
11 1030 422
11 1030 752
11 1090 661
11 1390 032
11 1450 032
11 1510 092
11 1550 124
11 1690 571
11 1692 061
Aq
Delinquent Mater and Sewer
$197.60
393.55
163.15
135.10
137.98
205.71
178.40
177.01
106.06
250.94
190.89
100.72
209.99.
147.40
240.8?
143.52
210.46
81.86
108.76
96.16
164.47
104.98
138.30
133.99
125.54
132.63
161.48
145.00
135.05
MUM
' o
•
•
0
•
•
11 1692 871
11 1694 631
11 1810 191
11 2050 092
11 2050 151
11 2140 034
11 2200 091
$155.65
109.22
209.96
139.12
139.12
104.64
19.30
$5654.53
0
C) 4 9 J-
Delinquent Water and Sewer 8/28/90
•
22 2380 451
Burt Linquist
$197.60
4879 Edgewater Dr.
11 0010 151
Rodney Pitsch
Pd.
393.55
1768 Lafayette Ln.
11 0190 421
Robert Shanley
Pd.
163.15
1676 Canary Ln.
11 019(' 511
Charles Carlson Pd.
135.10
1700 Canary Ln.
11 0220 20;
"Asey
Pd.
137.98
1601 Doge Ln.
11 0250 242
: reenran
205.71
1591 Eagle Ln.
11 0250 633
C. Cornelious
178.40
1653 Eagle Ln.
11 0280 332
Bill Bull
106.06
1616 Finch Ln.
11 0280 453
David Zilka
250.94
1683 Finch Ln.
11 0280 541
Ron Nelson
190.89
1656 Finch Ln.
11 0310 271
D.Fenner
Pd.
100.72
1623 Gull Ln.
11 0340 092
Daryyl Dillion
209.99
1643 Heron Ln.
11 0640 243
Brian Johnson
141.40
4945 Glen Elyn Rd.
11 0672 361
Jack Breazile
240.82
1920 Shorewood Ln.
11 0730 061
Norman Hemerick
Pd.
.143.52
4716 Beachside Rd.
11 0760 123
Tom Forystek
210.46
1720 Resthaven Ln.
11 0850 511
Tom Harty
81.86
4960 Three Pts. Blvd.
11 0852 542
Bob Lund
108.76
5525.Three Pts. Blvd.
11 0882 391
WM. Michel
Pd.
96.16
5865 Grandview Blvd.
11 1030 422
Tim Herzog
164.47
580$ Sunset Rd.
11 1030 752
T 6 L Olson
Pd.
'104.98
5921 Sunset Rd.
11 1090 661
Laurence Beer
138.30
6030 Hillcrest Rd.
11 1390 032
Carol Reckinger
133.99
6200 Birch Ln.
11 1450 032
Dave Kehlah
Pd.
125.54
6301 Rambler Rd.
11 1510 092
Brian Gubrud
132.63
6349 Walnut Rd.
11 1550 124
John Eccles
161.48
2214 Millpond Ln.
•
11 1690 571
John Larson
145.00
5713 Lynwood Blvd.
�
D
11
1692
061
Bruce Jones Pd
$135.05
58J
Lynwood Blvd,
11
1692
871
Kent lillegren
155.65
5972
Lynwood !- vd.
11
1694
631
Sherry Johnson
109.22
6256
�, �. 01vd.
11
1810
191
Marc Jaskey
209.96
5448
Breezy Rd.
11
2050
092
Daryln Holmes
139.12
5421
Church Rd.
11
2050
151
Paul Larson
139.12
5527
Church Rd.
11
2140
034
Fred Wehlage
104.64
2127
Centerview Ln.
11
2200
091
Kent Frazier Pd.
73.30
2155
Cardinal Ln.
$5654.53
$3862.47
•
PROPOSED RESOLUTION .
Case No. 90 -925
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -925
RESOLUTION APPROVING A SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE
TO ALLOW A GARAGE ADDITION AT
4878 EDGEWATER DRIVE
LOT 14, SUBDIVISION OF LOTS I i 32 SKARP & LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD,
PID #13- 117 -24 -41 0043
(PRZ CASE NO. 90 -925)
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a variance to recog-
nize an existing nonconforming side yard setback of 4.8 feet to
the principal building to allow construction of a 24' x 20' one
story garage addition 4.8 feet from the side property line at
4878 Edgewater Drive, Lot 14, Subdivision of Lots 18 32 Skarp d
Lindquists Ravenswood, PID #13- 117 -24 -41 0043; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R -2
Single Family Zoning District which according to the City Code
requires a 20 foot front yard setback, a 6 foot side yard set-
back, and a 50 foot setback from the Ordinary High Water; and
WHEREAS, Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) provides that al- •
terations may be made to a building containing a lawful, noncon-
forming residential, property when the alterations will improve
the livability thereof, but the alteration may not increase ''he
number of units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request
and does recommend approval due to the shape of the parcel and to
afford the owner reasonable use of their land.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City does hereby authorize the nonconforming setback to
the north side property line of 4.8 feet for the property
located at Lot 14, Subdivision of Lots 1 a 32 Skarp &
Linuquists Ravenswood, PID #13- 117 -24 -41 0043.
2. The City Council authorizes the existing structural setback
violations and authorizes the alteration set forth below,
pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) with the clear
and express understanding that the use remains ar a lawful,
nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and
restrictions of Section 23.404.
2140
PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case No. 90 -925
Page Two
3. It is determined that the livability of the residential
property will be improved by the authorization of the fol-
lowing alterations to a nonconforming use of the property to
afford the owner reasonable use of his land.
a. To construct a 24' x 20' one story garage addition 4.8
feet from the north side property line onto an existing
nonconforming principal structure which is setback 4.8
feet from the north side property line.
4. This variance is granted for the following lega:ly described
propertys Lot 14, Subdivision of Lots l & 32 Skarp &
Lindquists Ravenswood, PID #13- 117 -24 -41 0043.
This variance shall be recordea with the County Recorder or
the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to Min-
nesota State Statute, Section 462.3595, Subdivision (4).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used.
5. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs
for such recording. The building permit shall not be issued
until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk.
ew4 4
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 1990
a. Case No. 90 -925: Chester Stuteville, 4878 EggMter Drive,
Lot 14, Subd . of Lots 1 8 32 Skare 8 L i ndqu I sts Ravenswood
PLO #13-117-2441 0043. VARIANCE: side yard setback
Building Official, Jon Sutherland reviewed the applicants request
to construct a garage 4.8 feet from the side property line. The
garage is to be 24' x 20'. The existing dwelling structure is
setback 4.8 feet from the side property line. Staff recommended
approval of the 1.2 foot side yard setback variance to the
north /side property line as shown on the survey.
Thal questioned If the garage could not be moved to the south to
conform to the required 6 foot side yard setback. The applicant,
Chester Stuteville, explained his request, and confirmed that he
wants the garage to be in -line with the present structure at the
north side. Since the house is only 18.6 feet wide, and the
proposed garage is 20 feet wide, the garage will protrude 1.5'
from the house to the south. Turn- around area and the tree In
the yard were disctessed.
Mueller commented that the would like to see the amount of hard-
cover reduced, or kept to a minimum.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Weiland, to recom-
mend approval of the 1.2 foot side yard setback variance
to construction a 24' x 20' attached accessory building.
Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be reviewed by the City Council on August 28,
1990.
•
Z y95
CITY c �f N IOU D .41 MAVWOQC ROAD
4' ='UNC: MiNNES..tA 55sb4
F'. 4
DATE: Planning Commission Agenda of August 13, 1990
TO: Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff
FROM: Jon Sutherland, Building Official 31,7-
CASE NO.: 90 -925
APPLICANT: Chester Stutevilie
LOCATION: 4878 Edgewater Drive
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 14 Subdivision of Lots I E 32 Skarp 3
Lind uists Ravenswood
PID 13- 117 -24 -41 0043
SUBJECT: Side Yard Setback Variance
EXISTING ZONING: R -2 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance to construct an
attached garage A.8' from the north /side property line. The
required side yard setback for lots of record in an R -2 zone is 6
feet.
The addition as proposed will not encroach into the required side
yard setback beyond the current encroachment of the existing
house. All other setbacks are in compliance with the zoning
code.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation is to approve the variance
of 1.2 feet into the north /side setback for the construction of a
24' x 20' garage as shown on the attached survey.
The garage addition will line -up with the existing structure,
will provide the needed accessory building to the existing dwell-
ing, and allow the applicant reasonable use of the narrow 40 foot
wide lot of record.
The abutting neighbors have been notified. This case wiII be
referred to the City Council on August 28, 1990.
•
Zg4?(0
.K 12 Aso
4-10nn { a^
CITY OF MOUND PART If Case No. _ q;
Date Filed
Fee S 50.00 '��
VARIANCE APPLICATION &i
PLANNING i ZONING COMMISSION
(Please type or print the following Information.)
on
Address of Subject Property� % �� `�9�'�'t ��r d r • /�O V4,0 1 6 �S'3e
/ / 4
S 1 S1 � � %� 4,;,J Zr
Lot 7 i ��1 zO IL 0,0C X I A/ � Block
Addition � _ PID No. 12 n - n - zA 41 0
Owner's Name G /� 0 'J �� / Day Phone 4�� �� 3 D
Owner's Address '2 (f /��f d r'. A0 X r-f 4'r Y
Applicant's Name (if other than owner)
Address Day Phone
Exiating Use of Property:
Zoning Oistrict
dA9LO
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? yes / no . If yes,
Ilst date(s) of application, action taken, and provide resolution number(s)
(Copies of previous resolutions must accompany this application.)
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 ac-
curate. 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.
Applicant's Signatur Date
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
Planning Commission Recommendation_
Date
Council Action:__
Resolution No. _ ._ �_____ — Date _
tA91
0 VARIANCE APPLICATION
Case No. g0.g25
1. 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:
d S eY Aw C/�
2. Do the existing structures comply with all area. height. bulk. and
setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located?
Yes W, No ( ). If no, specify each non - conforming use:
3. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent
Its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning
district?
i s
(�) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil
( ) too small ( ) drainage ( ) sub- surface
( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify
4. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone
having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was
adopted? Yes ( ), No W. If yes, explain
S. Was the hardship created by any other man -made change. such as the
relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No (AT. If yes. explain
•
ZY9t
VARIANCE APPLICATION Case No. On - ( 1 01 5 0
6. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance
peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( ).
No (W. If no. how many other properties are simila affected?
A C�/O /7'
#- 7a .- p O S _ _ Z s 25 C../ _ e-
7.
What is the "minimum"
setback regulations
your land? (Specify,
ten explanation.
modification (variance) from the area. bulk, and
that will permit you to make reasonable use of
using mapst site plans with dimensions and writ-
_yftk r F ya r/ e-c
8. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property In
the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance?
tia
PART 111
J. SiTE PLAN INFORMATION: A:1 suppoi,Ino documents such -as sketch plans,
Attachments, etc., must bg submitted in 8 -1 /2"x11" size. If larger
drewinos are submitted, one must be 8 -I /2"x11". and 15 larger size
copies must be Provided. For each requested zoning variance procedure,
a site plan must be attached at a scale large enough for clarity show-
ing the f� lowing information:
I. Locat .f area, and dimensions of existing and proposed: (Lot(s).
bullc!1 -(s), driveway s) /street access, off - street parking, and
utilities.
2. Existing and proposed elevations.
3. Distance between: building and front, side and rear lot lines;
principal building and accessory buildings; principal building
and principal buildings on adjacent lots.
4. Location of: signs. easements, underground utilities, etc.
5. Indicate "north" compass direction.
6. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the
city staff and applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance. .0
Lygi
Certifi cat Ai,f Survey
for Choster L. (Rc.ney) Stutovil.ln
of Lot 14, Subdivision of Lots 1 & 32,
SKARP d LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD
Hennepin County, Minnesota
•
'rJ d 21 S, t Z
7r D E O tis (q ,'1 Zl 16
o,
199.5% ►�N
� c 2
949 91 ''s �, , ;• 4.A 19x6 � i
t9• £ G °�° • . N 1 �% O� E l • 6 2 %.9 0
1
t r e , tq �t.a 9 •° tt. %A0 94591 4
o � 24 A Eah11°?.6
G 2'�-•:;; N oro0 °' tt. �; 4 � 1Ot II ,•
% C pee' �,, �8 43 gyp° t9
�q4.
�po�rl , t Wo ` g49 'q4 91 `, 14 0 4S E ,
b ( y`41 .•,i,•N 1. 94,-0) \C;
4. N tg.5 g42s ►' 3 NOSN
9 46.41
N ''his drawing showR the location of all oxisting
buildings and the location of a proposed addition
thereon. It does not purport to show any other im-
3
t) provemnnts cor encroac
he"-P-e el 0 0 6.���
D
GAc-� sroavl1le ,
d� W76 A .
y� � Or , o6 rr,•, 1•%e ; , a
Al 47MAtol 6*w'ft ?v bc. &/ clac•c
ID M dp.-V&a� /.•mac - /Ap*,., ov77i&, 62, cork,
•
•
7.01501
I
4
- T=
1p
z - nj
L
Wor
- wTr
*!Av ;Op�
A A
10
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13. 1990
b. Case No. 90 -926: Melvin Zuckman. 5012 Tuxedo 81vd . RLS
1150. Tract A. PID 1124- 117 -24 -43 0034 MINOR SUBDIVISION
AND VARIANCE.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, breifly reviewed the history of this
request. In 1989 the City filed a complaint in District Court
seeking removal of the fire damaged structure and removal of a
second illegal dwelling unit located near Tuxedo Blvd. Another
Portion of the complaint was based on information received in
1989 that the structure abutting Tuxedo Blvd. had been converted
to a two - family residence without rezoning approval or issuance
of any building permits. if this issue cannot be settled as part
of the current subdivision /variance request, the City will cer-
tify the case as being ready for trial and will proceed with
litigation.
Koegler then reviewed the current request for a minor subdivision
and three variances: l) to construct a house on property which
does not abut a dedicated public street, 2) a 15.5 foot front
yard setback variance for the house on Parcel B, and 3) a 5.5
foot side yard setback variance also for the house on Parcel B.
The proposed Parcel A has a lot area of 11,600 square feet and
Parcel 8 has a total area of 10,015 square feet.
The applicant is proposing to reconstruct the driveway with an
average slope of 20% along the eastern property line which is in-
consistent with City provisions. The driveway is proposed to be
10 feet wide on Parcel A, however, all access drives are required
to be 12 feet wide. A tuckunder garage is proposed on the north
side of the building which is both unorthodox and unacceptable.
The City Planner commented that both himself and the City Attor-
ney feel that the proposed subdivision is a reasonable way to
resolve this Issue since it finally accomplishes the City of
Mound's major objective which is to remove the fire damaged
structure.
Staff recommended approval of the minor suvbidivsion establishing
parcels A and 8 as per the survey dated 8 -6 -90 prepared by Coffin
a Grondberg, inc. including the following variances: a lot fron-
tage variance for Parcel A, recognition of a 15.5 foot front yard
setback variance for the structure on Parcel 8, and recognition
of a 5.5 foot side yard setback variance for the structure on
Parcel B. This approval is subject to the full compliance by the
applicant with the conditions listed on the attached EXHIBIT A.
Mr. Zuckman's attorney, Gary Phleger, informed the Commission
that the tuckunder garage is no longer being proposed. He ex-
plained that the applicant does not intend to construct a garage,
however, are aware that a garage site must be Indicated. They
7 07o3 plan to propose an alternative garage site.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 3
Weiland expressed a concern with the access drive /easement and
the safety for emergency vehicles. Koegler confirmed that the
closest point from the proposed house to the Ordinary High Water
Is 54 feet.
Mr. Phleger spoke on Zuckman's behalf in responding the the City
Planner's recommendation. In relation to Condition $2, Phleger
stated that the Zuckman's want to use some material from the ex-
isting building, such as plumbing fixtures, and therefore, would
prefer to leave the existing structure standing during construc-
tion of the new. The Planner stated that due to the City
Attorney's opinion, Condition #2 should stay as written.
Phleger asked the Commission to consider allowing the "two -
family" use for the structure on Parcel B. He explained that
this structure was previously used for a Dentist office with an
apartment above. The City Planner recommended that no change be
made.
Cheryl Dale of 5024 Tuxedo Blvd. has lived next door to the
Zuckman's since they purchased the property. hrs. Dale exten-
sively review the history of the subject property. She stated
that both her and her husband, John Dale, are opposed to the sub-
division, and believe the structure on Proposed Parcel A should
be removed.
Mr. Mel Zuckman breifly reviewed the history of his case. He
stated that he wants to do the right thing.
Mr. Mike Perrine of 5006 Tuxedo Blvd., a neighbor to Mr.
Zuckman's property, is opposed to the subdivision request.
Mr. Perrine and Mrs. Dale expressed a concern regarding the
notifications to the adjoining neighbors, notices were nct
received until the day of the meeting. They would like property
owners within 350 feet notified for the City Council meeting.
Mr. Howard Barrett of 5000 Tuxedo B l v d . commented that he Is In
favor of the subdivision.
The Commission expressed concern about how they can enforce
single family occupancy in the house on proposed Parcel S.
Sharon Zuckman confirmed that there is a single person living
upstairs, and one couple living downstairs.
Meyer commented on the configuration of the proposed subdivision
line and the issue of setting a precedent for dividing lakeshore
lots and allowing access via easement (bottle neck lots).
Phleger argued that this case Is different since there are exist -
ing structures on the parcel. It was determined that precidence
is history.
Z soy
Planning Comission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 4
MOTION soft by Mue l l or seconded by Smi th to recommend
denial of the City Planner's racawfsendstion for the fol-
lowing reasons: 1) Parcel A does not abut a dedicated
Publle way, 2) the slope and topography Of the. proposed
driveway is questionable, 3) a future garage site has
not been determined, 4) the proposed driveway on Parcel
A is too narrow for emergency vehicles, end 5) due to
the shape and topography Of the Property, the best ' O use"
would be as one parcel. Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be reviewed by the City Council on August 28,
1990.
•
,
•
Zs05
®ISI? W
(p. 1 of 2)
Iuckman Planning Report
August 8, 1990
Page Four
1. Prior to this issue being reviewed by the City Council,
the applicant shall file a variance application for the
above identified variances and submit the appropriate
application fee.
2. No building permit for the new structure on Parcel A
shall be issued until the applicant has obtained a
demolition permit for the boat house /summer cottage and
removed all portions of the old structure except as
modified herein. Further, the applicant shall obtain any
required building permits and inspections to convert the
illegal two - family residence on Parcel B to a single -
family structure. Such conversion shall occur prior to
the City Clerk's release of the resolution approving the
minor subdivision for recording with Hennepin County.
3.
The proposed retaining wall utilizing two foundation
walls from the boat house /summer cottage shall be
permitted if it complies with building code requirements.
If required by the Building Official, certification by
a registered structural engineer and details of the
fencing along the top of the wall will be provided prior
to the issuance of a building permit for the new
structure on Parcel A.
4.
The applicants survey shall be revised to remove the tuck
under garage and driveway along the north side of the
property and replace it either with a south facing tuck
under garage and required retaining walls, an attached
garage, or the identification of a detached garage site
on the property as required by City Code.
5.
The applicant shall submit a grading and erosion control
plan for review and approval by the city engineer prior
to receipt of any building and /or demolition permits for
either Parcels A or B.
a
6.
The applicant shall pr-vide the City of Mound with a
performance bond, letter of credit or other acceptable
financial guarantee in the amount of $5,000 to guarantee
removal of the boat house /summer cottage structure within
one year of City Council approval of the minor
subdivision. The finai.tial guarantee shall t� in a form
acceptable to the city attorney. The Cit lerk shall
not be authorized to release the resolution - 0proving the
minor subdivision for recording with Hennepin County
prior to receipt of the financial guarantee.
Z5oty
pair 's'
(p. 2 of 2)
Zuckman Planning Report
August 8, 1990
Page Five
7. New utility services to Parcel A shall be installed
within the identified driveway easement area. Plans for
the utility services shall be revi ed and approved by
the city engineer and public works department. This
requirement will be waived if the applicant can
demonstrate that utility services serving Parcel A
complying with current city standards presently exists
within the proposed easement area.
Pursuant to Section 23.506.2 (5) of the Mound Zoning Code, the
variance approval shall expire one year after the date of City
Council approval.
•
ZSo
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: August 8, 1990
SUBJECT: Minor Subdivision with Variances
APPLICANT: Melvin Zuckman
CASE NUMBER: 90 -926
VHS FILE NUMBER: 90- 3:0- A24 -ZO
LOCATION: 5012 Tuxedo Boulevard
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family (R -1)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant and this property have a long history
of interaction with the City of Mound dating back to 1966. At that
time, Mr. Zuckman applied for and received a variance (Resolution
66 -77) to allow the subject parcel to contain two principal
structures. The approved structures included a single - family
residence abutting Tuxedo Boulevard and a modernized boat
house /summer cottage on the north end of the site approximately 1
feet from the ordinary high water level of Lake Minnetonka.
The property contained two lawful, non - conforming structures from
1966 until 1978 when a fire severely damaged the boat
house /cottage. After the fire, Mr. Zuckmar initiated
reconstruction of the building without obtaining required
demolition or building permits. After work was stopped by the
Mound Building Official, Mr. Zuckman applied for a variance and
building permit to reconstruct the building. The permit and the
variance were subsequently denied since it was found that more than
50% of the structure was damaged by the fire (Resolution 79 -213).
On April 24, 1989, the Mound Building Official observed that the
. Zuckman boat house /skimmer cottage was again being rebuilt without
obtaining required building permits. Work was ordered stopped by
L -5o9
3030 Harbor Lane North Sidq.11, Suite 104 Minneapolis, MN. 55447 -2175 412/653 -1950
Zuckman Planning Report
August 8, 1990
Page Two
the Building Official an on May 24, 1989, Mr. Zuckman filed for
another variance application to allow reconstruction of the
dwelling. In a staff report dated June 5, 1990, denial of the
request was recommended consistent with the actions taken by the
City of Mound in 1979. When the item came before the Mound City
Council on June 27, 1989, legal counsel for Mr. Zuckman •aquested
that the item be tabled. No further action on the 1989 variance
request occurred.
Over the past 10 years, this case has involved both the City
Attorney and the City Prosecuting Attorney. In July of 1989, the
City filed an amended complaint in District Court seeking removal
of the fire damaged structure and removal of a second illegal
dwelling unit in the structure located near Tuxedo Boulevard. The
second portion of the complaint was based on information received
in 1989 that the structure abuttinn Tuxedo Boulevard had been
converted to a two - family residence without rezoning approval or
issuance of any building permits.
•
Answers to the City's complaint were served in 1989. Since that
time, the City's legal staff has been working with Mr. Zuckman and
his legal coup -,el to attempt to settle this issue. If it can not
be settled as part of the current subdivision /variance request, the .
City will certify the case as being ready for trial and will
proce•.;d with the litigation.
CURRENT REQUEST: As per the survey drawing dated 8/6/90 prepared
by Coffin b Gronberg, Inc., Mr. Zuckman is proposing to divide the
property into two parcels and construct a new residence on Parcel
A. Under the proposal, the existing boat house /summer cottage will
be removed with the possible exception of two of the old foundation
walls which will be utilized as a retaining wall. Parcel A has a
lot area of 11,600 square feet and Parcel B has a total area of
10,015 square feet.
Approval of the subdivision as proposed will involve the issuance
of three variances. City Code, Section 23.408 (8) states that "no
building permit shall be issued for any lot or parcel which does
not abut a dedicated public street." Parcel A is connected to
Tuxedo Boulevard by a 14 foot wide driveway easement and does not
contain street frontage. The other two variances involve the
existing residence abutting Tuxedo Boulevard. The provisions of
the R -1 zone require a 30 foot front yard setback and a 10 foot
side yard setback. The structure presently has setbacks of
approximatei 14.5 feet on the front and 4.5 feet on the side
resulting in respective variances of 15.5 feet and 5.5 feet.
According to the survey, the applicant is proposing to reconstruct
the driveway along the eastern property line up to and around the
home where a tuck under garage is to be located on the north side
Z�
Zuckman Planning Report
• August 8, 1990
Page Three
abutting Lake Minnetonka. The proposed grade of the new driveway
is approximately 23% for the first 50 feet, then the grade is
reduced to 8% until the drive flattens as it approaches the
structure. The driveway then drops along the east side of the hone
to the gauge area with an average slope of approximately 20%.
The proposed tuck under garage on the north side of the building
is both unorthodox and unacceptable. Section 23.409 of the Mound
Zoning Code requires that all access drives have a minimum width
of 12 feet in order to accommodate emergency vehicles. Since the
proposed side yard setback is 10 feet, obviously a 12 foot wide
drive can not be accommodated. Additionally, Section 23.711.1 of
the Mound Zoning Code states "All development shall conform to the
natural limitations presented by topography and soil as to create
the best potential for preventing soil erosion." Creating two
driveway areas with slopes at, or exceeding 20% is inconsistent
with this provision. The driveway from Tuxedo Boulevard to the
structure is necessary since it is the only means to provide access
to the site. It is also generally consistent with the existing
driveway_ Providing access via a 20% slope driveway along the east
and north sides of the property is unnecessat•y in view of the
alternatives of either constructing a tuck under garage with a
southern entrance or locating an attached or detached garage along
the southern end of proposed Parcel A.
Access to Parcel A will be via a 14 foot driveway casement over
Parcel B. The easement is being proposed so that the lot area of
Parcel B does not drop below the 10,000 square foot minimum
required in the Zoning Code for R -1 districts.
COMMENT: This case has been active since 1979. Although the City
stands ready to pursue the complaint filed in 1989, both the city
attorney and city planner feet that the proposed subdivision is a
reasonable way to resolve this issue si.ice it finally accomplishes
the City of Mound's major objective which is to remove the fire
damaged structure. In doing so, it will also remove a situation
which has been tolerated by the neighboring properties for more
than 10 years.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision
establishing Parcels A and 8 as per the survey dated 8/6/90
prepared by Coffin & Gronbery, Inc, including the following
variances: a lot frontage variance for Parcel A, reccgnition of a
15.5 foot front yard setback variance for the structure on Parcel
B,, and recognition of a 5.5 foot side yard setback variance for the
structure on Parcel B. This approval is subject to the full
compliance by the applicant with the following conditions:
•
Z:5/0
Revises
Zuckman Planning Report •
August 8, 1990
Page Four
1. Prior to this issue being reviewed by the City Council,
the applicant shall file a variance application for the
above identified variances and submit the appropriate
application fee.
2. No building permit for the new structure on Parcel A
shall be issued until the applicant has obtained a
demolition permit for the boat house /summer cottage and
removed all portions of the old structure except as
modified herein. Further, the applicant shall obtain any
required building permits and inspections to convert the
illegal two - family residence on Parcel B to a single -
family structure. Such conversion shall occur prior to
the City Clerk's release of the resolution approving the
minor subdivision for recording with Hennepin County.
3. The proposed retaining wall utilizing two foundation
walls from the boat house /summer cottage shall be
permitted if it complies with building code requirements.
If required by the Building Official, certification by
a registered structural engineer and details of the •
fencing along the top of the wall will be provided prior
to the issuance of a building permit for the new
structure on Parcel A.
4. The applicants survey shall be revised to remove the tuck
under garage and driveway along the north side of the
property and replace it either with a south facing tuck
under garage and required retaining walls, an attached
garage, or the identification of a detached garage site
on the property as required by City Code.
5. The applicant shall submit a grading and erosion control
plan for review and approval by the city engineer prior
to receipt of. any building and /or demolition permits for
either Parcels A or B.
6. The applicant shall provide the City of Mound with a
performance bond, letter of credit or other acceptable
financial guarantee in the amount of $5,000 to guarantee
removal of the boat house /summer cottage structure within
one year of City Council approval of the minor
subdivision. The financial guarantee shall be in a form
acceptable to the city attorney. The City Clerk shall
not be authorized to release the resolution approving the
minor subdivision for recording with Hennepin County
prior to receipt of the financial guarantee.
7065l/
Revised
Zuckman Planning Report
August 8, 1990
Page Five
7. New utility services to Parcel A sha il be installed
within the identified driveway easement area. Plans for
the utility services shall be reviewed and approved by
the city engineer and public works department. This
requirement will be waived if the applicant can
demonstrate that utility services serving Parcel A
complying with current city standards presently exists
within the proposed easement area.
Pursuant to Section 23.506.2 (5) of the Mound Zoning Code, the
variance approval shall expire one year after the date of City
Council approval.
•
ZS/ Z
RFCEIVED AUG 6 1990
i
SURVEY FOR:
MELVIN ZUCKMAN
el
z r�r/?�+� sue• r
A
`fr�fi a� 1
1
J . 1
'
L pM ^ 1rw
Ir.,rr lw• 1 '�• I �
- 41r•I� Z
M,WIAr.r Ii
v 1 f
A
c_:tM KUum-
Tract A, IrgitttM t•N s.r. y r. 1151, !Iles of Registrar of Title..
r11 a.. Cerlg. NIAN "I a.
,
'Ml Part .f Tract A. Oql stated LW y r. Ilse, r11n N nr of
'till.-. N.Nerla c•wl►. A.... Wd INt Awwrly A/ t4 411AY1y
r«ri6" list W it, masterly • tagir.
C40ret1N At W awtMrl r Of laid it «t A; tw«e r N tur.od
rwl•g 01 rrt. s Mpa1 eg NNtts y Playa;; t aleq w out
Itr N NN Inca A. a distuN• 01 I11.M Mt b W MIN M
Inarl N W lift t• 6, dAet1lWi 0 feet• a dgr•ea p
.IANN�r .et•adt rat a diet•«# of NJ1 rrl 4 W .estwlf Ilr N
NU Tr eat A W said 11N t•n. Iw.INl /p.
BILLlJ
rrl Pwl •I it «t A, ReglstwN ltd k'9 r. It*. fr1« N 1aNN 01
IIt4u. pA•rPIA C•rlg, 11,..We Wca IIN ta•Ilrtly el w bIj
d•«ribN It":
GNenclnhqg at W sntrrt carne! of Nall tract A; tames w r uarAd
rat I .g N MV t depoes 1! pirto, U a «.rs rst alaq tM wt
IIN r M u rr «I A, a Alatae[• N in.M fiat A lM MIN d
OagINI N W IIN to M MwIM1: show. South A dagrNS 11
pINGa 6f .wads rat a dblasa d 11.31 fiat to the similarly IIN N
maid Tr «t A W old IIN a . tmlNtiM,
rrniag N Nswaat rw #r1NYy PwPeN{ Mr W AcrossM earl 14.n M{ N IM at.yre Re«rlNd rraett Y.
this surrey ho.$ a +U[Ing spot e11•Alleas Place# rPra A
OOYtd.rr turrfy f.r.lined by to. •Nest Naiad J.ly 11. Iag0.
sNrlrq the allslag OYl lel Ana dr1•ey and rru00
ei•: ^.inq IiM is rel Arlon [e t•e AMre w sea
des, noel t t.
It Also 0--s A prepse0 he.* aM Prore an r..ay tMnea
It dees not purport to She. coy •tAn I. AN or
eacreachments.
1 hereby certify that lots ..... y Yat rra0are0 1) a Or
,ender ., 0l recd t.!at.l alp aad t 1 1 r• A duly Reg!slerad
land S.rryor .ode• tM law or tM State of al nneset
COFFIN a 6a0Nf16. INC
[ngtngra, land SYrngen. ►�qrs
tang Uae. mat nnetota
Oate •- 1- g0.^•ra..
Scott I • 20•
• Iron llama, found
INari"a, -"nest are 0•ad .pen •n a +suNd 0. �
(.•►.q: to tong Spot [I r•aU On a
Dal.a: MAn )r• lerel
•
. •
•
Zvi 3
Fee Owner(s) _ d wt 4. ..
print name print name
•
mailing address
M
NL%
Signature of Qe Owner Signature of Fee Owner
This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the propertyp or an
explanation given why this is not the case.
Property to be divided:
Address /Locati
Add"ti
I So
mailing address
W of proposed subdivision:
sting Use of Property
'on+ng District:
JA 60rne("
knee le( - o E,4 a, ►, r. �t Z5 / 4
Block PiD 45 Q( Y Piat,
CITY Of
"MM
"M
4 No 1 Case
No. _ 1o��
LOMMAWi
I Date
F i 1 ed / - A - 1 0
&MICATION
FOR
SUED1VIS19N OF LM
FEES:
Mi nor Subdivision
Mia_ior Subdivision:
Application
$50
Preliminary Plat $150
Park Ded.
Final Plat
$100
Other
Escrow Deposit
$1,000
Delinquent Taxes? yes / no
Park Dedication
Other
(Please
type or pri
the following
i�nfformatitin.)
App 1 1 cant' s Nam
V% Day
Phone
App "cant's Address
ro �(
Q �, b t) y
Fee Owner(s) _ d wt 4. ..
print name print name
•
mailing address
M
NL%
Signature of Qe Owner Signature of Fee Owner
This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the propertyp or an
explanation given why this is not the case.
Property to be divided:
Address /Locati
Add"ti
I So
mailing address
W of proposed subdivision:
sting Use of Property
'on+ng District:
JA 60rne("
knee le( - o E,4 a, ►, r. �t Z5 / 4
Block PiD 45 Q( Y Piat,
Application for Subdivision
Pape Two
Case No.
Has an application ever been made for zoning, var I ancg., conditional use*
permit,, or other zoning procedure for this property? nom. If yes,
list date 2) of application, action taken, and provide lution number s)
(Copies of previous resolutions must accompany this application.)'
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 ac-
curate. 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.
Applicant' Signature Date x
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
Planning Commission Recommendation 0
Date
Council Action:
Resolution No.
Date
•
Z��S
S�
4N� e
F
01%L 0
1]
N
• low
ev '.A
N
.�
�:
M ;
s
r 0
k
•
l�
2 y
May 22, 1979
Councilmember Withhart moved the following resolution,
RESOLUTION NO. 79 - 213
RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT A STRUCTURE LOCATED
ON TRACT A, RLS 1150, WAS 50% OR MORE DESTROYED
BY FIRE b DENYING AN AFPLICATION TO REBUILD b RE-
CONSTRUCT A NON- CONFORMING USE
WHEREAS, Melvin Zuckman is the owner of property located at 5012 Tuxedo Blvd.
in the City of Mound, and
WHEREAS, Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes authorizes the City Council with
the aid and assistance of the City Planning Commission to carry out muni-
cipal planning activities which guide development and improvement of our
community, and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a zoning ordinance, Chapter 23 of the City Code, and
the intent of said ordinance is to correct past errors in plattinq, build-
ing and land use wherein much development took place in the City prior to
the adoption - of any planning regulations or planhing thought and to direct.
aid and assist development on an equal basis throughout the community for
present and future development, and
WHEREAS, the City did provide in the Zoning Ordinance for non - conforming uses to
protect existing property values and to meet constitutional requirements
protecting the rights of property owners and to prevent the taking of lands
or property without the payment of compensation, and
• WHEREAS, Courts throughout this country have uniformly recognized non - conforming
uses as a method of protecting said property rights but Courts and treat-
ises on zoning and planning have uniformly agreed that non - conforming
uses may be lost for a variety of reasons, including destruction, and
WHEREAS, Section 23.20 of the Mound Code of Ordinances relates to and provides re-
gulations regarding non - conforming uses and Sec. 23.20, Subd. "g" of the
City Code states as follows:
"Any building which is partially damaged or destroyed by fire, earthquake,
wind, water, or explosion may be restored to its former use, provided
that no building which does not conform to the requirements of the use
district in which it is located, and which is thus partially damaged or
destroyed to the extent of fifty percent (50 %) or more, may be rebuilt
or reconstructed other than for purposes of conformity. Estimate of the
extend of damage or destruction shall be made by the Citv Council or its
appointed agent." and
WHEREAS, the property located at 5012 Tuxedo Boulevard and legally described as
Teact A, RLS 1150 is owned by Mr. Zuckman and is a non - conforming use for
the following reasons:
a) Contains two principle structures (houses) on one parcel of land
which is zoned Residential A -1 (Single Family); said structures had
3 housing units in a single family district.
b) Building A on said parcel is the structure involved in the request
and it is further non - conforming because of
I a minor side yard set back deficiency (1/4 of a foot)
05 Z Z
220
May 22, 1979
2) it is built 13 feet from the lake front and the ordinance requires
a 50 foot setback - therefore the owner is requesting a 37 foot
variance from the lake front setback requirements. •
e) Building B is the other stricture on this parcel and this has two
setback violations
1) a deck is built 4.5 feet from the neighboring parcel and the or-
dinance requires a ten foot setback
2) the structure is 16.7 feet from the street and the ordinance re-
quires 20 feet as a setback,
and
WHEREAS, Building A was damaged by fire and the property owner failed to obtain any
building permits as required by the City and State building codes and began
reconstruction of the damaged home; the Building Inspector observed this con-
struction and stopped work on the house because the owner had not obtained
building permits and the property is a non - conforming use. The applicant
has applied for a variance to the nonconforming use section of tr,, ordin-
ance, and has asked for variances from the setback requirements and has con-
tended that Building A was not damaged by the tire "to the extent of 50% or
more ", and
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission at its meeting of March 26, 1979, indicated
it was very difficult to ascertain the percentage of structural damages caused
by the fire because the owner had torn down and replaced portions of the
structure before the Building Inspector stopped work; it was therefore im-
possible to determine with certainty the before and after values of this
structure, and therefore the Planning Commission recommended that this Council
determine the question of damage to the property before considering the
owner's request for variances, and
WHEREAS, the City directed Lyle Swanson, a Professional Engineer, to examine the
structure and to provide his professional opinion regarding damages, and
he did examine the building on March 28, 1979, and stated as follows:
"Virtually all of the structural members from the first floor level up were
damaged beyond repair. Many of these have been replaced with new members
since the fire. There are stress fractures in the sub -level block walls,
but these were probably not caused by the fire."
A copy of said report ;s on file in the City Clerk /Treasurer's Office and
marked Exh ;bit A, and
WHEREAS, the City then contacted the Hennepin County Assessor who acts as the assessor
for the City of Mou.id, who reported and filed with the Council a report in-
dicating that a member of the assessor's staff had inspected the premises
after the fire and estimated the damage to the structure at 50% of its value;
a copy of said appraiser's report and finding is on file in the City Clerk/
Treasurer's Office and marked Er',ibit B; and
WHEREAS, the City retained the services of Home Inspection Consultants, a national
firm, to examine this property and said report did not specifically state
the before value of the premises because they had not had an opportunity to
examine the premises prior to the fire and were unable to give before and
2523
211
May 22, 1979
after value, but the professional appraiser did state,
"It must be said here that extensive rehabilitative work to much of
the structure has been initiated without obtaining a building permit.
While many of the remaining structural members have some structural
integrity, in my professional opinion, 1 would not depend upon that
integrity unless every structural member damaged or scorched by the
fire would be subject to testing. Because testing would be impract-
ical if not impossible, I am assuming that the entire frarre portion
of the house would be replaced. Also because the entire chimney de-
veloped serious structural cracks from the fire, it would also have
to be rebuilt."
This Civil and Structural Engineer, Chester J. Zimrviewicz, did not make a
befori and after valuation, but did give a professional opinion related to
the destruction and the estimated costs of repair in the amount of $12,754.
Said report is on file in the office of the City Clerk /Treasurer and marked
Exhibit C; and
WHEREAS, this Council, having the responsibility of determining if 50% or more of
the structure'had been damaged or destroyed, requested additional informa-
tion from th- City Staff, and the City Manager requested Edward J. Stanke,
Vice President of Eberhardt Company, to examine the structure, and he has
stated,
"it is my opinion that the fire must have caused over 50% damage to
the home."
it being impossible to give'before and after figures because he had not
examined the house prior to the fire and substantial work had been done
on it by the property owner without a permit after the fire. A copy
of said report.is on file in the pity Clerk /Treasurer's Office and
marked Exhibit D, and
WHEREAS, the Council obtained a review by Mr. Milton Hilk of the Hennepin County
Assessor's Office who transmitted a report to the City Manager under date
of May 8 indicating that in its present state, the house is 45.7% complete,
and that in his opinion most of the structure is being replaced with new
materials. Said letter and report is or. file in the City Clerk /Treasurer's
office and marked Exhibit E, and
WHEREAS, the property owner has appeared before the Planning Commission and the
City Council on two occasions and has not at any time presented a before
and after valuation nor any appraisal of the property, but did on April 24
present a copy of a contract agreemen* with Deluxe Builders and Remodelers,
Inc. to do certain work on the building for the sum of $9,260. The
applicant has then argued to this Council that $9,260. is less than 50%
of what they consider the fair market value prior to the time of the fire.
A copy of said contract and agreement is on file in the office of the City
Clerk /Treasurer and marked Exhibit F. This contract does not take into
consideration that the owner was to furnish all roofing material, redecor-
ate the interior of the structure, furnish and install all interior trim,
kitchen cabinets and counters; and made no provision for plumbing, elec-
trical work, or exterior panting, and therefore said estimete as pre-
sented by the applicant is incomplete as to the actual work to be jone
on the structure, and
Z45zy
222
May 22, 1979
WHEREAS, the City Council has asked the City Attorney to review the law in Minnesota
regarding non - conforming uses and valuations, and he has done so and re-
ported on the case of State v. Pahl wherein the Minnesota Supreme Court
ind;cated that if preexisting non - conforming structure is substantially
destroyed, then the owners must thereafter comply with the setback re-
quirements of the ordinance even though the building did not conform to
such requirements at the time the ordinance was adopted, and
WHEREAS, this Council is sympathetic to the property owner and has done everything
in its power to fairly appraise the property, but has been frustrated in
coming up with exact numbers because of the property owner's proceeding
without a building permit and the property owner's failure to present any
evidence to the Council of a before and after valuation of the structure
to refute the evidence assembled by the City staff;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND:
1. The structure located on Tract A, RLS 1150, located the closest to Lake
Minnetonka was damaged by fire to the extent of 50% or more some time prior
to March of 1979 This estimate of the extent of the damage and destruction
is made by this Council pursuant to Section 23.20, subd. "g" of the City Code.
2. The applicant's request for vz 'antes to rebuild and reconstruct this non-
conforming use is hereby denied based on the following findings:
a. The applicant has created his own hardship by illegally proceeding to
reconstruct a structure without obtaining a building permit.
b. The applicant has failed to present any evidence to this Council to in-
dicate the structure was not 50% or more destroyed by fire.
c. The property is a non - conforming use in that it contains two structures
and three dwelling units on a single family lot and does not meet the
setback requirements of the ordinance,
d. The request of a lake front setback of 13 feet is contrary to the zoning
ordinance of the City of Mound and does not conform to the Minnetonka Lake
Conservation District requirement.
e. It is the finding and determination of this Council that based upon the
fact situation as set forth in the Whereas provisions of this Resolution,
the applicant's problem and the Council's dilemma in establishing valua-
tions was created by the applicant's failure to comply with City and State
laws,
3. It is a further finding of this Council that the application for variance
should be and is hereby denied b the granting of the variancf would have an
adverse and detrimental affect n the health, safety and general welfare of the
City, would be contrary to City ordinances, and would perpetuate and extend a non-
conforming use which would frustrate the purpose and intent of the comprehensive
G in and zoning ordinance of the City of Mound.
A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council -
member Polston and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor there
25Z4,�
223
May 22, 1979
• Lovaasen, Polston, W rick and Withhart, the following voted against the same;
Swenson, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by
the Mayor and his signature attested by the Acting City Clerk.
�7
M yor
Attest: Actin City Cler
i
• l
ZSzlo
66-77
4 -12.66
RESOLUTION N0. 66-77
RESOLUTION GRANTING ZONING VARIANCE '
(Tract A, RLS 1150_ - Second Dwelling on Lot)
WHEREASp the owner of Tract A, Registered Lane Survey No. 1150
has petitioned the Council for variance from th9
single family residence requiremen, of the permissible
uses;
WHEREAS, the Village Planning Commission has approved the
request with conditions upon the height thereof;
C.
AND WHEREAS, it appears to the Council that the granting of
the vaeLanco is necessary to avoid substantial
hardship and to promote the spirit of the zoning
ordinance, and that the granting :.f the variance
with suitable conditions would not unduly increase
the hazard intended to be avoidod; •
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF
MOUND MINNESOTA;
1. That substantial hardship be, and hereby is,
found in the strict application of the single
dwelling use restriction of the.zoning ordinance
such as to roquire the granting of permit to
add to and to modernize a boat house and summer
cottage on Tract A Registered Land Survey No.
1150, provided the roof height'be limited so as
not to obstruct the view from neighboring
dwellings.
2. That the aforesaid variance, as conditioned, be,
and hereby is, granted.
Adopted by the Council this 12th day of Apr 1966*
•
- w
ZyZ�.
;-oar N. 52 972/0 MA�IVCHESTEtZ R
it c
I 10
r" 1 of- - I � 4 7 d 3 2 11 l2 y . .. 23
°� J ! 3 g � � � 4r � • I
O
30 r
(9)29 • O ' ` « b
car: oPS 9
CD 3
110
L Ir
a 11 Its 3 1 ♦_
' ?t
13 23
a . 3 r 4 • • '� 0 2
+ 0 2 '516 r ,cl
!� $il t!� 33� • t L
� ":. L • 5 O+ sc a♦� 10 B . f TUXEO 30 . . � �" � •
',�� ►S ¢� .tR : i t elYO M \ 32 1 :�lz}.��04) • 9t ti...
3
g�S Vi �• " .� ,. • 30 �%1!� 7 d
► 4 o l . `p 29 TT
11 to 9 It 7 C. 3 -
Marsh �.�
TUXEDO /4 ' ° ' .K? 6�
.o ♦0 40 ♦o h` oo el. AS �,' ( 19 I !' o ii � lily
; - 4o VD I
'1° 2 � r 2i �� ii
+ �f!
0
0 9 0 e' . 1 . /; qbl (q�� ��� i ` �° 11 � \ � 2l Q 31 ( ,e l m rm 2 t! 3 `1a.�sjt 1� K)_�
1� z r rgtl' 5 09 1 .. 23 14 -
° r r i I 1 12 9. 7 •1 5 4 3j ��/ r 10 + _ 17 ,�� G
p1i �!S t , 7 6 ✓� u .. Z —y- � (71 s x J ' • s ' s : 1 •.t'f QR �
17 2
2 90� ! 1d (66)
_ h - � / t
40 b + 40 b 40 0 40 ' 4o �lUxE --
N O � �.� ... ZL ��. � D ft. �•
21�
25126t27 29 29,30`131 32 33�� 1 36 +37 3. 39 41 42 a 43 144
♦o o N 4o N 40 b •+ Ls 4. Jo . H Io 40 0 14i
I' ' O
RD
�A, 43 4 4
ftew
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNINI. COMMISSION
August 13. 1990
c. Case No. 90 -927: Dennis Hildebrandt 5229 Waterbury Road,
Whipple, lots 6. 7. i 8. Block 19. PIO &25- 117 -24 -21 013
VARIANCE: rear yard setba
Building Official. Jon Sutherland. reviewed the applicant's
request for , 8.5 foot rear yard setback variance. The applicant
proposes to construct a garage addition consisting of 370 square
feet onto the existing 484 square foot garage, therefore. creat-
ing an accessory structure of 854 square feet. Zoning Ordinance
Section 23.407(3) states, in residential districts, no acessory
building shall exceed 840 square feet of floor area except by
conditional use permit.
Staff recommended approval of the variance of 8.5 feet to the
required rear property line setback of 15 feet contingent upon
the applicant submitting plans in conformance with the 840 square
feet as required by Ordinance Section 23.407(3).
The applicant. Dennis Hildebrandt, stated that he feels the
square footage should be determined by the Interior useable
space. Both the Building Official and City Planner agreed that
the square footage Is measured from the footprint.
Hildebrandt stated that he wishes to use the additional garage
space for storage of his recreational vehicles, including a boat
and snowmobiles.
Thal was concerned about a hardship. He concluded that if the
applicant was requesting to build within 10 feet of the rear
property I I ne it would be easier to accept (If the rear was con-
sidered a side yard, the setback requirement would be 10 feet).
Jensen agreed, and commented that he has room to expand Into the
side yard. Jensen also commented on allowing variances for a
minimum size structure. and the proposed structure is not mini-
mum.
MOTION made by Ciapsaoddle. seconded by Meyer. to recom-
mend approval of staff recommendation.
The applicant confirmed that he has an alternative plan which
will conform to the 840 square feet by eliminating a 3' x 4'
square.
Jensen questioned why a veorlance situation should be created on
an existing conforming structure when there are other ilterna-
tle - !s. Meyer commented on the fact that the applicant want to
enclose his recreational vehicles, and the variances does not ap-
pear to infringe Ln anyone or anything.
MOTION FAILED 3 to 5 (those In favor were: Clap vIle,
Meyer, and Mueller; those opposed were: Welland. Thal.
Jensen. Smith and Michael).
Thal. Jensen, Welland, and Smith commented that he would approve
a garage to be built 10 feet from the rear yard. which is what
the side yard setback would be.
This case will be reviewed by the City Council on August 28,
1990.
Meyer commented on the fact that our ordinance does not allow for
a standard three car garage, and feels the ordinance should be
Z G reviewed In the future. It was determined this would be dis-
cussed later in the meeting.
•
•
4---
DATE: Planning Commission Agenda of August 13, 1990
TO: Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff
FROM: Jon Sutherland, Building Official
CASE NO.: 90 -927
APPLICANT: Dennis Hildebrandt
LOCATION: 5229 Waterbury Road
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Whipple, Lots 6, 7, 8 8. Block 19,
P I D #25-117-24-21 0138
SUBJECT: Rear Yard Setback Variance
EXISTING ZONING: R -3 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance of 8.5 feet to
the required rear yard setback of 15 feet in order to provide ad-
ditional space on the existing garage.
COMMENTS: The original proposal as submitted by the applicant to
this office was in excess of the area allowed by Zoning Ordinance
Section 23.407(3) that states, in residential districts, no ac-
cessory building shall exceed 10 percent of the lot area, and in
no case exceed 840 square feet of floor area except by condi-
tional use permit.
The applicant was notified of this requirement, fie then revised
and re- submitted another site plan. The total proposed garage
floor area as I calculated is still in excess of 840 square feet.
The ordinance allows 840 square feet for a typical single family
accessory building. The applicant is in need of additional
storage space for his personal property and recreation, vehicles.
The applicant's home is situated on a corner lot in such a manner
that the proposed addition imposes a practical difficulty in ob-
taining the maximum allowable floor area of accessory building on
his property.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the variance of 8.5
feet to the required rear property line setback of 15 feet con-
tingent on the applicant submitting plans in conformance with the
840 square feet as required by Ordinance Section 23.407(3).
If the applicant does not wish to modify the total area to 840
square feet or less, then the applicant shall be required to ful-
fiil the requirements for a conditional use permit.
The abutting neighbors have been notified. This case will be
referred to the City Council on August 28, 1990.
Z j j 1>O
/ , J ,k1L 2 6 �D
lrXT
C I TY OF MOUND PART I I Case No. - - 1 7i2 1
Date F I 1 ed_ 1
Fee 150.00
VARIANCE APPLICATION
PLANNING a ZONING COMMISSION
(Please type or print the following information.)
Address of Subject Property :S: 2 wQTi~'- (
Lot 'I . Block
9
Addition A')h _ PID No.
Owner's Name `�t�nr� S 1�P ��,, W c C�PhyYi v�(� Day Phone 1 -1 rvS I
Owner's Address 5 �C► W AT f f b
Applicant's Name (if other than owner)
Address Day Phone
Existing Use of Property:
Zoning District R' 3
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, co t ionaI use
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? yes / if yes,
list date(s) of application, action taken, and provide resolution number(s)
(Copies of previous resolutions must accompany this application.)
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 ac-
curate. 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.
Applicant's Signature Date -
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
Planning Commission Recommendation_
Council Action:
Resolution No. _
,Zol M- ; 4CoJfgW
Date
Date
&IANCE APPLICATION
Case No. q0'
I. Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for
the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (./S. No ( ). If no.
specify each non - conforming use:
2. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and
setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located?
Yes (V), No ( ). If no, specify each non - conforming use:
3. 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 ( ) soil
• ( ) too small ( ) drainage ( ) sub- surface
( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ✓j other: specify
4. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone
having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was
adopted? Yes ( ), No (✓). If yes, explain
5. Was the hardship created by any othe man -made change, such as the
relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No ( If yes, explain
2 532
VARIANCE APPLICATION
Case No. go
6. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a var - lance
peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes (✓S.
No ( ). if no, how many other properties are. similarly affected?
c1.0 - hO C44 a
7. What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area. bulk, and
setback regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of
your land? (Specify. using maps, site plans with dimensions and writ-
ten explanation.
4�, _ .,.��ec9 r 6c9e& 4c) 5In +g_r (_S a) Oehl G\e,
arA !g 1nP1cr�\"s if- lamere a +n . 1ann
ifi0Uy 941A .SrD r motel : f 4 kW 2
8. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in
the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance?
![1 No
PART III
J. SITE PLAN INFORMATION: A11 supporting documents such as sketch clans.
attachments, etc., must be submitted in 8- 1 /2 "xll" size. If larger
drawings are submitted,-one must be 8- 1 /2 "xll ", and 15 larger alz¢
copies must be provided. For each requested zoning variance procedure,
a site plan must be attached at a scale large enough for clarity show-
ing the following information:
I. Location, area, and dimensions of existing and proposed: (Lot(s),
building(s), driveways) /street access, off - street parking, and
utilities.
2. Existing and proposed elevations.
3. Distance between: building and front, side and rear lot lines;
principal building and accessory buildings; principal building
and principal buildings on adjacent lots.
4. Location of: signs, easements, underground utilities, etc.
5. Indicate "north" compass direction.
6. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by
city staff and applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Z501
Av
W A 7 E R B U Y ROAD CITY OF G
�
YD' ti
0�
s
W
or
. I
I 1 3 31-,. ur�.r hcf 1.,�•.� I
160 IJIW otk�
1
Cpf
Q v � u) '
kf �-Y"� .
splvylclo Crn
r -cp
u"o O�A
a , �4 Z/ -Z �
;4A� a* ,off.+ - ►' ,
�✓"�ilr L , �lK�
S? � Z v✓AR�I �it. L N
Mad v� N SS$�� •
...
253
CAD
to
��a�/� Z5�
o �
�J
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
Case No. 90 -930
RESOLUTION 90-
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ALLOW
SIGN VARIANCES FOR SOS PRINTING, 2361 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD,
LOTS 29 - 36, BLOCK 3, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT F. PID #
13- 117 -24 34 0051 & 0058. P & Z CASE #90 -930
WHEREAS, the applicant has regUeSted a variance to install two
wall signs on the north side of the subject building, one totalling
48 square feet in area and the second totalling 24 square feet in
area at 2361 Wilshire Boulevard , Lots 29 36, Block 3, Shirley
Hills Unit F, PID #13- 117 -24 34 0051 & 0058; and
WHEREAS, the 48 square foot sign containing the word
"Printing" is to be mounted in the upper portion of the north wall
between two existing vents and the 24 square foot sign containing
the name(s) of the lower level tenant(s) is to be mounted in the
lower portion of the north wall in an area previously containing
a sign with the message "Westonka School of Dance "; and
WHEREAS, Section 365 of the Mound Code of Ordinances prohibits
signage on walls not abutting publ right -of -way and the north
wall of the subject building does not abut public right -of -way
resulting in variances for the placement of both signs; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
does recommend approval of the sign placement variances .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the City does hereby authorize the applicants
request to install the two signs referenced above
providing that the 48 square foot sign contains only the
word " Printiny" and the 24 square foot sign contains only
the name(s) of the tenant(s) in the lower level of the
building for SOS Printing, 2361 Wilshire Boulevard, PID
#13- 117 -24 34 0051 & 0058.
2. The Council authorizes the sign variances pursuant to
Section 365:05, Subd. 5 of the Mound Code of Ordinances
with the clear and express understanding that the sign
remains a lawful, nonconforming sign subject to all of
the provisions and restrictions of Section 635 of the
Mound Code of Grdinances.
•
&5 2J
PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case No. 90 -930 •
Page Two
3. This variance is granted for the following legally
described property: Lots 29 - 36, Block 3, Shirley Hills
Unit F; PID 113- 111 -24 34 0051 b 0058.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder
or registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to
Minnesota State Statutes, Section 462.36, Subdivision
(1). This shall be considered a restriction on how this
property may be used.
4. The property owner shall have the responsibility for
filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying
all costs for such recording. The sign permit will not
be issued until proof of filing is received by the Mound
City Clerk.
•
•
SOSSIGN.R51
ZS35
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 1990
d. Case No. 90 -930: Gerald Smith, SOS Printing, 2361 Wilshire
Qivd., Shirley hills Unit F, Lots 29 - 36, Block 3, PID #13-
117-24-34 0051 - 0058. VARIANCE: scan
The City Planner explained that the applicant Is seeking a sign
variance for two signs, the largest one being 32 square feet, and
the other being 24 square feet. The signs will be placed on the
north wall of the building facing the parking lot for use by the
lower level tenant's employees and customers. The two existing
signs on the premises, a fabric canopy and a low freestanding
sign (approx. 4'x4') along the front of the building are in con-
formance with the ordinance.
Staff recommended approval fo the 24 square foot sign identifying
the lower level tenant providing that the sign is constructed of
wood or a similar durable material and is affixed to the building
where the former Westonka School of Dance sign was located. The
sign shall contain only the name of the applicable tenant(s).
Staff further recommended denial of the variance for the 2' x 16'
"Printing" sign that is proposed for the upper portion of the
north wall of the building because it is inconsistent with the
intent of the sign ordinance. The sign ordinance presently al-
lows SOS Printing to install a larger, taller free- standin,, sign
along the Wilshire Blvd. frontage. Such a sign would enhance the
visibility of the business.
The Commission discussed visibility of the "Printing" sign to
Shoreline Drive. They also compared the proposed slgnage to sur-
rounding slgnage. Applicant, Gerry Smith, commented that these
new signs are ,just a part of a plan to beautify the entire ex-
terior of the building.
The Commission compared the impact of the wall sign compared to
the type of free standing sign which is allowed by the ordinance.
It was agreed that if the wall signs could be allowed in lieu of
a taller and iarger free standing sign, this would be acceptable.
They discussed the possibility of limiting the size of the exist-
ing slgnage.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recom-
mend the City Council approve a variance to allow both
wails signs to be errected upon the condition that the
existing free standing sign does not increase in size.
Motion carried unanimously.
'rhis case will be heard by the City Council on August 28, 1990.
Z5Vo
0
PLANNING REPORT
2541
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: August 1, 1990
SUBJECT: Sign Variance
APPLICANT: Gerald Smith, SOS Printing
CASE NUMBER: 90 -930
VHS FILE NUMBER: 90- 310- A24 -ZO
LOCATION: 2361 Wilshire Boulevard
EXISTING ZONING: Central Business (8-1)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Commercial
BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a sign variance for two signs
along the north side of the building. One sign totalling 32 square
feet will contain the word "Printing" and will be placed high on
the north wall in an area between two existing vents. The second
sign totalling 24 square feet will serve as identification signage
for the tenant on the lower level of the business. The tenant sign
has been in place for the past 10 years as a nonconforming sign.
It was removed recently when the space became vacant.
The Mound Sign Code allows wall signs and free - standing signs in
the B -1 zone. The SOS Printing building presently has conforming
signage consisting of a fauric canopy with signage and a low
freestanding sign (approx. 4'x4') along the front of the building.
Under the code, the building can have wall signage and a free-
standing sign for each street frontage consistent with the size
requirements identified in Section 365:20, Subd. 5.
When the Mound sign ordinance was adopted, efforts were made to
allow signage that had a direct relationship with the location of
the business. Accordingly, off - premise advertising signs were
banned and signage was allowed only if it related to the street
frontage or frontages of a business. This request is at odds with
X030 Harbor Len* North 81d9.11, Suits 104 Minneapolls, MN. 55447 -2175 612/653 -1060
SOS Printing Planning Report
August 1, 1990
Page Two
the spirit and intent of the ordinance because it proposes a sign
with the word printing, whose only purpose is to be seen from
another roadway (Shoreline Drive) which the business does not abut.
Correspondingly, it becomes more of a billboard than it does an on-
premise identification sign.
In order to allow maximum business visibility while restricting
overall signage, the ordinance allows the installation of a free-
standing sign totalling 48 square feet in area with a height not
exceeding 25 feet. SOS has the option of installing such a sign
replacing the existing low sign along the front of the building.
A new, larger, taller sign would enhance the visibility of the
business, even when viewed from Shoreline Boulevard.
The second sign that is part of the variance request is for tenant
identification signage that will be installed where the previous
" Westonka School of Dance" sign existed for approximately 10 years.
The old sign was nonconforming under the current sign code and it
is was removed when the lower level became vacant. The north side of
the building contains separate parking for use by the lower level
tenant's employees and customers. Th.,. signage as proposed would
be clearly visible from the entry driveway and parking lot area.
The proposed sign contains c total of 24 square feet and will
contain the name of the lower level business once the space is
occupied. Signage in this area helps alleviate customer confusion
creating a more convenient and safer situation.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the 24 square foot
sign identifying the lower level tenant providing that the sign is
constructed of wood or a similar durable material and is affixed
to the building where the former Westonka School of Dance sign was
located. The sign shall contain only the name of the applicable
tenant(s).
Staff further recommends denial of the variance for the 2'x16'
"Printing" sign that is proposed for the upper portion of the north
wall of the building because it is inconsistent with the intent of
the sign ordinance. The sign ordinance presently allows SOS
Printing to install a larger, taller free - standing sign along the
Wilshire Boulevard frontage. Such a sign could enhance the
visibility of the business.
0
SOS.P51 LS 44X
a JUL 3 0 i9,
CI TY OF MOUND PART I I ~ + Case No.
Date F i I ed__ —
VARIANCE APPLICATION
PLANNING b ZONING COMMISSION
(Please type or print the following information.)
Address of Subject Property Z3 0/ L O O
Lot z-9 r 30 - 3 J 3 2 - 33 - 3 � f— 3�, — Block
Addition Sf f' fi 6 C S U/,// 7 F P ID
Owner's Name - 1OS P!L rf ►"- i S
No. 13 -- 1 - 1;
Day Phone
1 7 - X I
Owner's Address ?- 6 ( f.r sNOf A✓� C�ftcCC= f9o-g
App 1 i cant's Name ( i f other than owner) ew, L /) C 7 , -
Address f) tVkS - 1a1,e E QLV12' Day Phone 4 2- 5r S U
Existing Use of Property:_
Zoning District_
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, c:7no 'tional use
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? yes if yes .
list date (s) of application, action taken, and provide resol t on number (s)
(Copies of previous resolutions must accompany this application.)
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 ac-
curate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this
application by any authorized official of the Ci of Mound for the PL'-pose
of inspecting, or of postin , maintaining an re ving such notices as may
be required by law.
App 1 i cant's 51 griature _ - Date 'Z U
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
P l a n n i n g Commission Recommendation_____.. __- ____- .-- - -__ --
Date
Counci 1 Action:__- _____ -_
Resolution No. - __
-------------- - - - - -- -' Date ___._ —.__ _�'_�
.zsg3
O VARIANCE APPLICATION
Case No._*!
1. 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
2. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and
setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located?
Yes f 0. No ( ). If no, specify each non - conforming use: _
3, 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 ( ) soil
( ) too small ( ) drainage ( ) sub - surface
( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( X) other: specify
L.-i !/ 2/ .r C CF
4. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone
having property Interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was
adopted? Yes X). No ( ) . If Yes, explain .U4� C'o�Fa�e �N r�
c5'lGiN / y�o kJE s'��od,( -� _. of /.�/.�.�//►c -.5�e /eke 40
t�✓T �q.dF £ ARK / d(, f-ort to—erz Lt'U� L NCt
5.
•
as the hardship created by any other man -made change,
relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No ( ). If yes, explain
i
(3C�Civc <s� — d FACT of tin
44 ' V C' C4 e .S ?iv.✓ ,S S�TUr�r.�d�'S /.✓ ciT� i4�
6 Ev, &7, c �• a ^-��
such as the
015 vy
VARIANCE APPLICATION
Case No. .9.w __*
6. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance
peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( ).
No ( ). If no. how many other properties are similarly affected?
/_1 C/A r o'
20'e /101 kk- +re( e u-" l r�n" t_ & e- 4 "U Sefo{ e&,1( -a re
7. What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area, bulk, and
setback regulations that will permit y --u to make reasonable use of
your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and writ-
ten explanation.
8. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in
the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance?
-- -- - -__ - -- •
PART III
J. SITE PLAN INFORMATION: All supporting documents such as sketch plans,
attachments, etc., must be submitted in 8 -1 /2"x11" size. If larger
drawings are submitted, one must be 8- 1 /2 "xIl ", and 15 larger size
copies must be provided. For each requested zoning variance procedure,
a site plan must be attached at a scale large enough for clarity show-
ing the following information:
I. Location, area, and dimensions of existing and proposed: (Lot(s),
building(s), driveway(s) /street access, off - street parking, and
utilities.
2. Existing and proposed elevations.
3. Distance between: building and front, side and rear lot lines:
principal building and accessory buildings; principal building
and principal buildings on adjacent lots.
4. Location of: signs. easements, underground utilities, etc.
5. Indicate "north" compass direction.
6. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the
city staff and applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance. •
�tiy�
4o -930
CITY OF MOUND 472 -1155
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364
0 APPLICATION FOR SIGN PERMIT
ADDRESS OF SIGN LOCATION 23 6 / ul / LSr(i I4 E /gc v O . (G p W& R
BU I LD i NG OWNER , I 0 S P1Lo - #zT I C Z PHONE
NAME OF APPLICANT _ S O-'%- ► " " 1'/ �(,`� - C efr3 S'�. ci ? 2 -c f 550
(if other than owner
APPL I CANT'S ADDRESS 2 3 6 L W/ CS/V //t e
SIGN CONTRACTOR i3r✓` L S' /� �✓ PHONE
PLEASE INDICATE NU MBER OF SIGNS APPLYING FOR: (if more than one wall sign is
being requested, set back):
—4—Permanent sign(s) seasonal /temporary sign(s) banner(s)
TYPE OF SIGN: _wall mount free standing __portable
DESCRIBE TYPE OF SIGN (materials, is it illuminated, etc.): 1 (PnINF
r D)
4 16 . 1 (94 " I. a f I a ,-,
SIZE OF SIGN REQUESTED: __high x , _ Isq. ft, $eye
e IF SEASONAL SIGN, LENGTH OF TIME TO BE ERECTED: 2--( (�
IF FREE STANDING HOW HIGH WILL SIGN BE FROM GROUND LEVEL TO THE TOP?
IF MALL SIGN, INDICATE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF WALL AREA WHERE SIGN IS TO BE ERECTED
WALL AREA: high x 5,6 wide = ; Z S a ;sq. ft.
NUMBER OF EXISTING WALL SIGNS :_ TOTA 8. FT. OF EXISTING SIGNS:,' ;
DESCRIBE REASON FOR REQUEST: S /qwS ltca:cr-s rr ,va,t rt/ S/..: o^rJ
Va ► Vt 0; W i c c Su Ppo rt j T1E�
LF o'EC o f u ;4 01 isNs woetA..O
t'A�c,� -.�/� i3 pyA�c�9BC� o•v [o✓��/L [�y f/S d
Applicant's Signature Date
/ / / //18 ��////////!// /! / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ///
Recommendations:
APPROVED BY BUILDING OFFICIAL: _ Date
•
as qr v
•
L
1
's
•
I
. 9
•
REC'U JUN 2 5 IM
June 22, 1990
Mr. Ed Shukle, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Ed:
As a follow -uo to our conversation on signage for SOS Printiny, I
looked at the site and have the following comments to offer.
Section 365:20, Subd. 5 of the Mound Code of Ordinances contains
the provisions governing signage in the Central Business (8 -1.)
zone. It states that businesses in the B -1 zone are entitled to
wall signage on each street frontage as long as the signage does
not exceed 15% of the total wall area up to a maximum of 175 square
feet. It additionally limits wall signage to a maximum size of any
one sign of 100 square feet. Therefore, no single sign can exceed
100 square feet in area and the total allowable signage on any wall
fronting on public right-of-wi!j can not exceed either 15% of the
area or a maximum total area of 175 square feet. The ordinance
also contains language permitting wall signage for businesses
fronting on large Publip parking lots, however, this section does
not apply to s case.
��. Any existing signage on thi north
ldinq it prlsently non - conforming.
As an alternative to wall signs, the ordinance does allow SOS to
install a free standing sign along Wilshire Boulevard. Free.
standing signs can he up to 48 square feet in total area.
I trust this information clarifies the interpretation of the
ordinance relative to this property. If I can be of any further
assistance, please contact me.
Sincerely,
VAN DOREN HAZARD- STALLINGS, INC.
R, Mark Koegler
City Planner
s
e
3030 Harbor Lane North Sidq.11, Suite 104 Mlinneepolic Mi. 55447 -2175 412/563 -145o
1D i 3 �_� 3' 'r/ i. 2 •! `` i2 G O Q' v y 4!
- b f• f• f.. Kf 1
3l ,his
•d `7 e 9 11 12 13 s 16 171• 19 20 21 22 4 9
1 1 t
ia.t WOOD �.. BLVD ; • s I r - LVNWOa� w
SLVD
24 Z3
r - 7 (!' 9 10 11:.12 13°
s fs s -
- 2 31 30 29 2a f 27 I=, 2 3;
10
3slo � 6 5
^
-st >t.1L S 1) 36 CZS> i 4 L "' : N t.fr of •
\ 1 i ( 2 «K
r,. I i o \ 1 Ado 1 _ - �4/ C..X7o - i l i. 4 7t&
6 1� 11�r� 5 \ • per 11 ♦• b 14 IS 1S .
__t - - - - - -- 17
.
- - - - - 37 / � � I o.r. s_a -
(,.) -' CD
31 33
• to ;
35 ti 1 2 �� EDEN s Y,
LOW
E �32 w Z l
SH I
J \ ,
5
)� �O
lit, _ SO /f ' K Ao a•
674G '.... ..Z
IO2 S � �
19 2V ZL 89. 4 A s. NOTE
All reed data okmo Co -Rd IG
O See Coun'y Sllrwya's file for sl+own as E Is toUen hole Pe.
additional into on Ulf 25 � �.. � PIM. project 00.6904 S E 1 . 0 •
� '? 34
August 28 1990 •
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY 1991 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
IN THE AMOUNT OF ;2,264,150; SETTING THE LEVY AT
:1,644,464; APPROVING THE OVERALL PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR 1991;
AND BETTING PUBLIC HEARINGS
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of.
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby adopt the following 1991
Preliminary General Fund Budget appropriations.
GENERAL FUND
Council
61,300
City Manager /City Clerk
161,530
Elections /Voter Registration
590
Assessing
44,600
Finance
171,040
Computer
21,300
Legal
76,950
Cable T.V.
1,380
Police
745,910
Planning & Inspection
123,230
Civil Defense
2,700
0
Street
392,670
Shop & Stores
59,840
City Property & Buildings
89,200
Parks
152,690
Recreation
11,760
Contingency
40,000
Transfers
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 2,264,150
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Coun of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby direct the County Auditor
to levy the following preliminary taxes for collection in 1991:
Bonded Indebtedness 124,226
Unfunded Accrued Liability of
Public Pension Funds 33,350
Housing & Redevelopment
Authority 24,00
Total Special Levies Ir 181,576
TOTAL LEVY LIMITATION 1988/89 1,462.888
GRAND TOTAL TO BE LEVIED 1,644,464
ZSS1 1
•
August 28, 1990
BE IT nATHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby adopt the overall
preliminary budget for 1991 as follows:
As per above 2,264,150
Capital Projects 21,400
Area Fire Service Fund 256,000
Cemetery Fund 4,180
Pension Fund -0-
Commons Docks Fund 31,150
Recycling Fund 104,150
•
Water Fund 364,450
Sewer Fund 913,540
Liquor Fund 219.760
TOTAL 4,178.780
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, hereby sets November 20, 1990 and
November 27, 1990, as the public hearing dats for consideration
of the 1991 Proposed Budget.
2
255Z-
August 28, 1990 •
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO
EXCEED $24,000.00 FOR TRR PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING
THE COST OF OPERATION, PCRBUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
KBA 469, OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPXZNT AUTHORITY OF
THE CITY OF HOUND FOR THE YEAR 1991
WHEREA&, the City Council of the City of Mound is the
governing body of the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has receive3 two resolutions
from the Housing & Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound:
one entitled, "Resolution Approving the Mound Housing and
Redevelopment Authority Budget for the Year 1991 Pursuant to NSA
Chapter 469 ", and the other entitled, "Resolution Establishing
the. Tax Levy for the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority
for the Year 1991 "; and
WEERFAS, the City Council, pursuant to the provisions
of MSA 469., must by resolution consent to the proposed tax levy
of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound. 40
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Mound, Minnesota, that a special tax be levied upon
real and personal property within the City of Mound in the amount
not to exceed $24,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the said levy, not to
exceed $24,000.00 is approved by this Council to be used for the
operation of the Mound Housing & Redevelopment Authority pursuant
to the provisions of MSA '69, and shall be certified as a tax
levy to County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before
September 1990.
•
2553 1
":%cuites, Inc
Preliminary Engineering .Report
for
Acquisition and Improvements
Of
CBD Parking Lot
for
The City of Moil-nd, Minnesota
I
I August, 1990
I
I
i
I
I
t
e
PF 7!.IMIP' ".RY ENGINEERING REPORT
FOR
ACQUISITION A?'D IMPROVEMENTS
OF
CBD PARKING LOTS
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
August, 1990
r-
.J
Frank Roos Associates
McCombs Fr , Inc. .
I August 28, 1990
'
Hor,r)rah; ;;,, Mayor and Members
oi' th,, City Council
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
'
Mound, Minnesota 55364
'
SUBJECT: City of Mound, Minnesota
CBD Parking Lots
MFRA #8294
'
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
As requested, we are submitting
herewith a Preliminary Engineering Report
'
for Acquisition and Improvements of
CBD Parking Lot:.
If you have any questions, or require additional information .regarding any
'
_ nformation contained in this report, we will be pleased to discuss it further
with you at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
'
JC:jmj
Enclosures
1
1
1
INTRODUCTION
The City Council of the City of Mound ordered the preparation of this
Feasibility Report by Resolution No. 90 -90. on August 14. 1990. This report
1 will involve the acquisition and improvement of public parking facilities in
the Central Business District (CBD) and complies with Minnesota Statures.
' Chapter 429 for public improvements financed in part by special assessments.
i
s
i
t
t
i
1
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this report is to present the City Council with to
examination of the feasibility of the proposed public improvement project. To
better understand the project is necessary to give some background into the
operation of the present Central Business District. The CBD was organized
' about 1969 or 1970 as a result of a joint effort betwsen the City and business
community, primarily to solve a parking problem in the - iwntown area.
' According to the records available, land was purchased, leases signed with
Burlington Northern for the three areas in question and cost of the lots were
I paved. In the fall of 1971, these expenses were then assessed to the
benefiting businesses, according to a formula that is still in use todey. Much
time anu effect was originally put into this formula so that all the subject.
I properties were treated in a fair and equitable manner. Each subsequent year,
this same formula has been used to spread and assess the cost of the previous
' year's CBD expenses. including rent of the railroad property under lease.
' This section of the Burlington Northern Railroad was sold in 1985, to Mr.
Jerry Ross, who formed a iiew railroad called Dakota Rail. Approximately one
year ago, the present o ner, Mr. Mills, purchased the line from bankruptcy
court. The present lease for the property on which the parking lots are
located expires September 15, 1990. Over the years, the cost for leasing the
railroad property has gone from CBD paying 3,00% by the assessment process, io
the City paying 4/3 of the rental in 1989•
I The City has been negotiating with Mr. Mills for the ast year to try and
P Y Y a
come up with either a new lease agreement or a purchase price which would be
equitable to both the City and CBD.
1
I
I
I
PROJECT DESCR.T
Enclosed with this report is a map of the CBD which shows the three parking
lots discussed in the report. The area north of the railroad tracks, in front
' of and adjacent to the Coast to Coast, will be referred to as the North Lot for
purposes of this report. The parking lot south of the tracks and north of
Lynwood Boulevard, between Belmont Lane and First Minnesota, is identified as
the South Lot. The third parcel, located west of Commerce Boulevard between
the railroad tracks and the attorney's office, will be called the West Lot.
The North Lot is comprised of approximately 20,900 square feet that is
' presently paved and used as an improved parking lot in conjunction with
property owned by Phil Lansing and Mike Mueller. The remaining area of the
' North Lot, also approximately 20,900, is unimproved, even though some of it is
also used for parking. The improved portion of the lot was initially paved in
1970 and has been maintained by CBD since that time.
The South Lot contains approximately 40,700 square feet, of which 34,410 is
presently paved and under lease and 6,2$ square feet that comprises the
landscaped area between the lot and the tracks. This property contains a
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWvC) Lift Station, at the intersection.
of Belmont and Lynwood. Two forcemains also run the full length under the
parking lot and beneath, the drive -thru teller of First Minnesota and across
Commerce Boulevard.
1
The West Lot is a paved, 35 -foot wide access, running from fn.umerce
Boulevard westerly to serve the parking lot of the attorney's b ding and also
the CBD lot to the west. The two MWCC forcemains are also loca under this
paved lot.
These parking lots have served as a critical part of the dcw own
businesses over the past 20 years. To eliminate them from the 0, would be
devastating to those businesses which do not have enough propert; o provide
their own parking. For these reasons, it was felt that these Fai ng lots
should remain under control of the CBD and the City of Mound.
' COSTS
' The City Manager and City Attorney have been negotiating with Mr. Mills for
' the past few months and have arrived at a tentative purchase price, which will
be used for this report. Of course. this purchase will have to be approved by
the City Council, which is one reason for this report. An Option to Purchase.
in the amount of $265.000.00, has been prepared which includes all three lots
previously described. Also included in the agreement is a ;ease agreement in
' the amount of $2,000.00 /month, running from September 15. 1990 to February 1,
1990. If both parties meet the requirements of the option and the property is
' purchased, then up to $5.000.00 would be credited against the purchase price.
A second alternate is also included in this report which would eliminate
the west lot and reduce the purchase price to $240,000.00. Other costs need to
be added to these purchase prices. such as improvements, engineering, legal and
administrative costs and bonding costs. Enclosed. as Exhibit A, is a breakdown
of the costs of each alternative proposed to be assessed. The $35,000.00 shown
as improvements are for paving the remainder of the north lot, minor repairs to
existing blacktop and seal coating.
f
1
t
I
I
PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS
From all previous discussions, it has been the City's position that 50% of
~he cost of the project is proposed to be paid by the City and 50% would be
assessed. City Staff and myself have spent considerable time examining the
present formula used for assessing CBD maintenance each year and have come to
' the conclusion that it should also be used for this assessment, with a few
minor adjustments. The properties providing parking spaces would be given
credit under Item No. 3 on the enclosed proposed assessment, instead of a lease
' credit as is done on the normal CBD maintenance assessment.
' Enclosed as Exhibit B and C are the proposed assessment using the total
costs described in Alternate A and B. These assessments are proposed to be
spread over the next fifteen years at an 8% interest rate. If he
recommendations for assessments contained in this report are followed, a
mid -level assessment of $6,000.00 wovld result in yearly payments as shown on
Exhibi' D.
Also enclosed, as Exhibit E. is a chart showing a 15 -year payment schedule
for H "'00.00 assessment. To figure the yearly payments for an individual
assessment, divide the total assessment by 100 and multiply that figure by the
yea.'y payment on a $100.00 assessment, as shown on Exhibit E.
t
t
1
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMM
As previously mentioned in this -epo:t, we believe that these parking lots
are a critical ingredient of the downtown+ busines;Fs and should be retained in
the present CBD system. It is also importar_t that the City and, therefore,
It's residents, be an integral part of this project by sharing in the cast and
acting as the regulatory agency.
It is our opinion that this project is feasible and can best be
accomplished as described herein.
s
0
L4
r Engineering, Legal,
Administrative Cost (12x) 33.000
Bonding Cost 12,000
TOTAL $ 320,000
v
i
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
r
CBD PARKING U S
MFRA #8294
ALTERN N0, A
Land Cost
20-5,000
r Improvements
35.000
Engineering, Legal,
Adr :nistrative Cost
(12x) 35.000
r
Bonding Cost
15.000
TOTAL
S 350,000
r ALTE RNATE
NO. B
v
Land Cost
$ 240,000
Improvements
35.000
r Engineering, Legal,
Administrative Cost (12x) 33.000
Bonding Cost 12,000
TOTAL $ 320,000
v
i
EXHIBIT A
m s m_ m r m m m m m m m m m i m m m
175000 COD LOT ACOUISITIOM
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(1:)
(13)
CUST.
EPP.
X OF
X OF
1989
% OF
COST
COST
COST
PARK.
PARK.
SPACES
TOTAL
TOTAL
MARKET
TOTAL
x .7
x .15
x .15
REO'D.
REO'D
PROV.
0+2-3)
OF (4)
FRONT
OF (6)
VALUE
OF (8)
x (5)
x (7)
x (9)
(10+11-12)
13- 117 -24 33 0066
FIRST MINNESOTA
8
6.5
6
8.5
2.09
100.00
5.13
: 9000
6.26
2564.66
1347.56
1644.02
5556.24
14- 117 -24 44 0001
SNYDER DRUC_
19
2
10
11.0
2.71
50.00
2.57
133100
3.49
3318.97
673.78
915.56
4906.31
14- 117 -24 44 0002
NEISEL'S
16
4
0
20.0
4.93
98.40
5.05
119000
3.12
6034.48
1326.00
818.57
8179.06
14- 117 -24 K 0003
SHERBURNE BUILDING
40
10
16
34.0
8.37
50.00
2.57
313500
8.22
10258.62
675.78
2156.49
13088.89
14- 117 -24 44 0004
KOENIG
24
5.5
0
29.5
7.27
51.60
2.65
141500
3.71
8900.86
695.34
973.34
10569.55
14- 117 -74 k 0006
SNERSUND PARKING
0
0
0
0.0
0.00
50.00
2.57
26200
0.69
0.00
673.78
180.22
854.01
13 -117 -24 33 0004
CODDEN BLDG.
10
5.5
S
10.5
239
50.00
63000
1.65
3168.1(!
673.78
433.36
4275.25
13- 117 -24 33 BOOS
NOOSE OF MOY
30
22
S
47.0
11.58
95.00
400000
10.48
14181.03
1280.19
2751.50
18212.72
13- 117 -24 33 0006
CURTIS JONNSON
8
7.5
9
6.5
1.60
50.00
81200
2.13
19 +1.21
673.76
558.55
3193.54
13- 117 -24 33 0076
CENTURY AUTO
12
6
3
15.0
3.69
125.00
5.42
N600
3.27
4525.&
1684.45
857.09
7067.41
13- 117 -24 33 0011
POST OFFICE
16
19
10
25.0
6.16
100.00
5.13
40100
4.20
7543.10
1347.56
1101.29
9991.96
13- 117 -24 33 0014
KEN PEMIX BUILDING
4
2
0
6.0
1.48
2330
1.7'
48ow
1.26
1810.34
316.68
330.18
2457.20
13-117-24 33 0015
LAUER
9
2
11
0.0
0.00
85.10
4."
75500
1.98
0.00
1146.78
519.33
1666.12
13- 117 -24 33 0016
LONGM
7.5
3
S
S.5
1.35
62.00
3.18
88400
2.32
1659.48
835.49
606.08
3103.0S
13- 117 -24 33 00,7
LONGPRE
7.5
3
0
123
3.08
74.00
3.80
38800
1.54
3771.SS
997.20
404.47
5173.22
14- 117 -24 44 0046
MEISEL'S
0
J
0
0.0
0.00
70.00
3.59
15000
0.39
0.00
943.29
103.18
1046.48
13- 117 -24 33 0077
COAST TO COAST
37
10.5
17
30.5
T.S1
66.66
3.42
178906
4.6E
9202.59
898.29
1230.61
11331.48
13- 117 -24 33 0073
TONKA WEST
40
15
55
0.0
0.00
207.91
10.67
387400
10.15
0.00
2801.72
2664.83
5466.55
14- 117 -24 44 0036
BEM FRANKLIN
36
6
0
42.0
10.34
58.00
2.98
224800
5.89
12672.41
781.59
1546.34
15000.34
14- 117 -24 44 0037
RUSTIOIE
11
4
0
15.0
3.69
32.50
1.67
85800
2.25
4525.86
437.96
590.20
SSS4.02
14- 117 -24 44 0038
WAYZATA BANK
10
0
6
4.0
0.99
112.00
5.75
51000
1.34
1206.90
1509.27
350.62
5066.98
14- 117 -24 44 0039
WEST. SPORTS
26
3
0
29.0
7.14
40.00
2.05
153500
4.02
8750.00
539.03
1055.89
10344.91
14- 117 -24 K 0041
KOECIG
9
7.5
16
0.5
0.12
50.00
2.57
171100
4.48
150.86
673.78
1176.95
2001.60
14- 117 -24 K 0042
METKA
17
0
4
13.0
3.20
27.00
1.39
96000
2.52
3922.41
363.84
660.36
4946.62
13- 117 -24 33 0047
WEST. DENTAL (BORG)
4
6
7
3.0
0.74
29.30
1.50
65900
1.73
905.17
394.84
453.31
1753.32
13- 117 -24 33 0049
916 A
15
10
11
14.0
3.45
80.00
4.11
105300
2.76
4224.14
1078.05
725.71
6027.90
13- 117 -24 33 0050
REYNOLD A. LINGOUIST
1S
2
4
13.0
3.20
60.00
3.06
101300
2.65
3922.41
808.S4
696.82
5427.77
13- 117 -24 33 0082
MOUND LODGE.
14
3
6
11.0
3.71
49.99
2.57
108000
2.83
3318.97
573.65
742.91
473S.S2
K5
167
206
406.0
100.00
1947.96
100.00
3816100
100.00 122500.00
26250
26250 175000.00
ExN. 'T B
i m r m m m m m m m A m! m m m m i m
'60000 CBO LOT ACQUISITION
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
COST.
EMP.
% OF
% OF
1989
% OF
COST
COST
COST
PARK.
PARK.
SPACES
TOTAL
TOTAL
MARKET
TOTAL
x .7
x .15
x .15
RE0
RE0'0
PROV.
(1:2 -3)
OF (4)
FRONT
OF (6)
VALUE
OF (8)
x (5)
x (7)
x (9)
(10#11.12)
13- 117 -24 7 3 0066
FIRST MINNESOTA
8
6.5
6
6.5
2.09
100.00
5.13
239000
6.26
2344.83
1232.06
1503.11
5079.99
14- 117 -24 K 0001
SNYDER DRUG
19
2
10
11.0
2.71
50.00
2.57
133100
3.49
3034.48
616.03
837.08
4487.60
14- 117 -24 44 0002
MEISEL'S
16
4
0
20.0
4.93
98.40
5.05
119000
3.12
5517.24
1212.35
748.41
7477.99
14- 117 -24 k 0003
SHERBURNE BUiLDiNG
40
10
1E
34.0
8.37
50.00
2.57
313500
8.22
9379.31
616.03
1971.65
11966.99
14- 117 -24 " 0004
KOENIG
24
5.5
0
29.5
7.27
51.60
2.65
141500
3.71
8137.93
635.74
889.91
9663.59
14- 117 -24 44 0006
SNERBURNE PARKING
0
0
0
0.0
0.00
50.00
2.57
26200
0.69
0.00
616.03
164.78
780.80
13- 117 -24 33 0004
CODOEN BLDG.
10
5.5
5
10.5
2.59
50.00
2.57
63000
1.65
2896.55
616.03
396.22
3908.80
13- 117 -24 33 0005
NoUSE OF Moll
30
22
5
47.0
11.58
95.00
4.88
400000
10.4t
12965.52
1170.46
2515.66
16651.63
13- 117 -24 33 00(6
CURTIS JOHNSON
8
7.5
9
6.5
1.60
50.00
2.57
81200
2.13
1793.10
616.03
510.68
2919.81
13- 117 -24 33 0076
CENTURY AUTO
12
6
3
15.0
3.69
125.00
6.42
124600
3.27
4137.93
1540.07
783.63
6461.63
13- 117 -24 33 0011
POST OFFICE
16
19
10
25.0
6.16
100.00
5.13
160100
4.20
6696.55
1232.06
1006.89
9135.50
13- 117 -24 33 0014
KEN PERBIK BUILDING
4
2
0
6.0
1.48
23.50
1.21
WOO
1.26
1655.17
289.53
301.88
2246.58
13- 117 -24 33 0015
LAUER
9
2
11
0.0
0.00
85.10
4.37
75SUO
1.98
0.00
1048.48
474.83
1523.31
13- 117 -24 33 0016
LONGPKE
7.5
3
5
5.5
1.35
62.00
3.18
88400
2.32
1517.24
763.88
555.96
2837.08
i3- 117 -24 33 0017
LONGPRF
7.5
5
0
12.5
LOS
74.00
3.80
58800
1.54
3448.28
961.72
369.80
4729.80
14- 117 -24 44 0046
MEISEL'S
0
0
0
0.0
0.00
70.00
3.59
15000
0.39
0.00
862.44
94.34
956.78
13- 117 -24 33 0077
COAST TO COAST
37
10.5
17
30.5
7.51
66.66
3.42
178900
4.69
8413.79
821.29
1125.13
10360.21
13- 117 -24 33 0073
TONKA WEST
40
15
55
0.0
0.00
207.91
10.67
387400
10.15
0.00
2561.57
2436.41
4997.99
14- 117 -24 44 0036
BEN FRANKLIN
36
6
0
42.0
10.34
58.00
2.98
224800
5.89
11586.21
714.59
1413. - 3
13714.60
14- 117 -24 44 0037
RUST IOUE
11
4
0
15.0
3.69
32.50
1.67
85800
2.25
4137.93
400.42
539.61
5077.96
14- 117 -24 44 0038
WAYZATA BANK
10
0
6
4.0
0.99
112.00
5.75
51000
1.34
1103.45
1379.91
320.75
2804.10
14- 117 -24 44 0039
WEST. SPORTS
26
3
0
29.0
7.14
40.00
2.05
153500
4.02
8000.00
492.82
965.38
9458.21
14- 117 -24 44 0041
KOENIG
9
7.5
16
0.5
0.12
50.00
2.57
171100
4.48
137.93
616.03
1076.07
1830.03
14- 117 -24 44 0042
NETKA
17
0
4
13.0
3.20
27.00
1.39
96000
2.52
3586.21
332.66
603.76
4522.62
13- 117 -24 33 0047
WEST. DENTAL (BORG)
6
7
:.0
0.74
29.30
1.50
65900
1.73
827.59
360.99
414.45
1603.03
13- 117 -24 33 0049
BIG A
15
10
11
14.0
3.45
80.00
4.11
105500
2.76
3862.07
985.65
663.50
5511.22
13- 117 -24 33 On50
REYNOLD A. LINGOUIST
15
2
4
13.0
3.20
60.00
3.08
1013W
2.65
3586.21
739.23
637.09
4962.53
13- 117 -24 33 0082
MOULD LODGE
14
3
6
11.0
2.71
49.99
2.57
108000
2.83
3034.48
615.91
679.23
4319.62
445
167
206
406.0
100.00
1947.96
100.00
3816100
100.00 112000.00
24000
24000 160000.00
MIRIBIT C
i
1
1
1
1
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF MOUND
CBD ASSESSMENT
ROLL
MID LEVEL ASSESSMENT
$6000 - 15
YEARS
6300
PRINCIPAL
INTEREST
TOTAL
1992
400
600
1000
1993
400
448
848
1994
400
416
816
1995
400
384
784
1996
400
352
752
1997
400
320
720
1998
400
288
688
1999
400
256
655
2000
400
224
624
2001
400
192
592
2002
400
160
560
2003
400
128
528
2004
400
96
496
2005
400
64
464
2006
400
32
432
TOTAL
6000
3960
9960
EXHIBIT D
i CITY
OF MOUND
'
CBD
ASSESSMENT
ROLL
$100 ASSESSMENT
'
$100 - 15
YEAPS
100
PRINCIPAL
INTEREST
TOTAL
'
1992
6.67
10.00
16.67
1993
6.67
7.47
14.14
1994
1995
6.66
6.6
6.93
6.40
13.59
13.07
1996
6.67
5.87
12.54
1997
6.66
5.33
11.99
1998
6.67
4.80
11.47
1999
6.67
4.27
10.94
2000
6.66
3.73
10.39
2001
6.67
3.20
9.87
2002
6.67
2.67
9.34
2003
6.66
2.13
8.79
'
2004
2005
6.67
6.67
1.60
1.07
8.27
7.74
2006
6.66
0.53
7.19
TOTAL
100.00
66.00
166.00
v
EXHIBIT E
j
i
. l
0
UP
O
I'
1 ,
x. COMMF RCE A. N.
HT
0 0U
LA k_
ORE L.! NE
_ " f
i
R
I r i } r��f-k CFFIC3
lu
U �
I
t
I f
v - � C1D t 7��2 .
W O
J,
T -\�O `
Q
- PJO
-HAT '�- P. AN WAS "4tfAHCU tlY ME (,,
VPEAV NA %-) THAT i ',MA IULV REGISTER
NOE^� THE >WS of THE STATE Of McCombs Frank Roos Associa4es. Inc
IGPF
u�l■
I
CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT (CBGi
PARKING LOTS
CITY OF MOUND
u
i
S
0
z
G is u '2 C. H
C�
c .
J
CO
0
------------
Q ��� ✓ A
B LV D. (C. S A IN. A/0.15
1
V
- "1
LL
w
Z
J
is
rl
.t3LVD.
a C. o.
ol
z
J
W
cc
, 'u- C' f �
PA
m
C. 5. A- /-/ - * h/
0
t c ;l1 �� 1
0 LEASE EXTENSION AND OPTION TO PURCHASE
THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of , 1990, by and
between Dakota Rail, Inc., a � ____._ corporation (Seller), and
the City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation (Buyer).
Seller, for itself, its successors and assigns, being the present
owner of the tract of land hereinafter described, and in consideration of
the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) paid by Buyer, receipt of which payment is
hereby acknowledged, does hereby confer upon Buyer, its successors and
assigns, an exclusive option to purchase the tract of land situate in
Hennepin County, Minnesota, the location of which is depicted as the shaded
area on Exhibits A and B attached hereto (Property) , on the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth:
1. PURCHASE PRICE. Buyer may elect to purchase only the
property shown on Exhibit A, in which event the purchase price shall be Two
Hundred Forty Thousand and no /100 Dollars ($240,000.00) , or Buyer may
purchase property shown on both Exhibits A and B, in which event the
purchase price shall be Two Hunched Sixty Five Thousand and no /100 Dollars
($265,000.00). The purchase price shall be payable in cash upon the
closing of the transaction, if the option is exercised by buyer.
2. TERM OF OPTION. .'his option shall be exercisable by Buyer
at any time, on or before the 30th day of September, 1990.
3. EXERCISE OF OPTION. In the event Buyer exercises this
option to purchase the Property, written notice thereof shall be given to
Seller by hand - delivering said notice or by mailing said notice to Seller by
certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to Dakota Rail, Inc. at
the following address:
25 Adams Street North
Hutchinson, MN 5350
4. EARNEST MONEY. At time of exercise of option, Buyer shall
pay Seller, as earnest money, the sum of Five Thousand and no /100 Dollars
($5,000.00), which shall be credited against the purchase price.
5. LEASE EXTENSION. Seller hereby extends the expiration
date of the existing lease agreement with Buyer for the Property shown on
Exhibit A (or on both Exhibits A and B at option of nuyer) , from September
15, 1990, to February 1, 1991. Rental payments during the extension period
shall be $1,750.00 per month if Buyer elects to lease only the property
shown on Exhibit A, and $2,000.00 per month if Buyer elects to also lease the
property shown on Exhibit B. Except as modified by this paragraph, the
terms and conditions of the existing lease agreement shall remain
unchanged.
6. CREDIT FOR RENT PAYMENTS. As additional . _ to said
purchase price, if Buyer exercises the within option and closes the
. transaction on or before December 1, 1990 there shall be deducted from the
purchase price all rental payments made during the extended term of the
lease referred to at paragraph 5 above. If the transaction is closed after
December 1 1990, credit shall be allowed to Buyer only for the pro -rated
• portion of rent paid in advance which is allocable to the period following
the date of closing.
7. TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. Seller represents to
Buyer that it believes the Property to be free from any toxic or hazardous
substances or wastes or pollutants or contaminants as those terms are
defined under Federal and State law (Hazardous Waste). Seller further
represents and warrants to Buyer that it has never placed any Hazardous
Waste upon the Property, and has no knowledge of any Hazardous Waste upon
the Property. Buyer or Buyer's representatives, employees, or agents
shall be entitled to conduct a Phase I Environmental Audit and such other
tests or inspections as Buyer deems necessary or advisable to satisfy
itself that the soil or ground water on the Property is free from Hazardous
Waste. If the Property is found to contain Hazardous Waste, Buyer shall
have the option of terminating this agreement, in which event all earnest
money paid herein shall be refunded, and neither party shall have any
further obligation to the other.
8. MARKETABLE TITLE. Within thirty (30) days after notice
of the exercise of this option, Seller shall furnish to Buyer abstracts of
title or registered property abstracts to the Property, continued to date
with all usual and customary searches (or in lieu thereof, an Owner's Title
Insurance Commitment naming Buyer as proposed insured) after which Buyer
shall have thirty (30) days within which to determine the marketability of
title thereto and make objections thereto, if any. In the event that title
to the Property is found unmarketable and cannot be made marketable within
sixty (60) days of notice thereof to Seller, then this agreement, shall at
the option of Buyer, be void and the earnest money payments theretofore made
shall be refunded to Buyer.
9. SURVEY. Buye: shall obtain, at its expense, a survey of
the Property, prepared and certified by a registered land surveyor. The
legal description prepared from such survey shall be used to convey the
Property to Buyer at closing. If the description to be used for the
conveyance of the Property results in the subdivision of an existing parcel
of land, Buyer shall be responsible for obtaining any approvals required by
the City of Mound, including waiver of subdivision ordinance requirements,
if necessary.
10. CONVEYANCE OF TITLE. At the closing, Seller shall
deliver to Buyer a quit claim deed conveying marketable title, free from all
encumbrances, subject to the following exceptions:
a. Building and zoning laws, ordinances, and regu-
lations.
b. Reservation of any minerals or mineral rights to
the State of Minnesota.
C. Utility, drainage and roadway easements to the
extent that they do not interfere with Buyer's
intended use of the property.
• d. The lien of real estate taxes and installments of
special assessments, if any, and interest
thereon, payable in the year following the year of
closing.
11. PLACE OF CLOSING. The closing of said transaction, in the
event the within option is exercised by Buyer, shall take place at the
offices of Wurst, Pearson, Larson, Underwood & Mertz, 1100 First Bank Place
West, Minneapolis, Minnesota, or at such other location as shall. be
mutually agreed upon by the parties.
12. POSSESSION OF PROPERTY. Upon closing, the immediate
possession of the Property shall be given to Buyer.
13. CLOSING DATE. If Buyer exercises this option, the
closing shall take place on or before February 1, 1991. It Buyer shall fail
to close on or before the aforementioned date, then Buyer shall "orfeit to
Seller all sums theretofore paid, and Seller shall be discha.ged of all
obligations herein contained.
14. AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO EASEMENTS. It is understood
and agreed, by and t^etween the Seller and Buyer, that if Buyer exercises the
within option and closes on the purchase of the Property, Seller shall also
convey to Buyer a utility easement over, under, and across that part of
Seller's right -of -way, located in the City of Mound, which lir,s east of
• Commerce Boulevara.
15. INDEMNIFICATION OF SELLER. Buyer shall indemnify and
hold harmless Seller against and fromany and all claims, including but not
limited to, mechanic's liens, by or on behalf of any person or persons, firm
or firms, corporation or corporations, arising from the conduct of or
management of or from any work or thing whatsoever done by Buyer, or Buyer's
officers, agents, employees, or contractors on or about the Property, or
arising from any act of negligence of the Bayer or Buyer's officers, agents,
employees, or contractors, on or about the Property, and from and against
all costs, attorneys' fees, expenses, and liabilities incurred ir) or about
any such claim or action or proceeding brought thereon; and in case any
action or proceeding is brought against Seller by reason of any such claim,
Buyer, upon notice from Seller, shall resist and defend such action or
proceeding.
16. SURVIVAL OF AGREEMENTS. The terms and conditions of this
agreement shall not be merged into the deed delivered hereto, but shall,
where applicable, survive the delivery of such deed from Seller to Buyer.
•
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement on
is the day and year first above written.
SELLER
Dakota Rail, Inc.
B y - -- - - --
Its
BUYER
City of Mound
Its Mayor
B y - -- -- -- - -- - - - - -- - - -- - --
Its City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA
• COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day
of , 1990" by ----- _��_�� the
of Dakota Rail, Inc,, a
corporation, on behalf of the corporation. - -� —
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day
of , 1990, by Steven L. Smith and Edward J. ShukIe, Jr., the
Mayor and Cit; Manager of the City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
•
CITY COUNCIL PACKET - 8 -28 -90 #2
WF10 TEL: 338 -2525 Aug 27. 15:22 No.001 P.02
Dakota
Inc.
FLORIDA OFFICE 801 West Bay Drive, Suae 800, Largo. FL 34840 (813) 585 -4727
FAX: (813) 585 -7781
'AM$ of the Charging Buffalo"
August 24, 1990
Curtis A. Pearson, Esq.
Wurst, Pearson, Larson, Underwood & Mertz, P.A.
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Dear Curt:
I am enclosing four executed copies of a revised Lease Extension
and Option to Purchase Agreement. When executed, I would
appreciate it if you wound return two originals for my files.
I have made several revisions to the document yca drafted. I have
highlighted some or the major changes below:
Paragraph 1: I've requested that you iden which parcels you
• intend to purchase when you exercise the option to purchase.
Paragraph 5: The lease extension cones into effect only if you
exercise the option to purchase.
Paragraph 6: The credit for rent payment is for the period of 9/15
through 11/30; thereafter there will be no credit for rental
payments against the purchase price.
Paragraph 7: 1 have modified this paragraph to represent that we
have no knowledge of hazardous substances, but you must rely on
your own inspections.
Paragraph 8: You will have to obtain title abstracts or insurance
at your own expense. We will have releases for the two mortgages
on the property (3M Corporation and Butler Manufacturing) at
closing and will be happy to show you a draft prior to closing. As
we discussed, Minnesota Title provided title insurance to the
Trustee in 1988, so I do not believe it will be a problem for you
to obtain an acceptable title insurance policy.
Paragraph 10: As I indicated to you in our discussion, we will
provide a quit claim deed only.
Paragraph 14: I believe this reflects our oral understanding that
we will convey the utility easement for the MWCC pipe on the right
WPLUH TEL: 338 -2625 Aug 27,90 15 :22 No.001 P.03
• Mr. Curtis Pearson
August 24, 1990
Page 2
of way if, and only if, the City closes by the end of the calendar
year.
Paragraph 18: The notice provision has both the Oppenheimer firm
and yourselves copied.
Paragraph 19: Please take note of subparagraph e. in which the
City acknowledges that Dakota Rail will be operating a rail line on
the right of way, that the use of the subject Property will not
interfere with rail operations, and that the City will not
Interfere with Dakota Rail's use of any of its right of way in the
City of Mound which is used for rail purposes. This refers to our
discussion of the siding we expect to put in west of Commerce on
our right of way.
Very truly yours,
• Elli M. A. Mills
President
CC: Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
Patrick McLaughlin, Esq.
Eric Nilsson, Esq.
EMAM:ec
•
WPLWM TEL: 338 -2625 Aug 27.90 15:22 N0.001 P.04
•
•
LEASE EXTENSION AND OPTION TO PURCHASE
THIS AGREEMENT, Made this o2 "I day "..' 990, by and between Dakota
Rail, Inc., 25 Adapts Street North, Hutchinson, Minnesota 55.5x1, a South Dakota Corporation,
duly registered to conduct business in Minnesota (Seiler), and the City of Mound, 5341
Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364, a Minnesota municipal corporation (Buyer).
Seller, for itself, its successors and assigns, being the present owner of the tract of land
hereinafter described, and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) paid by Buyer,
receipt of which payment is hereby acknowledged, does hereby confer upon Buyer, its
successors and assigns, an exclusive option to purchase the tract of land situate in Hennepin
County, Minnesota, the location of which is depicted as the shaded area on Exhibits A and B
attached heieto (P rulwi - ty), un the teeny and conditions hereinafter set forth:
1. PURCHASE PRICE. Buyer may elect to purchase only the property shown on
Exhibit A, in which event the purchase price shall be Two Hundred Forty Thousand and no /100
Dollars ($240,000.00) or Buyer may purchase property shown on both Exhibits A and R, in
which event the purchase price shall be Two Hundred Sixty -Five Thousand and no /100 Dollars
($265,000.00). The purchase price shall be payable in cash, wire transfer, or cashier's check
upon the closing of the transaction, if the option is exercised by Buyer. At the exercise of the
Option of Purchase, Buyer shall notify Seller as to which Property Buyer elects to purchase.
2. TERM OF OPTION. This option shall be exercisable by Buyer at any time, on
or before the 30th day of September, 1990.
3. EXERCISE OF OPTION. In the event Buyer exercises this option to purchase
the Property, notice thereof shall be given to Seller in accord with the terms and conditions of
paragraph 1 below.
4. EARNEST MONEY. At time of exercise of option, Buyer shall pay Seller, as
earnest money, the sum of Five Thousand and no /100 Dollars ($5,000.00), which shall be
credited against the purchase price.
5. LEASE EXTENSION. In the event Buyer exercises this option, Seller will extend
the expiration date of the existing Icase agreement with Buyer for the Property shown on Exhibit
A (or on both Exhibits A and B at option of Buyer), from September 15, 1990, to February 1,
1991 Rental naymr,ntt rli,rinp thr, r,xtr,nSinn m inrl Shall hr, �l .75t1 fKl 1rr mrutth if Rnyrr rlrrts
to lease only the property shown on Exhibit A, and $2,000.00 per month if Buyer elects to also
lease the property shown on Exhibit B. Except as modified by this paragraph, the terms and
conditions of the existing lease agreement shall remain unchanged.
6. CREDIT FOR RENT PAYMENTS. An additional credit to said purchase price,
is if Buyer exerc:ses the within option and c, c the transaction on or before December 1, 1990
there shall be deducted fro,n the purchase pr,�e all rental payments made during the extended
WPL41M TEL: 338 -2625 Aug 27.90 15:22 No.001 P.05
0
C7
terms of the lease referred to at paragraph S above. if the transaction is closed after Dezember
1, 1990, credit shalt be allowed to Buyer only for the portion of rent paid from September 15,
1990 through November 30, 1990.
7. TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. Seller represents to Buyer that to
the test of its knowledge it has never placed any Hazardous Waste upon the Property, and that,
without duty or obligation of inquiry, it has no knowledge of any Hazardous Waste upon the
Property. Buyer or Buyer's representatives, eriployees, or agents shall be entitled, at its own
expense, to conduct a Phare I Environmental Audit and such other tests or inspections as Buyer
deems necessary or advisable to satisfy itself that the soil or ground water on the Property is free
frc rn Hazardous Waste. If the Property is found to contain Hazardous Waste, Buyer shall have
the option of terminating this agreement, in which event all earnest money paid herein shall be
refunded , and neither party shall have any further obligation to the other. It is the duty of
Buyer to satisfy itself regarding the condition of the property. Notwithstanding any other terms
and conditions of this agreement, the representations and warranties in this paragraph from Seller
to Buyer shall not survive closing.
8. TITLE. Within thirty (30) days after notice of the exercise of this option, Buyer
shall obtain at its expense abstracts of title of registered property abstracts to the Property,
continued to elate with all usual and customary searches (or in lieu thereof, an Owner's Title
Insurance Commitment naming Buyer as proposed insured, "Commitment "). Buyer shall have
ten (10) days after receipt of the abstract, registered property abstract, or Commitment to
examine title to the Property and to make any objections ( "Objections "), if any, shall be made
in writing. If Buyer makes a reasonable %jection, Seller shalt have thirty (30) days to cure the
Objection . If the Objection is not so cured or waived by Buyer, then this Agreement shall be
null and void and all earnest money shall be refunded to Buyer upon demand.
9. SURVEY. Buyer shall obtain, at its expense, a survey of the Property, prepared
and certified by a registered land surveyor. The legal description prepared from such survey
shall be used to convey the Property to Buyer at closing. If the description to be used for the
conveyance of the Property results in the subdivision of an existing parcel of land, Buyer shall
be responsible for obtaining any approvals required by the City of Mound, including waiver of
subdivision ordinance requircmenis, if ner miry
'0. CONVEYANCE OF TITLE. At the closing, Seller shall deliver to Buyer a quit
claim deed conveying title.
11, PLACE OF CLOSING. The closing of said transaction, in the event the within
option is exercised by Buyer, shall take place at the offices of Wurst, Pearson, Larson,
Underwood k Mcrtz, I l(K) First Rank Place West, Minnmipnlis, hlinnesnia, or at such location
as shall be mutually agreed upon by the parties.
• 12. POSSFSSION OF PROPERTY. Upon closing, the immediate possession of the
Property shall be given to Buyer.
2
13. CLOSING DATE. If Buyer exercises this option, the closing shall take place on
or before February 1, 1991. If Buyer shall fail to close on or before the aforementioned date,
. then Buycr shall forfeit to Seller all sums theretofore paid, the Seller shall be discharged of all
obligations herein contained.
14. AGPEl3A6RNIT W1T14 FFSPI;CTTOfiAgRkfRW
by and betwccn the Seiler and Buyer, that if Buycr exercises the within�Option and closes on the
purchase of the Property by December 30, 1990, Seller shall also convey to Buyer a utility
easement over, under, and across that part of Seller's right -of -way, locat
Mound, which lies east of Commerce Boulevard. ed in the City of
15. INDEMNIFICATION OF SELLER. Buyer shall indemnify and hold harmless
Seller against and from any and all claims, including but not limited to, mechanic's liens, by or
on behalf of any person or persons, firm or firms, co
conduct of or management of or from any work or thing whatsoever done l by Buyer, or Buyers
officers, agents, employees, or contractors on or about the Property, or arising from any act of
negligence of the Buyer or Buyer's officers, agents, employees, or contractors, on or about the
Property, and from and against all costs, attorneys' fees, expenses, and liabitities incurred in or
about any such claim or action or proceeding brought thereon; and in case any action or
proceeding is brought against Seller by mason of any such claim, Buyer, upon notice from
Seller, shall resist and defend such action or proceeding.
16. SURVIVAL OF AGREEMENTS. The terms and conditions of this agreement
shall not be merged into the deed delivered hereto, but shall, where applicable, survive the
delivery of such decd from Seller to Buyer.
IT CLOSING COSTS. Seller shall pay for the state documentary or recording charges
on the deed; Buyer shall pay for all other expenses of closing except that each party shall pay
for its own attorney's fees.
18. NOTICE. Any and all notices, requests, Objections, or other communications
hereunder shall be deemed to have been duly 6ivcn if in wr;t;q al +d if teaJIS11111W by 1lu„j
delivery with ;eccipt thereof, or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and
first class postage prepaid, to Seller and to Buyer as follows, or to such other addresses or to
the attention of such other persons as shall be supplied in like manner:
To Seller:
Mr. Elli M. A. Mills, President
Dakota Rail, Inc.
25 Adams Street North
Hutchinson, Mn. 55350
With a copy to:
•
3
. WFt.ltM
TEL: 3
• Patrick J. McLaughlin, Esq.
Oppenheimer, Wolff & Donnelly
3400 Plata VII Building
45 South Scvcnth Street
Minneapolis, Mn. 55402
To Buyer:
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Mn. 55364
with a copy to:
Curtis A. Pearson, Esq.
Wurst, Pearson, Larson, Underwood & Mertz
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, Mn. 55402
• 19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Aug 27.90 15:22 No.001 P.O?
a. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
b. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto contain
the final and entire agreement between tie parties with respect to the option to purchase, lease
extension, and sale and purchase of the Property, and are intended to be an integration of all
prior negotiations and understandings. Buyer, Selicr, and its agents shall not be bound by any
terms, conditions, statements, warranties or representations, oral or written, not contained
herein. No change or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless the same is in writing
and signed by the parties hereto. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall
be valid unless the same is in writing and is signed by the party against which it is sought to be
enforced.
e. Time of Essence. Time is hereby made of the essence in this Agreement.
d. Brokers. Each party represents and warrants to the other that such party is
not involved with any real estate broker in this transaction. Each party further agrees to
indemnify and hold harmless the other party from and against any and all claims or demands
with respect to any broker's fees or agent's commissions or other compensation asseried by any
person, firm or corporation, arising from the acts of the indemnifying party in conjunction with
• this agreement or the transaction contemplated herein.
4
WFL�,pj TEL: 338 - 2625
Aug 27.90 15:22 No.001 P.08
•
•
C. Acknowledgment. Buyer acknowledges that Seller is an operating railroad and
intends to conduct rail operations on its right of way adjacent to the Property. Buyer will insure
that its use of the Property will not interfere or obstruct Seller's use of its right of way for rail
Operations, nor will Buyer interfere with Seller's use of any of its right of way in the City of
Mound for rail purposes.
20. ACCEPTANCE. This Agreement shall be null and void unless executed by all
parties hereto and delivered by August 31, 1990.
IN TESTIMONY WHI- RII-OF, the parties have executed this agreement on the day and
year first above written.
WITNESSES: .
SF1,I,FR
Dakota '1, In
By
Its President
BUYER
City of Mound
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Manavr
5
WPLUM
is
A TIMOMAS WUMST. PA.
CY11T1! A PEARSON. PA.
JAMES O US30 PA.
TwOmAs r. UwoE11w000. PA,
ROGER J. FELLOW&
TEL: 338 -2625
Aug 28.90 13:26 N0.001 P.01
:�- # //
LAW orders
WURST, PEARSON, LARSON. UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
A PA""'Nri• 'W"Us'" ►1 p . L46-0%&L A8$0C.An0yg
1100 FIRST BANK PACE WEST
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540!
Date _ August 28, 1990
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
V91.46..0.1E
1ou) Z30 4200
'AK ""t"
MR) 330.10 +6
TO: Mr. Ed Shukle, City Manager
Company: City of Mound
Curt Pearson
FROM:
Total number of pages including transmittal sheet 3
If you do not receive all pages, please call 612/338 -4200.
Ed, enclosed are two letters, one from Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission and one from Mills' attorney, which accomplish
the following:
1. The Sewer Board is willing to work with us to try to
clear up their problem,
1. Wo don't have to execute the option until after we
have had more time to study it and to hold our public
hearing.
. C.A.P.
WPLUM
August 27, 1990
TEL: 338 -2625
Aug 28.90 13:32 No.002 P.01
Metropolitan 11'aste Control Commission
Mears Park Cerise, 2.30 Ea-! Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesm SSIM
612 222 -8423
Mr. Curt Pearson
1100 First Bank place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Re: parking Lot property in Mound, MN
Dear Mr. Pearson:
As we discussed on the phone, the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission, for a nominal amount would be interested in converting its
. permit for the sewcr line and lift station on the parking lot property
in downtown Mound into a recordable easement.
Sincerely,
C
eanne K. Mat s
Associate General Counsel
JKM :am
WFLUM
•
TEL: 338 -2625
August 28 1990
Aug 28,90 13:32 No.002 P.02
I ra r
grow -$
toam
lArtha N
New Yak
brw
St. FW
WUMV0 c
"A-M
00 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402
luvp
V SOYtA SMAth ftr.tl
swig 3 00
Mr. -AAW6. w 5w
(612) 7N•9300
T.aa 70"
M0 12) M44376
Curtis A. Pearson, Esq.
Wurst, Pearson, Larson, Underwood
& Mert
11
Ras Dakota flail, Zae.
Dear Curt:
1�tEm
This letter confirms our telephone conversation a few moments ago
durin which I represented on behalf of Dakota Rail, Znc. that the
deadline for acceptance of the Lease Extension an
Purchase Agreement conveyed to you by Dakota Rail, Inc. 1unOption over
of August 24, 1990 has been extended from August 31, 1990 to
September 14, 1990.
To ease your concern over the marketability issue, I am enclosing
a copy or an initial commitment for title insurance issued by Title
Insurance Company of Minnesota and Conveying a portion of the
railroad property located in the City of Minnetonka Beach, Hennepin
County. Schedule B, Items 3, 6, 7 and 8 Were deleted from the
commitment At 9 19sina. T as itnne that s oomaLta4hk r
option property would be as clear of exceptions, aside from Q.
utility
and roadway easements. Furthermore, as I mentioned, the insurance
premium on the Minnetonka Beach property was less than $3.00 per
$1,000 of the insured ataount.
Please call me if you have any further questions regarding the
marketability issue.
Thank you.
Very tzvly yours,
Eric B. Nilsson
• EBN:tlm
Enclosure
Cc: Mr. 2111 M.A. Mills
Patrick J. McTAUghlin, Esq.
PETER
1t.91\ L A IR
IG
4iR1 L F•HIEC,ER
%AMEN \ 40410A !R
i N,; rr %t.k IE
J %1 \F%Ti. K>
\\\, 'kilt?
T CHRi �-TFU>RT
RP H>RI� I v H:1 4tth
RRI.i\ H -1 A% Y;LN I
'A' ' *} it F �
JOHNSON & WOOD
'_iu FAST LAKE SYRFEI
TLLF i'F+;� \t.
RECD AUG 2 4 1990
August 22, 1990
Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
City Administrator
City of Mound
Mound, MN 55364
s ,n\a_
f.>RI.f J \W11:10 IEI AE
!» \Ip I!FR:!tK
Re: Downtown Parking
Dear Mr. Shukle:
Phyllis and William Johnson are supportive of the City's efforts
to purchase the land currently owned by Dakota Rail north of the
railroad tracks in Mound and east of Commerce Boulevard. In
discussions with you and Curt Pearson on Monday, you explained that
the approximate cost of land purchases would be $4.00 per square
foot after factoring in adequate allowances for legal, bonding,
appraisal, improvements, etc. At that cost on a per square footage
basis, the Johnsons would be in favor of City purchase of all
available parking area west of their existing Coast to Coast
building. In support of that purchase, the Johnsons would agree
to repurchase from the City at its cost of acquisition the
northerly 50 feet of that parcel, together with the easterly most
30 feet. These parcels would Consist -� approximately 10,840
square feet of property and the Johnsons would expect to pay
approximately $43,000 for the property. The Johnsons would provide
the City with access and egress easements serving the remainder of
the land purchased from the railroad and wou'_: provide an access
and egress easement to the Mueller /Lansing property which is
situated north of the Coast to Coast building. Johnsons'
repurchase of the railroad property would be conditioned upon their
obtaining an adequate egress easement to Lynwood over the
Mueller /Lansing parcel.
Additionally, Phyllis .and William Johnson will agree to purchase
the property immediate__y south of their existing property. Said
S parcel would be approximately 39 feet wide and would be 317 feet
in depth./ The Johnsons are willing to pay $20,000 for that parcel
on two conditions:
.
1. There are no City imposed conditions upon use (other than
existing zoning) and no public use easements.
2. That central business district parking assessments
recognize and accept parking spaces upon the purchased
parcel in the event the Johnsons improve the area for the
purpose of parking, including pavement and striping.
•
If it is possible to negotiate a "coordinated purchase" under which
Johnsons purchase the above parcels directly from Dakota Rail and
the City separately purchases its parcels, the Johnsons would have
no objection to that procedure.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
August 22, 1990
Page 2
The Johnsons feel strongly that their access to Commerce Boulevard
should be established through a purchase of the fee interest in the
real estate. Nevertheless, if the City determires that public
policy requires that the purchased property remain as public
parking in perpetuity, the Johnsons would support reasonable
assessments of benefitted property owners. If you need or desire
additional information with regard to the Johnsons position on
this matter, please do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours,
JOHNSON & WOOD
Pet W. Johnson
PWJ/ j kP
C�
i PENFIELD INC. TEL:612- 777 -0119
1hWt"LVW FUN Scr*v Aw shmas
10 4
P E 7a ■E INCe
Scrums All Arans of Appraisal Needs
August 28, 1990
Edward J. Schukle, Jr.
City Manager
City of Mound.
5341 Maywood Rd.
Mound, MN. 55364
Re! Land Va].ueA, City
of Mound, MN
Aug 28.90 16:03 No.002 P.02
10010 60th tmat No., Stillwater. MN 5SOB9 (1112) 7'77 -9211
T l l., m 1; 1/ WILLIAM A.11CHWAS, CA- C.N.A.
President
JACK M.SWEDAHL, /6
Senior SfaN Appraiser
Dear Mr. Sebukle,
• You requested that I prepare an appraisal of certain proper-
ties in the City of Mound. Due to the limited time and not
having received some of the material I needed until yester-
day, I have not been able to complete the written report. X
have, however, been able to complete the valuation analysis
of the affected property.
There are three separate tracts of land which I have valued.
They are as follows:
A. A parcel located west of Commerce Boulevard and south of
and adjacent to the railroad tracks. This parcel is 24
feet wide and 260 feet deep, for a total size of 6,240
square feet. Part of this parcel is encumbered by an
existing sanitary sewer line. Due to the parcel size,
limited use and the encumbrance, it is my opinion it has
a market value of $6,240,00.
B. A parcel located west of Belmont Lane, and between the
railroad tracks and Shoreline Boulevard. This parcel is
about 555 feet long with an average depth of 73.5 feet.
It is 85 feet wide at the widest point and 62 feet wide
at the narrow end. There is a sanitary sewer line run-
ning the full length of this parcel and about 17 feet
• north of the south property line. There is also a lift
station on the east end of the parcel. The total parcel
mPmAArr. of
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION or CCRTIfIED ArrnAISERS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION U� 10VIFW APPRAISrRS
WwNr3oTA GOWANMENTAI APPnAISERS INTERNA71ONAI HIGH1 OF WAY ASSOCIATION
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION SOCIETY OF REAL ESTATC , ,PPnAi$rns
ST PAvi BOAnn nr REALTORS V ;Z'ID OF rFt;'c1R�
;PEN9IELD INC. TEI_:612- 777 -0119 Aug 28.90 16 :03 Nb..
,f
size is 40 square feat. It is my opinion this par-
cel has a market value of $78,120.00.
C. A parcel located east of Commerce Boulevard and north of
and adjacent to the railroad tracks. This parcel ham
135 feet of frontage on Commerce Boulevard and is 218
feet deep. The total size of this parcel is 29,400
square feet. In the southwest corner of this parcel is
an electronic control building, which I an assuming must
remain. It is my opinion this parcel h a market value
of $85,500.00.
The totals of these three
Parcel ELY&
A 6 sq.
B 40,660 sq.
C 29.300 car.
Total: 76,300 sq.
parcels are:
ZW.Ina Market V
ft. $ 6,240.00
ft. $ 78,120.00
ft. & 85,500
ft. $169,860.00
Say: $170,000.00
• In addition to these three parcels, there was the parcel
south of the Coast -to -Coast store. This parcel has 12,363
square feet. This parcel, because of its width and
location, has a very limited use except if attached to the
aohnson parcel, where it could be used in conjunction with
a possible expansion of the Coast -to -Coast building. As
assemblage, this parcel has a market value of $18,500.00.
I am currently working on completing the appraisal report,
which will support the values arrived at for the three par-
cels listed above. I will try to have the completed report
to you next week. If additional documentation is needed for
the parcel south of the Coast -to -Coast store, please let me
know.
Sincc your',
William A. Schwab, CA -S, C.R.A.
MN License #4000585
PENFIELD, INC.
WAS /mk
• cc: Curt Pearson
August 28, 1990 •
RESOLUTION LO. 90-
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO
EXCEED $24,000.00 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING
THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
NSA 469, OF THE HOUSING AND REDE'VELOPNENT AUTHORITY OF
THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR 1991
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mound is the
governing body of the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received two resolutions
from the Housing & Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound:
one entitled, "Resolution Approving the Mound Housing and
Redevelopment Authority Budget for the Year 1991 Pursuant to MSA
Chapter 469 ", and the other entitled, "Resolution Establishing
the. Tax Levy for the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority
for the Year 1991 "; arx
WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to the provisions
of MSA 469., must by resolution consent to the proposed tax levy
of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Mound, Minnesota, that a special tax be levied upon
real and personal property within the City of Mound in the amount
not to exceed $24,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the said levy, not to
exceed $24,000.00 is approved by this Council to be used for the
operation of the Mound Housing & Redevelopment Authority pursuant
to the provisions of MSA 469, and shall be certified as a tax
levy to the County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before
September 1, 1990.
is
2553
LAW OrFICEs
WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD 6 MERTZ
A P461ITM{AsM10 IMCLVMM(♦ P"o'c"IOMti AwkWAA,04301
1100 FIRST SANK PUCE WEST
0" TNOwAs WuRST. PA MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 Ts
CYRrl$ A P[ARSOU. P.A.
JAMES o. uwaow. P -A July 27, 1990 16621 330 -4aOC
THOMAS F. Uno[RWOOO. PA rAR Muwstw
CRAIG M. MSRTZ 16621 330-""
Ro6[R J. F[LLOWS
RECD JUL 3 0 WO
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Nature Conservation Area
Dear Ed:
On July 13, 1990, you sent me a revised draft of a resolution on a
Nature Conservation Area. You also sent along a copy of a letter from Tom
Casey to you under date of July 11, 1990. You asked me to tell you how you
can resolve this matter and asked me to review the letter and resolution.
The resolution is a recommendation from the Park and Open Space
Commission recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance which
• contains certain provisions.
First of all, as a basic over -all comment, I would recommend
against an ordinance being adopted until we understand what problems or
conditions we are trying to regulate or control. I certainly have no
argument with any of the statements made as it relates to the environment,
but when we get specific and start talking about identifying public and
private properties, we create a cloud on the title for the private areas. I
would think that before adopting an ordinance a great deal of work would
grave to go into outlining the areas of concern and the ramifications on any
private property. Klch of this could be eliminated if private properties
were deleted from paragraph 2 on page 2 of the resolution.
Page 3 of the resolution was not enclosed in your prior
transmittal. I do not understand where all of the quotation marks are
coming from, and it would seem to me that if the resolution is considered all
of those quotes should be removed since there is no identif ication any place
in the resolution which states any source setting forth these provisions.
I read paragraph 3 on the top of page 3, and frankly I do not
understand that definition of what a Nature Conservation Area is, and it
seems to me to be very vague and not very definite or understandable. We
certainly should not be writing laws which leave a great deal to the
imagination and to interpretation and therefore, before you go forward, a
Nature Conservation Area would have to be much better defined. Paragraph 4
is again indicates that private lands are deemed public parks pursuant to the
v;'54
WORST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
•
aforementioned provisions in paragraph 2. It would seem to me that what is
being said in those sections should not be in an ordinance. If the Park and
Open Space Commission or the City Council wants to r ke a policy statement
of some sort, they can do so. However, I think t.ie Park and Open Space
Commission should indicate what their goals may be in managing public
lands, and definitions such as 'plant or animal indigenous to the State of
Minnesota beore the time of European settlement' is not sufficiently
definite to mean very much to most people.
Paragraph 5 should be -eviewed in relationship to the areas that
you are proposing as nature conservation areas. What does this man?
What are the ramifications? What buildings are being removed? Whatroads
are being removed? How does this affect the public and the public's right
to use public lands?
Paragraph 8 places a limitation on the City Council and in effect
brings the Park and Open Space Advisory Commission in as a manager of public
lands and says that the City Council cannot sell lands without the
recommendation from the Park and Open Space Advisory Commission. This
section appears overly broad and appears to put the Park and Open Space
Advisory Commission into the City administration in areas where it does not
necessarily have an interest. •
What does paragraph 9 mean? What are your economic abilities to
acquire lands which are designated as nature conservation areas? What
funds have been set aside for these purposes? Do you need a bond issue to
provide the City with monies to acquire the lands? Many of these problems
would be removed if any reference to private lands were removed. There
appears to be some form of regist.ation program being proposed for private
owners for which they will receive a small 'non -cash' award. What does
this mean? Why would a landowner subject his lands to these kinds of
restrictions since that would be an encumbrance on his property and limit
his ability to sell or develop his property? Who can inspect private lands
and tell the landowner he is failing to live up to the environmental
criteria in the ordinance? Why would an owner give the City 60 days notice
before he would sell or transfer his property? Paragraph 9 B. provides for
an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and has no place in an ordinance.
Ed, I would think that programs of this nature should be developed
as a goal or policy of a Park. and Open Space Advisory Commission and then if
there are specific areas where the City Council needs to be involved, or
where public funds are to be committed, a program should be thought out and
reduced to writing. Based on what I find in the resolution, I would not
recommend that the City C -juncil adopt an ordinance whose purpose is not very
clear, whose definitions are very vague, and which appears to place
restrictions or encumbrances on private properties. Many of the basic
comments contained in my earlier letter of June 4, 1990, relate to these
questions. I think you as an administrator should ask the Park and Open
LSSS
WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
•
•
•
Space Commission and the City Council if there is some specific purpose or
problem they are trying to resolve by adopting this legislation. If it is
the goal of the Council to adopt legislation, then it should be written in a
much clearer form than the materials contained in Mr. Casey's resolution.
CAP: lh
r tserely, is A. Pearson
City Attorney
!!�"5
July A:,, 1990
Mr. Curt Pearson
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN. 55402
RE: NATURE CONSERVATION AREA RESOLUTION is
Dear Curt,
I received a letter dated July 11, 1990, from Tom Casey regarding
your June 4, 1990, letter. Please review his letter and the
resolution enclosed and advise me as to how we can resolve this
matter. I look forward to hearing from ycu.
Si cerely, ,
1 I
Edward I. Shukle, Jr.
City Manager
EJS:fc
enc.
Z tis
0
.... •1 .7',Sr --Ale ,r ^AS ' '
0 July 11, 1990
Ed Shukle M JUL 12
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Resolution - Nature Conservation Areas
Dear Ed,
Yesterday I received a copy of a June 4, 1990 letter from the
City Attorney regarding the Nature Conservation Area
Resolution. After reviewing his comments, it is evident that
Mr. Pearson did not have a copy of page 4, which contains
language relevant to his concerns regarding taking private
property without compensation. Therefore, I have enclosed
this revised resolution for his review. (Please note, in
particular, paragraph 9(b) ).
The language in the resolution was derived from various laws,
including the Scientific and Natural Areas Program (Minn.
Stat. 86A.05) and from materials supplied by The Nature
Conservancy. The intent of this resolution is to identify
and conserve public and private land to assure its
continuation in a naturzl condition and protect it from
further degradation. The resolution allows the City of Mound
a wide range of options to achieve this goal. Some options
require little financial expenditure, such as the Registry
Program (for private property) and the designation of certain
City parks as Nature Conservation Areas.
Please send me a copy of the Mr. Pearson's comments regarding
the revised resolution. Thank you again for you
consideration in this regard. If you have any further
questions, please call me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
Tom Casey
(472 -1099)
55 8+
RESOLUTION
NATURE ( C ONSERVATION AREAS •
WHEREAS, natural habitat throughout the world is
decreasing at an alarming rate, thereby contributing to
global warming and the extinction or rapid decline of many
plant and animal species. Estimates of the number of
species eliminated since 1980 range from 3,000 to 30,000;
WHEREAS, 99.96% of Minnesota's old growth
maple - basswood forest ( "Big Woods ") has been lost %only 800
acres remain undisturbed out of an original 2,000,000
areas);
WHEREAS, 99.2% of Minnesota's original native prairie
has been lost (only 150,000 acres remain out of an original
18,000,000 acres);
WHEREAS, 53$ of Minnesota's original wetlands have
been lost, with some regions of Minnesota suffering a 90%
loss of original wetland habitat;
WHEREAS, native wetland plant species in the Lake
Minnetonka area have suffered a disastrous decline because
of the ' of purple loosestrife;
Wh..REAS, prior to European settlement, the City of
Mound consisted of "Big Woods ", wetland, and small tracts
of native prairie ecosystems;
WHER0.A.S, the City of Mound is presently 91%
developed, consequently retaining only small remnants of
its original ecosystems;
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has designated a small
parcel of land, legally described as Lots 13 and 14, Block
11, Devon as the City'-- first Nature Conservation Area;
WHEREAS, Nature Conservation Areas presently have no
specific legal protection regarding development and
recreational uses;
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Section of the
proposed Mound Comprehensi Plan. states (1) "Mound is
presentl, 91% developed." ;p.71); (2) "Natural Park -like
areas" are the numler 1 . priority for recreational
facilities. (p.82); (3) "... more natural open space areas
are needed." (p.83); and (4; "Mound should expand its
existing ownership of nature areas and open space." (p.85);
WHEREAS, Mound's undeveloped property suffers •
continuing degradation and, therefore, requires immediate
legal protection;
2 4559 1
WHEREAS, the establishment, posting, and publicity of
. Nature Conservation Areas may increase environmental
awareness and reduce the amount of litter and junk in our
City;
WHEREAS, environmental education and ethics can be
better conveyed to our citizens by naming our Nature
Conservation Areas after well -known conservationists and
environmentalists stich as Henry Thoreau, John Muir,
Theodore Roosevelt, Aldo Leopold, Bob Marshall, Rachel
Carson, Dian Fossey, Edward Abbey, Sigurd Olson, etc.;
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Section of the
proposed Mound Comprehensive Plan presently has the limited
goal, "... to provide recreational opportunities Lo meet
the needs of all Mound residents." (p.71). Omitted is the
necessary goal of preserving plants and animals in our
parks and open space for future generations to enjoy;
WHEREAS, on January 22, 1990, the City of Mound
proclaimed the 1990's to be the "Decade of the
Environment ";
WHEREAS, the City of Mound Park and Open Space
Commission is concerned about the loss of native habitat
throughout the world and desires to do what it can on a
local level to protect and restore native habitat;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mound
Park and Open Space Commission recommends that the City
Council:
A. Adopt a Nature Conservation Area ordinance which
provides that:
1. "In order to assure that an increasing population,
accompanied by expanding development, does not
occupy and modify all areas within the City of
Mound, leaving no lands designated for
preservation and protection in their natural
condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of Mound to secure for its citizens of present and
fu;a,re generations the benefits of enduring Nature
Conservation Areas."
2. "Within one year after the enactment of this
ordinance, the City of Mound shall, with the
advice and recommendations of the Park and open
Space Advisory Commission, identify public and
private properties proposed to be designated as a
Nature Conservation Area and submit a report
(including a map and legal description of each
pruposed parcel) to the City Council for
approval."
2 ZS bo
3. "A Nature Conservation Area is defined to mean
property appearing to be primarily affected by the
forces of nature with the evidence of humanity
being substantially unnoticeable or where the
evidence of humanity may be substantially
eliminated by restoration."
4. "Nature Conservation Areas are deemed public parks
and are established to preserve and perpetuate
property in a natural wild and undeveloped
condition. They shall remain undisturbed and
shall be managed only to the extent necessary to:
a) control fire, insects, and disease; or h)
preserve and protect existing natural features or
re- establish natural features. Natural features
shall include but not be limited to: (1) natural
formations which illustrate geological processes;
(2) fossils or archeological sites; or (3) native
Minnesota plant and animal communities. For the
purposes of this ordinance, the term "native"
shall be defined as any plant or animal indigenous
to the State of Minnesota before the time of
European settlement."
5. "There shall be no development allowed including
but not limited to roads, buildings, or other
recreational facilities Except trails for walking
and small markers for nature interpretation
purposes. Developments and facilities not in
conformance with this ordinance and existing at
the time of designation shall be removed and the
property restored to its natural condition at the
earliest practical date.."
6. "Nature Conservation Areas shall be named in honor
of conservationists and other persons who have had
a substantial impact on protecting the
environment."
7. "In addition to other restrictions regaired by
law, an area designated a Nature Conservation Area
shall not be altered in designation or use without
holding a public hearing by the City Council at a
time and place designated in the notice of the
hearing which shall be published once each week
for two consecutive weeks in a legal newspaper at
least 14 days in advance of the hearing. A vote
of four - fifths of the City Council is necessary to
change said designation or use."
8. Notwithstanding the foregoing, prior to the time
of sale, all property intended to be conveyed by
the City of Mound shall be reviewed by the Park
and Open Space Advisory Commission and the City .
Council as to the feasibility of designation as a
Nature Conservation Area or park.
ZS (0r
•
(revised)
9.(a) For the purpose of establishing Nature Conservation
Areas, the City of Mound may acquire title, conservation
easements, or other interests in real estate by purchase,
gift, exchange, lease, eminent domain, or other lawful means.
(b) Exempt from the requirements of this ordinance are
private properties enrolled in the Nature Conservation Area
Registry Program whereby landowners make a non - binding
commitment to preserve and protect their property as a Nature
Conservation Area. The non - binding commitment shall include:
(1) preservation of the property to the best of their
abilities; (2) notification to the City of Mound of any
threats to the property, including but not limited to
pollution, drainage, or encroachments; (3) notification to
the City of Mound at least 60 days prior to any sale or
transfer of the property.
The Nature Conservation Area Registry Program is designed
• to honor and recognize owners of natural areas for their
commitment to preserve and protect the environment. In honor
of their enrollment in this program, landowners shall receive
from the City of Mound a small non -cash award to commemorate
their commitment. Except by express consent of th_ landowner,
enrollment in this program implies no right of publ'c access
and shall not be publicized. The City of Mound shall provide,
to the extent possible, management assistance to the
landowner and shall remov? the property from the program if
the landowner fails to protect the property.
B. Amend page 71, paragraph 4, line 1 of the propos =d Parks
and Recreation Section of the Comprensive Plan to read as
follows:
"The goal of this plan is to provide recreational
opportunities to meet the needs of all Mound
residents and to pr plant ese the ant and ani mal
life ty such means as will leave them unimpaired
for the enj_oyment for f uture generations
•
4
Z 5 (0Z
LAW OFFICES
WORST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
�.CCo % -w0►[SSIO«AL ASSOCI.I.D
1100 FIRST SANK PLACE WEST
A. THOMAS WORST, P.A MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA SS402 TELEP-
CURTIS A. PEARSON. PA.
1 s 33,8-
JAM E! O LARSDN. PA.
THOMAS F. UNDERW P . FAY NL/Ne(R
CRAIG M M[RT2
June 4, 1990 Is-21aas -2a2e
RODE" J. F ►ILOWS
gn JUN 61990
Mr. Ed Shuxle
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Resolution Concerning Nature Conservation Area
Doar Ed:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 29,
1990, with a copy of a resolution concerning "nature conservation
areas." I am not sure where this came from, but the "Be It
Resolved" provisions all include statements which are in quotations,
so I assume this has been taken from some other proposal in some
other area. Maybe Mr. Casey can give you some more background.
The resolution and adoption of ordinances or laws in the
City of Mound encompassing everything that is in the resolution
would create a large number of problems for the City. As I read
paragraph 2, it indicates that the City will identify "public
and private properties proposed to be designated as a Nature
Conservation Area and submit a report (including a map and legal
description of each proposed parcel) to the City Council for approval."
Paragraph 4 indicates that these areas are then deemed public
properties. I do not understand how we can designate private
properties to be a public park, and obviously each property owner
could bring an action against the City claiming that we have taken
their property ana that they are entitled to compensation.
It is not my intention to comment on the entire resolution
or to enter into a discussion as to its merits, since that is
the prerogative of the City Council. The current request does
not seem feasible to me, and I would recommend that the Council
noc adopt such a program until it is well thought out both from
the standpoint of goals and the financial implications imposed
upon public and private property. _ n
Ve y truly I yours
I A:��
Cu s A. Pearson
c.AP :lh Cit Attorney
Z 5 (o 'S
RESOLUTION
NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS
WHEREAS, natural habitat throughout the world is
decreasing at an alarming rate, thereby contributing to
global warming and the extinction or rapid decline of many
plant and animal species. Estimates of the number of
species eliminated since 1980 range from 3,000 to 30,000;
WHEREAS, 99.96; of Minnesota's old growth
maple- basswood forest ( "Big Woods ") has been lost (only 800
acres remain undisturbed out of an original 2,000,000
areas):
WHEREAS, 99.2% of Minnesota's original native prairie
has been lost (only 150,000 acres remain out of an original
18,000,000 acres);
WHEREAS, 53% of Minnesota's original wetlands have
been lost, with some regions of Minnesota suffering a 9o%
loss of original wetland habitat;
WHEREAs, native wetland plant species in the Lake
Minnetonka area have suffered a disastrous decline because
of the invasion of purple loosestrife;
• WHEREAS, prior to European settlement, the City of
Mound consisted of "Big Woods ", wetland, and small tracts
of native prairie ecosystems;
WHEREAS, the City of Mound is presently 91%
developed, consequently retaining only small remnants oZ
its original ecosystems;
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has designated a small
parcel of land, legally described as Lots 13 and 14, Block
11, Devon as the City's first Nature Conservation Area;
WHEREAS, Nature Conservation Areas presently have no
sgecific legal protection regarding development and
recreational uses;
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Section of the
proposed Mound Comprehensive Plan states (1) "Mound is
presently 91% developed." (p.71); (2) "Natural Park -like
areas" are the number 1 priority for recreational
facilities. (p.82); (3) "... more natural open space areas
are needed." (p.83); and (4) "Mound should expand its
existing ownership of nature areas and open space." (p.85);
WHEREAS, Mound's undeveloped property suffers
. continuing degradation and, therefore, requires immediate
legal protection;
1 Z56y/
INNUM, the establishment, posting, and publicity of
Mature Conservation Areas may increase environmental
awareness and reduce the amount of litter and junk in our
city;
W&MUK1S, environmental education and ethics can be •
better conveyed to our citizens by naming our Nature
Conservation Areas after well -known conservationists and
environmentalists such as Henry Thoreau, John Muir,
Theodore Roosevelt, Aldo Leopold, Bob Marshall, Rachel
Carson, Dian Fossey, Edward Abbey, Sigurd Olson, etc.;
NnMK AS, the Parks and Recreation Section of the
Proposed Mound Comprehensive Plan presently has the limited
goal, "... to provide recreational opportunities to meet
the needs of all Mound residents." (p.71). omitted is the
necessary goal of preserving plants and animals in our
parks and open space for future generations to enjoy;
MHEREAS, on January 22, 1990, the City of Mound
proclaimed the 1990's to be the "Decade of the
Environment ";
WHEREAS the City of Mound Park and Open Space
i
Commission s concerned about the loss of native habitat
throughout the world and desires to do what it c. on a
local level to protect and restore native habitat;
WN THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mound
Park and Open Space Commission recommends that the City •
Council:
A. Adopt a Nature Conservation Area ordinance which
provides that:
1. "In order to assure that an increasing population,
accompanied by expanding development, does not
occupy and modify all areas within the City of
Mound, leaving no lands designated for
preservation and protection in their natural
condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of Mound to secure for its citizens of present and
future generations the benefits of enduring Nature
Conservation Areas."
2. "Within.one year after the enactment of this
ordinance, the City of Mound shall, with the
advice and recommendations of the Park and open
Space Advisory Commission, identify public and
private properties proposed to be designated as a
Nature Conservation Area and submit a report
(including a map and legal description of each
proposed parcel) to the City Council for
approval."
•
ps (ps 2
3. "A Nature Conservation Area is defined to mean
property appearing to be primarily affected by the
forces of nature with the evidence of humanity
. being substantially unnoticeable or where the
evidence of humanity my be substantially
eliminated by restoration."
4. "Nature Conservation Areas are deemed public parks
and are established to preserve and perpetuate
property in a natural wild and undeveloped
condition. They shall remain undisturbed and
shall be managed only to the extent necessary to:
a) control fire, insects, and disease; or a)
preserve and protect existing natural features or
re- establish natural features. Natural features
shall include but not be limited to: (1) natural
formations which illustrate geological processes;
(2) fossils or archeological sites; or (3) native
Minnesota plant and animal communities. For the
purposes of this ordinance, the term "native"
shall be defined as any plant or animal indigenous
to the State of Minnesota before the time of
European settlement."
5.. "There shall be no development allowed including
but not limited to roads, buildings, or other
recreational facilities except trails for walking
and small markers for nature interpretation
• purposes. Developments and facilities not in
conformance with this ordinance and existing at
the time of designation shall be removed and the
property restored to its natural condition at the
earliest practical date."
6. "Nature Conservation Areas shall be named in honor
of conservationists and other pnrr:onr; who havo ha(I
a substantial impact on protec i i ncj the
environment."
7. "In addition to other restrictions required by
law, an area designated a Nature Conservation Area
shall not be altered in designation or use without
holding a public hearing by the City Council at a
time and place designated in the notice of the
hearing which shall be published once each week
for two ponsecutive weeks in a legal newspaper at
least 14 days in advance of the hearing. A vote
of four - fifths of the City Council is necessary to
change said designation or use."
8. Notwithstanding the foregoing, prior to the time
of sale, all property intended to be conveyed by
the City of Mound shall be reviewed by the Park
10 and Open Space Advisory Commission and the City
Council as to the feasibility of ir i ��trnt i con i , i
Nature Conservation Area or E»r l:.
4 � y
Z S WA
B. Amend page 71, paragraph 4, line 1 of the proposed
Parks and Recreation Section of the Comprehensive Plan
to read as follows:
"The goal of this plan is to provide recreational •
opportunities to meet the needs of a]] Mound
residents and to preserve t he plant__and_animal
life by such a means as will _lea th unimpa
for the enjoyment of future g enerations."
0
•
26(v-1
•
For August 28, 1990 Council Meeting
August 20, 1990
LICENSE RENEWAL -- EXPIRED 6- 30 -90. New License Period 7 -1 -90 to 6- 30 -91.
Approval contingent upon all required forms, insurance,
etc. being turned in.
On -Sale Beer
Mound Lanes
2346 Cypress Ln.
Mound, MN.
.J
•
Zs (of
BILLS - - - -- AUGUST 28, 1990
•
BATCH 0081
BATCH 0082
Lutz Tree Service Tree Removal
TOTAL BILLS
204,496.07
74,260.35
1,450.00
280,206.42
•
ZSof
PA& 1
AP - 01
PURCHASE JOURNAL
DAIL
8/1000
CITY OF t! X
T11E
14.06.59
VENOM
INVOICE BE 101j
PRE{KI
pry
10. IW T Mkt NYE OATS STATUS
AM
DEZUIPTIGN
A1]nNf MIER
ARM
OW 8
NYE
• 10649
PIE -PAID
8/!0/90 8/20/90
9!5.42
9!5.42
LIB
AL-0
71- 7100.9510
1010
995.42
30118
8/07/90
ME-MI0
808.65
L19
71- 1100.9510
1/20/90 8/20/90
8x.65
"k.
1010
808.66
30811
8/14/90
loam CON'OMTIOI YE OW TOTAL
1801.01
80180
PREPAID
62.57
OIL
O1- 4290-2210
8mHO 8/20/90
62.57
AL-0
1010
62.51
30109
8/13/90
BILL CLATD( OIL 671 W YE TOTAL
62.37
Ono
PIE-PAID
3,108.4
CMU 8/4 PR
01 -200 -M
8/10/90 8/20/90
3,74.00
JIL-0
1010
3708.00
30198
8 /09/90
CITY COW" CIESIT 111101 mow TOTAL
VOL"
C092o
ME-m
31.66
N31E11 P/C4R
01- 4140-2200
8/20/" 8/20/90
31.Y
JK-w
1010
31.66
30115
8/01/90
FRE-M
16.72
A" P/C -LIQ
71- 7100.2200
1/0/90 8/20/90
16.72
JBL-CD
1010
16.72
30788
8/09/90
CITY OF MM
YEW TOTAL
48.31
00923
RUMP
8.50
LIC-89 KN EVW
01-4140 -4110
8.9
uC-11 wETTA
01-4140.4140
1.58
uC-% DEN �
01- 4140 -4140
51.75
LIC KKnAC
73- 7300-410
•
51.73
UC-97 FORK
18-7800-4140
8/28/90 8/20/90
129.00
%K-0
1010
129.00
30786
8/07/90
CITY OF WAYZATA
Vk' m TL 1 0
129.00
C10ol
ME-MID
2,497.92
SIT eN Mt
01 -2mo-m
IMm/90 MOM
2,497.92
JK-0
1010
247.92
30190
1/09/90
ME-m
4546
SO 1/2 JOE 490 OKES TAX
73- 3592-0000
4,251.98
210 1/2 JK 1990 9W TAX
71- 3592 -M
8/20/90 8/20/90
4,297.81
AL-0
1010
4291.81
3x16
8/15/90
ME-MD
163.10
JLY lUwEB TAX
73- 3!92-0000
7,24.42
JLY EKES TAX
71- 3592 -M
8/20/90 8/20/90
7,412.32
AL-0
1010
7412.52
30811
8/15/90
COIIISSIOER OF 1EVEME VENOM TOTAL
14208.28
01219
PRE -MID
407.64
43 C1111TRACT WA
81- 4350.3100
20.02
MILEAGE
81 -4350 -3340
8/20/90 8/20/90
421.66
AL-CD
1010
427.66
30784
8/07/90
Be" RAM
VEMP TOTAL
421.66
01235
r . -OAID
1,301.40
AUG UWAL
01- 2040-0000
0.0 8
16.20
AM OWAL- RETIREE
01- 4190.1510
•
PAIR:
PURCHASE JOURNAL
DATE
8/2')/90
AP- 002-01
CITY OF ATMA
TIME
14.06.39
VNIOI
DBATICE of 181!.0
FIE-PAID
am
M. INVOICE M STE DATE STAIM
mw DESCRIPTION
ACCOUQ NULLR
NONT
QED( 8
DATE
41.60 NM DDRAL-IETIREE
01- 4280 -1310
41.60 N6 MITAL- ETIREE
01- 41WISIO
37.80 NA DDTIAL- RETIREE
71-7100-1510
8/10/90 8/20/90
1 JLL-CD
1010
1431.60
30806
8/09/90
DELTA WITH.
WMR TOTAL
1438.60
E1429
PIE-PAID
1,177.71 LID
71-7100-9510
32.0 NIE
71- 7100 -9320
37 •x - DISC
71- 7100.9560
IM/90 8/20/90
2,3!2.82 JK-M
1010
23!2.82
30781
8/07/90
PRE-PAM
242.36 UK
11- 7100-9520
8/20/90 8/,0/90
242.35 JK-CD
1010
242.35
30814
8 /14/!0
PRE MD
607.26 LI8
11- 7100-9510
12.14- DISC
71- 71009560
8/20,90 8/20/90
3!5.12 JLL-00
1010
95.12
30018
8/15/90
ED PHILLIPS 1 Sfl6 VE<ildt TDf18.
3230.29
619%
PRE-FAID
1,1 .00 DEF CDP 8/4 PR
01- 2010 -0000
1/21/90 1/20/90
1,135.10 JK-0
1010
1/55.00
30794
8/1900
BUT ZEST LIFE AIMMU vow TTMTAL
1135.00
61971
P1E -MD
21.80 M HLTH 1/4 PR
01 -' 040.0000
1/20/90 8/20/90
d -W JLL-1D
1010
21.80
30801
8/0900
Ow WJLTw FI M
VENOM TOTAL
21.80
Sim
PRE-/AID
921.90 LID
71- 71009310
43.06 MIME
11.710) =9920
19.54- oISC
71- 11009360
1).76 FRIC
71- 7100-9600
8/EO/90 8/20!90
956620 JLL-CD
1010
956.20
30x179
8/0'/90
PIE-M
413.21 LID
71- 71009510
10.37- DISC
71-71009360
2.91 F1T
71 -7700 -9600
31.95 Nil
71- 7100.9340
8/2000 8/20/90
510.14 JLL-CD
1010
$10.84
30812
8/1400
DRIODS COlPEER & taw", Von TOTAL
1457.04
KM
PRE -PAID
9,300.00 FIK -STORH SERER
40-2040-0000
8/20/90 8/20/90
9,300.00 JLL-CD
1010
9!00.00
30810
8/14/90
Wows, INC
YOM TOTAL
9500. 9
H2143
PREPAID
288.46 8/4 PR DED
01- 2040.0000
8/20/90 8/10/90
288.46 JK-CD
1010
281.46
30192
8/09/90
HIM W SLFPIRT 6 CMLECT+ VENDOR TOTAL
288.46
17199
PRE -PAID
135.00 IACP COI/ HARRELL
01- 4140-4110
s
•
•
25-7
PAGE 3
PURCNA5E JOURNAL
11A1k
VUO /Y1/
W-02-01
CITY OF IWO
TIME
14.04.39
VEISOII OMUDICE NE MOLD
PRE-m
om
M0. WAIOE INN DATE DATE UATW
APIIW
DEZUIIPTIM
Ammw Mu m
AIIm ow 1
OMITS
8/20/90 emr)o
• IA?
135.00
JK-m
1010
135.00
31M
8/21/90
%w TOTAL
135.00
12301 RE-MID
RE2.90
N OOP 8/4 PI
01- 2040-0000
8/20/90 so/90
512.90
JK-CD
1010
512.!0
3065
8/119190
tOM WrIlEm TMDBT -487 VDmt TOTAL
512.90
12301 PE-AID
91.911
IOM 1/4 R
01- 20100000
1/10/90 8/2{1/90
91.98
JDL-OD
1010
91.91
30791
8 /09/90
IOM RET9801 MDIT -401 VBmI 1MAL
91.98
I2360 FIE-Mill
290.00
REBISIR-ICDHXLD
01- 4190-4110
1/mm 8/20/90
290.00
AL-0
1010
290.01
30806
8/10/90
IIITEIIMTL CWFK ■.DD Wo VEIODR TOTAL
290.6
12370 PRE-mv
411.00
IOM COMF -SIXE
01- 10104110
38.00
IOM COIF- SUCLE-EN
01- 1190 -0000
8!20/90 e/Min
416.00
AL-0
1010
446.00
30711
WOOD
W MTL Cm NW ADDD YE DAAL
446.00
M71 PMAID
53!.20
10 CGIMINCT ar--3
01- 43103100
om/90 8/20/90
53!.20
JK-0
1010
!'x.20
30185
8/07/90
09 TAFFE ilE TOTAL
839.20
0 in" PIE -AID
1,336.!
LJ8
71- 71009510
?01.81
AILS
71- 7100 -m
34.83- DIDC
71 -7100 -9860
MO/90 8/20/90
2,109.38
AUG
1010
210945
30M
IM190
PIE -MID
5'07.29
LID
71- 71005310
768.18
WE
71- 7100 -M
25.83- DIDC
71- 71009760
1/20/90 6/20/90
1,649.61
AL-CD
1010
169.61
30113
SAW"
AM DROB *CLEBALE LU YOU TOTAL
3188.%
L2817 PIE -MID
44.00
IBS 8/4 PR
01- 20100000
8/20/90 8/20/90
44.00
JK-CD
1010
0.00
30104
8/09/90
LAM E1FIIrc8W Lm SM# VB W TOTAL
44.00
Im29 PRE -PAID
83.34
MW PART( TW EXPENSES
01- 43404120
8/20/90 8/10190
83.34
JK-CD
1010
83.3E
30808
8/10/90
RARBA V JIIES VDmt TOTAL
03.34
IKIOSI PREPAID
10,%b.37
FIT 8/4 PR
01 -2040 -4000
8/20/90 8/20/90
10,946.37
AL-L-
1010
10946.37
30789
8/09190
IWUFTTE ow - an Yom! TOTAL
10946.37
•
0-57L
PAGE 4
PURC',,ASE JOURNAL
DALE
6/10,'90
4 1 -0O2 -01
CITY Q mm
TIME
14.06.51
8H81dt DFAI E DUE all
PA-PAII
am
Ml. 1MIDICE MrM NYE MTE STAIRS
MUM
MBUPTIOM
=W MICR
NOW am 8
MTE
NM PA-AID
97.84
IEDCMII 8/4 PR
O1- 2010 -0000
8/20/90 8/20/90
97.84
,NL-CD
1010
97.84 30802
8/0!/90 •
a CMER 1EALTN KM YM TOTAL
9744
MR3166 PIE-PAID
301.00
AIMFARE-IOM-MA
01- 4040-4110
8/20/90 8/20/90
301.00
JK-CD
1010
301.00 30187
8/07/90
METRO TRAM 6 TOILS VEMM TOTAL
301.00
13279 PRE-PAIB
40.00
a MASD -HXn
01- 41SM110
8/20/90 8/20/90
40.00
AL-C8
IWO
40.00 30776
8/01/90
A RICK CWMM ABM YW TMJT&
40.00
Iml POE-PAID
20.00
IF CW 8/4 PR
01- 2040 -0800
8/20/90 4/20/90
24.00
AL-0
1010
218.00 30791
8/09/90
A SETIRBRDIf shim IWOR TOTAL
288.00
IL9110 IRE -PAID
60.63
L320 8/4 PR
01- 2040.0000
8/20/90 WM/90
640.63
J8L-MO
1OY1
40.63 30800
8/09/90
A TEMM LOX 320 YM TOTAL
60.63
IM351D PIE -PAID
11.54
OM POM HM
01- 4070-3210
89.03
few FM DETER
01-4020.3210
14.00
1" FUM IEIEII
01- 4040 -3210
7.16
REM Pam MEM
01- 4060 -31210
70.60
IEW POSTO NM
01 -4090 -31210
14.05
IBM POSTS METER
224170 -3210
10.60
wo Fan REiBt
71- 7100-3210
60.25
REM P06T8 MM
01- 43w321O
24.77
REFUN PON METER
81- 400.3210
95.72
few FM REM
01- 41W3210
43.21
11" FM METER
7343W3210
43.22
@CBI FUM METER
78-78081210
54.3D
MEPLBI P91S METER
01- 4140.31210
4.10
OE M PWM WER
01- 4280 -3210
3.20
FOUM POSTS METER
01.4110-31210
11.40
IMFLBM POSTS METER SECT 8
01-4090-3210
39.16
M" Pam OVER
01-4320 -3210
8/20/90 8/20/90
600.00
AL-0
1010
600.00 30820
8/20/90
am PMTMAFER YNO R TOTAL
600.00
93960 PRE-PAID
6,90.94
PEFO 8/4 PR
01- 2040-0000
8/20/90 8/20/90
6,90.94
J8L-CD
1010
6180.94 30791
8/09/90
P E R A VENDOR TOTAL
690,94
PM PRE -PAID
509.04
PW 8/4 PR
01 -1040 -0000
8/20/90 812000
539.04
,AL-0
1010
539.04 30800
8/09/90
PMSICINS OF MN vR100R TOTAL
539.04
0
Z5 ?3
F" S
PURCHASE JOURNAL
DATE
8/20/40
AP-M-01
CITT OF an
TIME
14.06.9
sm DIM BE mi
PIE-PAD
am
10. INDICE NMlll MATE MTE STATUB am
MEBDIIP?IIM
ACCOINT NINA
AWW
DIM #
MTE
• M171 PME -PAD
981.45
LID
71- 7100-9610
417.10
WK
71- 7100 -M
23.W Bit
71-7100 -9360
8/20/!0 60/90
1,377.67
JIL- D
1010
1317.67
30782
8/07190
Pii'M
2,00Q.04
LIQ
71- 7100.9510
481.65
1K
71-1100-9520
44.81- ME
71- 7100 -M
8/20/90 8/20/90
2,431.01
JIL-la
1010
2431.81
3005
8114190
MIIILITT IIiME i SPwT$ NMSM>pt TOTAL
3/26.41
am PRE-NO
105.01
8H F1 ME/
01 -2m-m
sm/90 01
100.00
JIL-0
1010
106.00
30793
8/09/90
m i POOps VOm TOTAL
105.00
sm FRE-M
W.64
64 m11RKT MMm
01-4310.3101
8/20/90 sm/90
6N.64
JIL-CD
1010
681.64
30783
8/07/90
MATT E JII®M YOM TOTAL
681.64
91381 PW'PAD
135,813.17
PYRT 01 -CITY IKL AM
3D- 6000 -�00
W/O 8/20/90
135,813.17
JIL-Cl
1010
133113.17
300
1MI"
lumm lluum YOM TOTAL
13013.17
!1443 RE-m
103.00
3 WISTR -W =1110
78-710MI10
8/20/90 8/20/90
105.00
JIL-0
1010
105.00
30107
8/10/90
SAECD-PL ME %m TOTAL
105.00
91311 FK-m
5W. 92
CU 8/4 PR
01- 2040 -00
I 0/90 8/20/90
M.
JI L-0
1010
SX.92
NM
8/09/90
STATE CAPITOL CMEIIT W= VM TOTAL
501.92
T4780 PIE'm
7.0
►[CTUES
01-4140-2200
`
8/20/0 8/20/90
7 • 0
JK-0
1010
7.49
30819
8/13/90
THRIFTY My St W M34 VE40M TOTAL
7.49
TOTAL ALL YOM
204,4%.07
•
zs7t/
A0029
590.00
EXCAVATE-2191 CARDINAL
78-7800-4200
8/22/9 8/22190
590.00
AL-co
1010
"Aft VEND TOTAL.
590.00
AM
3.385.00
LANUMWING
73- 7300 -3800
8/22/90 8/22/90
3,565.00
AL-0
1010
AMR LAIN i LANIMIFING VOW TOTAL
3585.00
AM
556.00
TEMP W
01-4140-1300
8/22/90 8/22/90
558.00
AL-CO
1010
ALTERNATIVE STAFFING, INC VETM TOTAL
568.00
Kul
30.00
SEPT PARKING LEAST:
01-4280 -4200
30.00
SEPT PAWING LEAS
73- 7300 -4200
30.00
SEPT PARKING LENS
18- 7800-4200
8/22/90 8/22/90
90.00
,AL-M
1010
&UM MINESOTA COW NY YOM TOTAL
90,00
M)533
124.00
MINER
01-4020-2200
8/22/90 S/22/90
124.00
,NL-a)
1010
MINERS TO 00 VEIGOR TOTAL
124.00
00 8
159.99
CAA IRATOR
78- 7800-2300
8/22/90 8/22/90
159.99
JWL-CD
1010
DWPION AUTO STORES Veda TOTAL
159.99
00670
114.00
810 AMP SWAM ROOF
01- 4340 -2330
8/22190 0/22/90
114.00
JK-CO
1010
GWPIN PIMLISHINi CO VEIOOR TOTAL
114.00
C0997
32.40
MPS
01 -4020 -2200
S/22/90 8/22/90
32.40
J1RI -0
1010
MAW FUM SERVICE YEW TOTAL
32.40
00960
16.00
JILT HK
01- 4280 -2200
25.75
JILT HK
01-4290 -2200
3.50
,ALT HK
01- 4290 -2250
85.45
JAL1 HK
01-4310 MW
16.99
JILT HDIE
01-4340 -2200
3.06
JILL NILE
01 -4340 -2330
161.14
,ALT HK
73- 7300.2200
19.76
,ALT HDIE
73- 7300-b00
9.76
JILT HK
78- 7800 -2300
11.99
JILT HOLE
78- 7800.2200
84.19
JILT HOLE
22- 4170-2200
1.78 -
HONE CREDIT
01-4140 -2200
8/22190 8/22/90 434.83 At -LO 1010
•r .
•
•
•
05 7S
Z� 7�0
PACE 2
PURCHASE JOURNAL
DATE K /22/90
AP-M-01
CITT OF MA
ME 9.44.27
SMO R INVOICE M ND19
PRE-MID Lim
NO. BNOICE M DATE DATE STATUE
MM
DESCRIPTION
AMMM mm
Wirt DWI 8 SITE
cm TO MIST VENDIDI TOTAL
434.83
00990
90/.00
JILT COMPUTER
01 -4095 -5000
545.25
A T CD11°UTER
01- 4095 -3800
8/72!90 8/22/90
1.452.25
JRNL-M
1010
03FUTOMWICE INC VE1mt TOTAL
1452.25
01078
52.00
REPAIR TELE
01- 4320 -3220
8/22/90 8/22/90
52.00
J K-CD
1010
CONTUSTAL TFIE W SER! VDmt TOTAL
52.00
C1079
324.78
TE JFW
014320-3220
16.83
THEM
01- 4190-3220
9.79
TEL M
80- 03*4100
.48
TWA"
01- 1090-3220
13.18
TELEP N
01-4010.3220
5.27
TE JFW
01-4095-3220
64.09
TEIBWK
01-4340-3220
44.79
TELOW
01-42W3?20
10944
TBEPITDE
73- 7300-3220
22.41
TEJFM
78- 7800 -3220
225.06
THJPW
01-4110-3220
146.03
TEJFM
71- 7100 -3220
69.81
TEIBAOE
22- 4170 -3220
67.70
TELE W- CQPUIER
22- 4170-3220
8/22190 8/22/90
1,119.86
J K-0
1010
•
CONFUSITAL TELE WK YOM TOTAL
1119.86
81170
406.65
RR LE49E TO 9/15
40-6000 -3910
204.35
RTI LEAK TO 9/15
01-WD-3910
8!71/90 8/22/90
613.00
J K-CD
1010
OVA VAL INC VE7mt TOTAL
613.00
91190
194.48
DANE ASSEIQIES
73- 7300 -2300
8122/90 8/22/90
194.48
JRX-0
1010
OAVIES LATER EBUIFQa YOM TOTAL
194.48
919:2
115.08
RAMIDE
73- 7300 -2260
8/22/90 8/22190
115.08
JRNL-0
1010
MPC IMSTRIES, INC. VOW TOTAL
115.06
81365
650.00
STIW RE10VAL -DEVON COMM
81-4350-5110
8/22/90 8/22/90
650.00
,AE-CD
1010
WORT %KLT1 VEIW TOTAL
650.00
E1410
174.31
REFLECTIVE TAPE
01 -4280 -2360
8/22/90 8/22/90
174.31
JRNL -CD
1010
EARL F ANDERSEN VENDOR TOTAL
174.31
Z� 7�0
PAGE s
PURCHASE JOURNAL
DATE 8r2/90
AP- CO2-Ol
CITY OF MM
TIME 9.44.27
VENDOR
INVOICE ME NLLD
PIE -PAID CAW
NO. BRICE N I R
DATE DATE STATUS
AMOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT N16t
AMOUNT CNEU t DATE
E1512
238.33
COMSLT -AIR SYST ANALYSIS-N
01- 4280-3100
•
238.33
CONSULT-AIR SYST ANALYSIS-FY
73 -7300 -3100
238.31
CONSULT-AIR SYST NMMLYSIS -N
78- 7800-3100
330.00
COBLT-SIOE WOM ANALYSIS
30-6000 -3100
8/22/90 8/2
1,045.00
JO L-0
1010
LE AMIATES, INC. Vow TOTAL
1045.00
F1631
256.73
11100 OESTW FEES
30-6000-6120
57.50
DONI DESTAWT FEES
73- 7300-6120
8/22/90 8/22/90
314.23
JIL-CD
1010
FIRST TW
VE11DOt TOTAL
314.23
F1630
4.03
RIVE SPRING
78 -7800 -2300
8/22/90 8/22/90
4.03
JiL-0
1010
FMIDLE PIPE TOOL
CO VENDOR TOTAL
4.03
F1660
18.00
SERVICE 9WITY SYSTEM
01-4280 -3950
18.00
SERVICE SECURITY SYSTEM
73- 7300 -3930
18.00
SERVICE STr"L]RITY SYSTEM
78-7800 -390
8/22/90 8/22/90
54.00
JOL-CD
1010
FLOYD SMRITY
VOW TOTAL
54.00
F1720
5,887.10
ARBITRATION
01-4399 -4100
8/22/90 8/22/90
5,887.10
J0L-CD
1010
FRANK RAW ti -:
VENDOR TOTAL
5987.1C
•
M2120
13.30
POSTAL VERIF
01-4060-3210
8/22/90 8/22/90
13.30
JBL-CD
1010
WIN CO DEPT SE PROPERT► T VOW TOTAL
13.30
I2251
130.71
4405E
01- 4280-2300
8/22 8/22/90
130.71
JOL-CD
1010
NOSE, INC.
VENDOR TOTAL
130.71
J2411
590.00
AIG JVNITOR SERVICE
01- 4320 -4210
50.66
AM JANITOR SERVILE
01- 4280 -4200
50.67
AM JNITOR SERVICE
73-7300-4200
50.67
AG JANITOR SERVICE
78- 7800 -4200
8/22/90 8/22/90
741.00
JRNL -CD
1010
J i S CLEANING CO.
VENDOR TOTAL
742.00
J2480
593.02
CONF-COLO-FADia
01-4340 -4110
8/22/90 8,
593.02
JRML -CD
1010
JAMES FACKID
VOW TOTAL
593.02
K2720
30.00
PUB BELT
01-4340 -3810
•
2S ?-7
PAGE 4 PURL14 ASE JOURNAL
AP -M-01 CITY OF 10UNO
vm INVOICE ME !LLD
W. INVOICE Wit DATE DATE STATUS
MOUNT
ORIPTIOD
8/22/90 8%72/40
30.00
JK-CD
OiOER CO. VENDOR TOTAL
30.00
wsm awwTION VENDOR TOTAL
L2850
1,413.76
310 QTR-INS
NOW
395.27
3RD QTR -INS
27- 5M3100
595.27
30 QTR -INS
JULY ENGR- ODi19FA8g9S
49.21
30 QTR -INS
40.00
3,720.42
3RD QTR -INS
37.20
3RD OTR -INS
01- 4310-3100
395.27
30 QTR -INS
JULY 1908 -PAWL DEFT
3,80.43
310 = -016
886.00
347.24
3IW 9TR -I16
140.12
3RD QTR -116
78 -71100 -3100
942.51
3111 9TR -INS
JLT am-Mtn DEPT
3,472.39
30 YIR -INS
2,179.00
1,240.11
30 9TR-IG
2.666.30
3RD 9TR-I16
30.6000 -5000
2,666.30
316 9TR-INB
8/12/90 8/22/90
22,301.30
J/L-Cl
LEAGUE OF NN CITIES 116 H YOM TOTAL
22301.50
01- 4280-3140
12930
2,361.29
,LLY AUTO PARTS
81-4350-3100
142.80
JULY AUTO POTS
8/22/90 8/22/90
2,701.09
JlL-CD
LOE11'S AITQQTIVE11ITCOF VENDOR TOTAL
2704.09
DATE 8/22190:`..
TINE 9.0.27
PIE -PAID 0m
ACtnNT OW MOUNT OEM 1 WE
1010
01-4020 -3610
01 -4040 -3610
01- 4090 -3610
01-4110-3610
01- 4140 -3610
01-4150.3610
01- 4190-3610
01-4290.3610
01- 4290.3610
01-4320 -3610
01-4310-3610
22-4170-3610
71-7100 -300
73- 7300-3610
78- 1100-3610
1010
01-4290-2310
22- 4170-2200
1010
93D40
170.00
SEPT ENM MINT
01 -4095 -3800
8/22/90 B/22/90
170.00
JK-CD
1010
wsm awwTION VENDOR TOTAL
170.00
NOW
1211.00
ALT EN O R -'90 gU WAT
27- 5M3100
192.00
JULY ENGR- ODi19FA8g9S
86-1190-0000
40.00
JULY 17408 - 1 90 wam
81- 4374 -5100
1,249.48
JULY ENDR -IP OWE WAIR
01- 4310-3100
32.00
JULY 1908 -PAWL DEFT
01- 4310-3100
886.00
JULY EN W-LUFT STA UPOW
78 -7800 -3100
46.00
JULY ENOR- NTR/9R DEPT
78 -71100 -3100
40.00
JLT am-Mtn DEPT
73- 7300 -3100
2,179.00
JULY E]DR -CITY 14ALL an
30- 6000-5000
2,108.68
JULY EN OR -DEPOT IENUAA
30.6000 -5000
889.39
JULY ENOR -LBO DEPT
01- 4190-3100
64.00
ALT ENOR- STREET DEFT
01- 4280-3140
489.00
JULY 90- NATERSIDE
81-4350-3100
9/22190 8/22/90
8,360.75
JOL-CD
1010
MM MBS FRAM( RHOS A550C1# VENDOR TOTAL
8360.75
"3130
18.00
FAMA-REIMA-SHLOU
01-1190 -0000
11.00
MAMA MTG -9ml
01-4040-4120
8!22/90 8/22/90
29.00
Ac-CD
1010
METRO AREA Off ASSN VEIOOt TOTAL
29.00
ZS 78'
5
PUkCNASE JOURNAL
DATE 8/12/90
CITY OF 11x111
TIME 9.44.27
8 1�
N. � m BATE MTE STAIM aw OEDIPTION
PIE -PAID CHECK
ACCQIIT Ww
AND w CHECK N GATE
7.36 JULY GAS
01- 4340-3720
3.00 JLLY GAS
01- 4320-3720
6.65 JULY GAS
71 -1100 -3720
7.38 J LT GAS
22-4170-3720
882/!0 8/22/90
24.41 JK-0
1010
NINBBIIWRO VBSOR TOTAL
24.41
N3289
12.00 WE TAG
22 -4170 -2200
882/90
12.00 JK-CO
1010
NM C l FIE II SAFER Vow TOTAL
12.00
ID3ZS
110.00 11 CBTTIFICA11DN54T1
22-4170 -4130
Mu" 8/200
110.00 JK-CD
1010
NN FIE NN CBTITFICATN s VB" TOTAL
110.00
NDIA
44.00 WATER ANALYSIS
73- 7300-3100
8/22/'0 8/22/90
44.00 JK-CD
1010
NN VALID TESTIN LA80NNTO Yaw TOTAL
44.00
13110
38.27 81111E SEED
01-4340-2350
23.17 CHAIN
01 -4340 -2300
9.99 STEP LAOOEIt
73- 7300-2200
44 •" DYER
73-7300-2300
8/22/90 8/22/90
193.42 `RL-CD
1010
WMA E WOW Vow TOTAL
193.42
N3740
118.80 SIGNS -VIOL
01 -42OD -2360
882/90 8/12/90
118.80 JBL-0
1010
Nom Sims Vam TOTAL
118.80
NO800
614.66 JULY ELECTRICITY
01- 4280-3710
84.93 JULY ELECTRICITY
01-4340 -3710
699.81 .LLY ELECTRICITY
01-4320 -3710
518.14 JULY ELECTRICITY
71- 7100-3110
272.41 JLY ELECTRICITY
22- 4170-3710
2, 518.49 ,LLT ELECTRICITY
73- 7300-3710
1,709.66 JILT ELECTRICITY
78- 7800 -3710
8/71/90 8/22/90
6,478.10 JK-CD
1010
NTRT)ft STATES POWER CO VENOOR TOTAL
6478.10
03870
135.00 TYPEWRITER MAINT TAN! 8191
01- 4140 -1100
85.00 TYPEWRITER Mir THRU 8/91
01- 4280-1100
180.00 TYPEWRITER MINT TWA) 8/91
01 -4090 -2100
45.00 TYPEWRITER MAINT THRU 811
01-4040 -1100
8/22190 8122/90
445.00 JITI-CD
1010
OFFICE PROOLIM-M VENDOR TOTAL
445.00
•
•
•
a45 -?5
01 S6v
PAM 6
AP -m-01
PURCHASE JOURNAL
DATE 8/22/90
CITY IP NWO
TOE 9.0.27
ow
ND. MICE M
INNOICE Off HOLD
DATE DATE STATUS
MW
X=IpTI(N
PIE -PAID OED](
AMUIXT 00
A OW OW 8 DATE
.
0031
162.00
10 -11 -12 NOr -d=
71- 71WI310
162.00
10-11 -12 NO!-R TNAIYLM
01- 4140 -1510
10.0
07 HIP-M THARAL.M
01 -4140 -1510
8/21/90 8/21/90
319.45
JK-CD
1010
RASICIN6 OF 0
VEDWt TOTAL
529.45
0040
117.00
9 /16-12 /15 POSM DETER FM
01-4310 -3210
8/22/90 8/22/90
117.00
JK-CD
1010
PITNEY OES DC
VE Wt TOTAL
117.00
p4m
0
U RJFS
01- 4280-2310
8/22/90 8/22/90
43.20
JK-CD
1010
PONER DRAKE EJUM MT CO MW TOTAL
43.20
54371
812.30
FAY RACHINE
73- 7900-5000
812.30
FAX DMOUDE
78- 7800-5000
42.00
TIERINL PNPED
73- 7300 -2100
42.00
I1ER1AL PRIS
78-7800-2100
8/12190 8/22/90
1,709.00
JK-CD
1010
9m ELE MILS
VENDAIR TOTAL
1709.00
on
1,306.42
9PT Wo
71- 7100-3910
8/22/90 8/2'!/90
2 + 306.42
JILL -0
1010
90ELAE PLAZA
5030
VEINDOTt TOTK,
2306.42
2.20
LAR NTE ID DAM
01- 4190 -2100
3.30
LAUNTE ID DAM
01-4340-2200
1.10
LAMINATE ID DAW
01- 4290 -2200
73.90
ETINELOPEES -FIRE
22- 4170 -3500
136.30
E1AGRES -POLIO:
01- 4140.2120
8/22/90 8/22/90
217.00
JI81. -D
1010
906 RENTING
VENDOR TOTAL
217.00
54440
129.30
JILT CAR NAM
01-4140-3810
10.50
JLT CAR was
01-4280 -3810
3.30
JLLY CAR wan
01- 4190.3810
3.50
JILT CAR was
01-4040 -3610
8/22/90 6/22/90
147.00
JK-CD
1010
SPRING PAW CAR we
YOM TOTAL
147.00
S4600
74.70
99 LIGHT
01-4140 -3820
8/22/90 8/22/90
74.70
JK-CD
1010
STREIOIER'S
VE]Wt TOTAL
74.70
S46.'DO
18.32
JLLY GASOLINE
01- 4040 -2210
23.90
JAL► GA93LINE
01- 4190 -2210
392.53
JILT GASOLINE
01- 4340 -2210
313.91
JLLY GASOLINE
01-4280 -2210
01 S6v
PAGE 7
PURCHASE J0UkNAI
•
DATE 8/:2/9
AP -COQ -01
CITY OF MUD
TIME 9.44.27
vow INVOICE DIE HU
PRE -PAID nEnc
ND. INVOICE M DATE DATE STATUS
ARM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT KM
AIM UNT DID I DATE
51.99
JULY GASl1LINE
01- 4290-2210
254.26
JULY GASOLINE
73- 7300 -2210
8.97
BATTERIES
73- 7300 -2200
'
128.26
JULY GASOLINE
78- 7800 -2210
5.50
JUNE WSMINE
22- 4170 -2210
1,001.35
ALLY GASOLINE
01-4140-2210
8/22/90 8/22/90
2,409.01
JDL-CD
1010
9RERAPUICA VEXMR TOTAL
2409.01
T4712
860.00
Twa PlW- YIDMER
73- 1190 -0000
8/22/90 8/22/90
880.00
JBL-CD
1010
TELTNIFLM CORPOATION VOW TOTAL
880.00
T4716
25.50
TEW HELP
01-4270-1300
8/22/90 8/22/
23.50
jK-CD
1010
TEIEOIRIES TO GO VEISJR TOTAL
25.50
T/B96
45.00
LAIN COIW
76- 7800 -4200
8/22/90 8/22/90
45.00
JRNL-CD
1010
TDP Tw VENDOR TOTAL
45.00
IM3060
59.90
SHIRTS-HYLA10
01-4140-2240
8/22/90 8/22/90
59.90
JRNL-LL
1010
UNIFNIS WHITED VENDOR TOTAL
59.90
175070
19.94
TYPEWRITER RIBM,TAPES
01-4280-2100
19.94
TYPEWRITER RIBD0S,TAPE5
73- 7300-2100
19.94
TYPEWRITER RIMW,TAPES
78- 7800-2100
6/22/90 8/22/90
59.62
JK-CD
1010
UNITED BUSINESS NNOUIMES YOM TOTAL
59.82
Y5190
1,833.75
JULY PUN CONSIIT
01- 4190 -3100
8/22/90 9/22/90
1,833.75
JRNL -CD
1010
1AINOQEIHWARD- STALLINDS VOW TOTAL
1833.75
MWO
617.25
NAIMOLE CASTIMDS
78 -7800 -2300
8/12/90 8/22190
617.25
JRML-CD
1010
HATER PROAU:TS COIPANT VENDOR TOTAL
617.25
Mn
53.15
IESTOWA DLLLARS LETTERS
01- 4170 -2120
50.00
BUSINESS DIRECTORIES
01- 4020-1100
8/121" 8/22/90
103.15
JRML-CD
1010
IESTO KA CMYMUBER OF COM9ER VU M TOTAL
103.15
Mr
318.76
NCAN-AUIG,9EPT RENT
16- 5886-4100
8/21/90 8!22190
318.76
ARML-0
1010
•
•
•
d 5 91
PAGE 6
PURCHASE
JOURNAL
DATE 8122/90
AP-002-01
CITY OF IM
111E 9.0.27
YEIw IN40ICE U N11D
PIE -MUD OLEO(
NO. 1NWICE No DATE DATE STATUS
ARM
DEul"fON
ACCOINT NITER
MINT DIEM 8 MTE
IESTflBlA CNMIIT ACTH Nf VENDOR TOTAL
318.76
IE630
1,619.30
8EAQ8W
79- 7800-4200
8/22/90 6/22/90
1,614.50
JOL-CD
1010
NIDMER INC Yom TOTAL
1619.30
03689
676.50
a PORTOIM
01- 4310-3900
6/22/90 6/22/90
678.30
JAIL -00
1010
NMI MWICES OF 0 VENDOR TOTAL
678.30
om
409.8P
AM LEAIE-=
01-4320-3600
8/22/90 8/22190
409.88
J K-CD
1010
Dr' W COpOATION YEND011 TOTAL
409.88
13630
84.90
VILYENTS
01-4290-2230
26.00
NUM
O1-42B0-?300
6/22/90 6/22/90
110.90
JRNL-CD
1010
ZAMIS INC YEND011 TOTAL
110.90
TOTAL ALL VEIKM
14,260.35
•
C�ffr�-
1 t . C ..
Mc Combs Frank Roo A ssociates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plvmnuth. Minnesota 55447 Telephone Er jmeers
612 476 -6010 Planners
612 476 8532 FAX Surveyors
August 27, 1990
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager REC�� AUG Z ? X590
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT: City of Mound, Minnesota
Phillippi Property
Driveway Entrance
MFRA #$903
Dear Ed:
As we discussed over the phone, I am writing this letter to give you the
history of this area and make recommendations on issuing a permit. I was made
aware, on August 13, 1990 during a visit to Mound on a different matter, that
someone was grading a new driveway off Tuxedo Boulevard, just south of
Manchester Road. Geno and I made an immediate trip to the site and discovered
that a new driveway had indeed been rough graded and a section of the City's
stone retaining wall had been removed.
We talked to the renter of the house at the top of the hill and he
indicated that the property owner, Matt Phillippi, was having the driveway
built to give him access and parking. Geno obtained the name of the Contractor
and I gave the renter my business card and told him to let Mr. Phillippi know
that a permit was required and the job was being shut down. Mr. Phillippi
called me at my office that same afternoon, and we set up a meeting for 5:00
P.M. on August 21, 1990, at the site. Attached is a cosy of the meeting
attendance report from that meeting.
There is a lung history involving not only this parcel but also adjacent
properties. Enclosed is Resolution No. 79 -371, which created this parcel
identified as Parcel "A" on the resolution and Parcel "B ", now owned by Mr.
Host. Also included is Resolution 79 -450 which vacated a portion of
Cumberland Road, which is now a part of Parcel "A" from Resolution 79 -371.
These two resolutions also vacated other parts of Cumberland Road and created
other parcels which left Parcel "A" without any access, except to Tuxedo
Boulevard. From my memory of this subdivision, there was supposed to be a
15 -foot driveway easement from the Inverness Lane cul -de -sac along 'hP forth
side of Parcel "B" to serve as access for Parcel "A ". The only dr atation
we can find of this easement is from several surveys made by Egar .eld and
Nowak, showing the proposed subdivision. I believe there is a in one of
Peggy's files. It is also shown on the survey used by Gordy S on when he
had a slope easement vacated by the City when he was purchasir ie property.
A copy is enclosed.
F ,,,.. . , , . ,
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
August 27, 1990
Page Two
What these actions by the City resulted in was creating a buildable parcel
with access only to Tuxedo Boulevard at a very undesirable location. I do not
see how we (the City) can deny this driveway permit; however, there are some
conditions that I would recommend be placed on this permit approval. The
rented house that is being provided access and parking by the new driveway is
located on Parcel No. 19- 117 -23 31 0059. This parcel also has another
structure located on it, which I understand is also be rented to a different
party. This structure has a tuck -under garage which i nts on Manchester Lane
with the living quarters above and behind the garage, une action that could be
required is to divide the tuck -under home into a separate parcel and then
combine the leftover parcel, which contains the other rental home, with the
vacant parcel where the proposed driveway is under construction. The only
problem with this scenario is the resulting undersized lot (approximately 4,000
S.F.) created with the tuck -under structure located on it.
I would recommend that we require combining Parcel (0059) which contains
the two structures with Parcel (0118), upon which the driveway is under
construction. This way, the City would have better control over what is done
with the property in the future. I also suggest that an easement for a
driveway running in favor of Parcel (0118) across Parcel (0112) be furnished
before issuing the permit. Enclosed is a drawing that Mr. Phillippi sent to
me, which shows the proposed driveway. It dues not have what I would consider
sufficient information, such as dimensions, proposed elevations, etc., to issue
a permit under these circumstances. The following are conditions I would
recommend be placed on the driveway permit:
1. Combine Parcels (0055) and (0118).
US.
2. Provide signed easement documents. Note: the City should have proof
that it is recordeJ.
3. New drawing of proposed driveway with sufficient information.
4. Some type of guarantee that work will be done to the City's
satisfaction. Note: the normal permit is a street excavation permit,
which requires a $5,000 bond. I don't think that large of an amount
is necessary in this case.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
jmj
k.ncl osures
SCALE=
30 F£E T
- 9� \• o
.. 89'4 00 1. - -
J nn l
9Z. Mf/ •• -
ip
dot
9�60 i5 4 �` o•� `-
4 -
V •�,�•.� y / \ ' X 15 ooe -, a' �. ` �f � �
E
r '
.-
. o
J iiruPv For. (;nr T nrn..,
491
October 23, 1979
Councilmember Swenson moved the following resolution,
RESOLUTION NO. 79 - 450
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF CUMBERLAND
ROAD FROM STRATFORD TO TUXEDO
WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held for the vacation of Cumberland Road frc-n
Stratford to Tuxedo, and
WHEREAS, easements for the proposed cul -de -sac on Inverness Lane has been signed
and an application made for the subdivision of land (8 lots into 3 parcels)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUI3,
MINNESOTA:
That Council does hereby authorize the street vacation of Cumberland Read,
said vacation to consist of the following:
That part of Cumberland Road adjoinging Lots 10, 11, 12 & 13,
Block 14, Avalon, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying
easterly of the southerly extension of the west line of said Lot
13 and which lies westerly of a circle having a ra dius of 45.00
feet, the center of said circle is the intersection of a line 25.00
feet south of and parallel with the north line of Cumberland Roal,
with a liiie 13.00 feet east of the southerly extension of the west
is line of Lot 9 of said Block 14.
Subject to a perpetual utility easement over, under and across the
south 15.00 feet of the north 17.50 feet of said above described
Cumberland Road.
That part of Cumberland Road adjoining Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block
14, Avalon, which lies westerly of the westerly right -of -way ling
of Tuxe,ic Boulevard, as widened, and which lies easterly of a circle
having a radius of 45.00 feet, the center of said circle is the inter-
section of a line 25.00 feet south of a -. parallel with the north line
of Cumberland Road, with a line 13.00 east of the southerly ex-
tension of the west line of Lot 9 of said Block 14.
A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council -
member Withhart and upon vote being taken thereon, the following vcted i- favor
thereof; Lovaasen, Polston, Swenson and Withhart, the following voted against the
same; none, with Ulrick being temporarily absent, whereupon said resolution was
declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the
City Clerk.
Mayor
Attes . CMC City Clerk
399
September 11, 1979
Parcel "C" - That part of Lot 3 lying Southerly of a line 2 feet Northerly
pf, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the Southerly line of
said Lot 3 and all of Lot 4 and 5, all in Block 1, Pembroke, according to
the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of
Titles h and for said County of Hennepin.
Subject to road easements for Tuxedo Road as per Document Number 915676 and
slope easement as per Document Number 915677.
Square footage of said parcel is 10,050.
Parcel "D" - VI that part of Lots 1 and s, which lies North of a line
drawn 50 feet South of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the
North line of said Lot 1 and East of a line drawn 105 feet East of, measured
at a right angle to and parallel with the 'Rest line of lot 55, all in Block
10, Pebroke, according to the plat thereof on We or of record in the off-
...e of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County of Hennepin.
Square footage of said parcel is 6,590.
Parcel "E" - All that part of Lots 2 and 3, which lies South of a line drawn
50 feet South of,, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the North
line of Lot 1, and East of a II,. -'n 105 feet East of, measured at a
right angle to and parallel with ti,e West line of Lot 55, all in Block 10,
Pembroke, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office
of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County of Hennepin.
Square footage of said parcel is 6,013.
Parcel "F " - Lot 56, except the West 5 feet thereof, and all that part of
Lots 1, 2 and 3 which lies West of a line drawn 105 feet East of, ^1easured
at a right angle to and parallel with the West line of Lot 55, except that
part of Lot 3 lying Westerly of the Southerly extension of the East line
of the West 5 feet of said Lot 56, all in Block 10, Pembroke, according to
the plat thereo, on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of
Titles in and for said County of Hennepin.
Square footage of said parcel is 6,383•
2) It is determined that the foregoing division will constitute a de-
sirable and stable community development and is in harmony with adjacent
properties.
3) That any Sanitary Sewer, Sewer Lateral and /or water deficiencies
will be paid in full or waivers signed and any new assessments levied against
the above described property to be paid in full or assumed by o —ner.
4) 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 Register of Titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the sub-
division regulations of this City.
A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council -
member Polston and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof;
Lovaasen, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Withhart, the following voted against the same;
40 none, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
,G
Mayor
Attest: Clerk
398
September 11, 1979
Councilmember Withhart moved the following resolution,
RESOLUTION NO. 79 -371
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO GRANT THE SUB-
DIVISION AS REQUESTED
WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in Section
22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound, ..,d
WHEREAS, said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and
the City Council, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would de-
ni - '' e'the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; that the waiver is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property
right; and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental to the pub-
lic welfare or injurious to other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND,
MINNESOTA:
0 That the request-of M.L. Sycks for the waiver from the provisions
of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request to subdivide property
of less than five acres, described as follows:
Lots 1 through 5 Block 1 Pembroke
Lots 1, 2, 3 6 56 Block 10 'Pembroke
Lots 4 b S} of 5 Block 14 Avalon
is hereby granted a permit for division of the above property in the
following manner:
Parcel " A " - Lot Four (4) and the South One -Half (S -1/2) of Lot Five (5)
In Block Fourteen (14) of Avalon, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County
of Hennepin. Inclucing all of Cumberland Lane adjoining said Lots 4 and 5,
vacated or to be vacated.
Lot 1 Block 1, Pembroke, according to the plat thereof on file or of record
in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County of Hennepin.
Subject to road easement for Tuxedo Road as per Document Numbers 915676 and
915678 and slope easement as per Document Numbers 915677 and 915679.
Square footage of said parcel is 7,108.
Parcel "B" - Al of Lot 2 and Lot 3, except that part of said Lot 3 lying
Southerly of a line 2 feet Northerly of, measured at a right angle to and
parallel with the Southerly line of said Lot 3, all in Block 1, Pembroke,
according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the
Registrar of Titles in and for said County of Hennepin.
Subject to road easements for Tuxedo Road as per Document Number 915676 and
slope easement as per Document Number 915677.
Square footage of said parcel is 8 ,393• City agreed to approval of this
undersized parcel in exchange for land needed for the easement for the
cul- de-sac off Inverness Road and Cumberland Lane.
• off �; f�` • � �/, �/ �1 ievq '•iu w
AO :11
�l ( , jr�it`��;.�� {. r �` • 'moo r �. - ' , (I / �j
.11 To
LU7 r. /
kc
fa `:J. �� v �I
it .✓ 9��,4f1 ` ' l I :G O I e
', ` / / /� / I �•u.- s js.„ , V \I -.'� i" % .F •. =: J `,.j'; ��, •kttd y / /� +tS yM•
• �� `.� o ff, k';i 41 .��� - /�`� `/ 1 �E.
1 r
� L e
J /
N I
J
kr ..,I 1 �cc 1 /
1
"'• �l I
j
1
Honorable Mayor and Members
o+' the City Council
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
August 28, 1990
•
- A
om s rank oc � ssociates, Inc.
SUBJECT: City of Mound, Minnesota
Denbigh Road
1990 Street Improvements
Preliminary Assessment Roll
MFRA #;'7064
Dear M: ind Council Members:
As requested, we submit herewith the Preliminary Assessment Roll for the
1989 Street Improvements on Denbigh Road.
The amount to be assessed has been calculated as follows:
Construction Cost $ 29,398.00
Easement 4,919.00
Engineering, Staking, Inspection,
Easement Preparation and Preparation
of As::Pssment Roll 11,358.00
Legal, includin; Easement Preparation
and Title Search Cost $ 3,840.00
Administration Cost 3o8,Q0
SUBTOTAL, $ T19 -3.00
Minus City Share of Costs (107.) 4,983.0
TOTAL TO BE ASSESSED $ -714-,-84-0 .00
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
August 28, 1990
Page Two
In 1976 the City adopted a street improvement assessment policy under
Resolution No. 76 -77. The assessment criteria is as follows:
a. 30 percent of the total cost to be assessed based on front footage.
Corner lots shall be calculated to include all front footage (front
and sides). All lots shall be deemed to have at least a minimum of 40
front feet.
b. 30 percent of the total cost to be assessed shall be based on the
square footage of the property to be assessed.
C. 40 percent of the total cost to be assessed shall be based on a unit
basis.
Since 1976, the City Council has added the following refinements to this
policy:
1. Triangle Lots - lots that form a triangle on two streets are to be
• assessed for footage on the long side only.
2. Multiple units other than duplexes are assessed on the basis of 3/4
unit per each residential unit in the building (i.e., a 50 unit
apartment is assessed for 37.5 units plus footage plus area).
3. Lots that front on a County Road and a street improvement will be
assessed on the same basis as other lots except that the units and
square footage will be reduced by 50 percent.
4. area of land formerly commons and now under private ownership is to be
assessed as part of the private property.
5. Large parcels (a number of combined lots) to be assessed one unit,
plus area and footage. Two separate parcels under the same ownership
will be assessed two units, plus area and footage if they both have
enough area to qualify as buildable sites under the present zoning.
0. Single lots under separate ownership from adjacent property thr,t do
not meet the area requirements for a buildable site will be assessed
only area and footage.
7. Properties abutting alleys that are bituminous surface only, with no
curb and patter, to be assessed the same as any other property except
the front `'oot. age will be reduced by 50% with a minimum of 40 lineal
Coot.
r �
U
• Honorable Mayor and Member
of the City Council
August 28, 1990
Page Three
8. Properties which have the garage located across the street from the
house will be assessed on the same basis as other lots except the
parcel in which the garage is located will not receive a unit charge.
9. Lots that front on a street to be improved and which previously paid a
full assessment on another street improvement project will be assessed
for the footage only with no minimum.
10. Parcels which do not abut a street improvement project but received
benefits from the construction will be assessed for thr; project.
11. Lots that are adjacent to a 12' wide bituminous street installed for
City purposes which front on another street in the pro will not be
assessed for footage on the side street.
12. Triangular lots that are combined with a rectangular lot are to be
assessed for footage on the long side of the triangular lot plus the
footage of the remaining lot or lots.
• 13. Duplexes are to be assessed on the basis of two units plus area and
footage, with a minimum on the footage of 80 feet.
14. Lots that have streets or, three sides are to be assessed for footage
on the long side and the average length of the other two sides.
15. The cost of the driveway entrances over 12 feet wide are assessed
directly to the property owner.
16. Commercial or industrial property get 1 -112 units.
17. Credit is given for past storm sewer assessme—ts except that when
credits exceed the assessment, no assessment will be levied and no
assessment paid.
18. There is a maximum of 250 feet and 25,000 square feet per resident:ir,l
parcel.
19• Storm sewers are assessed as part of the street improvements -ind
assessments are included in the unit, square footage and frontag;2
charges.
• Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
August 28, 1990
Page Four
As part of the agreement signed with Freda Olson when the permanent
easement was obtained, a set amount for her assessment was established at
$3.344.76. A copy of said agreement is enclosed. Therefore, this amount was
deducted from the aforementioned amount to be assessed to arrive at a total to
be iiiserted in the City's assessment formula. The preliminary assessment roll
was then prepared as follows, using the assessment policy:
The cost per unit is:
($41,495.24 x 0.40) : 7 -1/2 units = $ 2,213.08 /unit
The cost of the footage assessment is:
($41,495.24 x 0.30) 1 490 feet = $ 25.40 /front foot
The cost of the area assessment is:
($41.495.34 x 0.30) : 69,998 S.F. = $ 0.178 /square foot
• If' you have any questions or need more information on anything in the
assessment roll, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
JC:jmj
Enclosures
0
• • •
PID NO. LEGAL
NAME, ADDRESS DESCRIPTION
19- 117 -23 24 0023 LOT 88, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
HALDEi J W LARSON
4400 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0024 LOT 89, PHELPS ISLAjT)
PARK FIRST DIVISION
JACK R & DEBORAH L WANG
4408 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0025 LOT 90, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
W WITHERS & L SANNA
4416 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0026 LOT 91, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
JAMES JAREMKO
4424 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0027 LOT 92, PHELPS ISLAND
?ARK FIRST DIVISION
ELMA K KLUTH
4432 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0028 LOT 93, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
OSWIN C PFLUG
4440 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
1989 STREET IMPROVEMENTS - DENBIGH ROAD
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
MFRA #7064
AREA
UNITS COST S.F. COST
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00
FOOTAGE
L.F. COST
TOTAL
ASSESS
40 $ 1,016.00 $ 5,009.08
1 $ 2 10,000 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
1 $ 2,213.08 10,00C $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
1 $ 2 10 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 51263.08
PID NO.
LEGAL
NAME, ADDRESS
DESCRIPTION
19- 117 -23 24 0023
LOT 88, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
HALDEN W LARSON
4400 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0024
LOT 89, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
JACK R & DEBORAH L
WANG
4408 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0025
LOT 90, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
W WITHERS & L SANNA
4416 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0026
LOT 91, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
JAMES JAREMKO
4424 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- li7 -23 24 0027
LOT 92, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
ELMA K KLUTH
4432 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
19- 117 -23 24 0028
LOT 93, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
OSWIN C PFLUG
4440 DENBIGH ROAD
MOUND MINN 55364
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
1989 STREET IMPROVEMENTS - DENBIGH ROAD
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
MFRA #7064
AREA
UNITS COST S.F. COST
1 $ 2 10,000 $ 1,780.00
FOOTAGE TOTAL
L.F. COST ASSESSMENT
40 $ 1,016.00 $ 5
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5
1 $ 2,213.08 10,000 $ 1,780.00
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
1 $ 2 10 $ 1,780.00 50 $ 1,270.00 $ 5,263.08
•
•
PID NO.
LEGAL
AREA
NAME, ADDRESS
DESCR IPTION
UNITS
COST
S.F.
COST
19- 117 -23 24 0029
LOT 94, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
—
$
—_ --
—__—
$
"JETER C ZUBERT
PC BOX 35077
MPLS MIwo: 55435
19- 117 -23 24 0030
LOT 95, PHF' —' TSLAND
PARK FIRS '. 1N
1/2
$
1,106.54
3,217
$
572.63
PETER C ZUBERT
PO BOX 35077
MPLS MINN 55435
19- 117 -23 24 0031
LOT 96, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
1/2
$
1,106.54
3,011
$
535.96
PETER C ZUBERT
PO BOX 35077
MPLS MINN 55435
19- 117 -23 24 0033
LOT 99 AND E 1/2 LOT 98,
PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST
1/2
$
1,106.54
3,770
$
671.06
JOHN F MORGAN
DIVISION
4400 WILSHIRE BLVD
MOUND MINN 55364
SUBTOTAL 7 -1/2 $ 16,598.10 69,998 $ 12,459.65 490 $ 12 $ 41,503.75
19- 117 -23 24 00;2 LOT 97 AND W 1/2 LOT 98,
PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST $ 3
FREDA J OLSON DIVISION
4414 WILSHIRE BLVD
MOUND MINN 55364
FOOTAGE TOTAL
L.F. COST ASSESSMENT
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 1,270.00
50 $ 1,27U.00 $ 2,949.17
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 2,912.50
50 $ 1,e-70.00 $ 3,047.60
TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED
$ 441848.51
0
•
PID NO.
LEGAL
AREA
NAME, ADDRESS
DESCRIPTION
UNITS
COST
S.F.
COST
19- 117 -23 24 0029
LOT 94, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
-
$
-___
____
PETER C ZUBERT
PO BOX 35077
MPLS MINN 55435
19- 117 -23 24 0030
LOT 95, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
112
$
1,106.54
3
$
572.6?
PETER C ZUBERT
PO BOX 35077
MPLS MINN 55435
19- 117 -23 24 0031
LOT 96, PHELPS ISLAND
PARK FIRST DIVISION
1/2
$
1,106.54
3,011
$
535.96
PETER C ZUBERT
PO BOX 35077
MPLS MINN 55435
19- 117 -23 24 0033
LOT 99 AND E 1/2 LOT 98
PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST
1/2
$
1,106.54
3,770
$
671.06
JOHN F MORGAN
DIVISION
4400 WILSHIRE BLVD
MOUND MINN 55364
SUBTOTAL 7 -1/2 $ 16,598.10 69,998 $ 12 490 $ 12 $ 41,503.75
19- 117 -23 24 0032 LOT 97 AND W 1/2 LOT 98
PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST $ 3,344.76
FREDA J OLSON DIVISION
4414 WILSHIRE BLVD
MOUND MINN 55364
•
FOOTAGE TOTAL
L.F COST ASSESSMENT
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 1,270.00
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 2,949.17
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 2,912.50
50 $ 1,270.00 $ 3,047.60
TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED $ 44,848.51
0
STIPULATED AGREEMENT
]IS AGREEMENT, made this L day of September, 1989, between
Frei L 1son, a single person, hereinafter referred to as "Olson ", and the
City of W-und, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to
as "Mound ".
It is stipulated and agreed that Olson and Mound have negotiated a
settlement for the acquisition of certain easement rights over Olson's
property and for the levyi.ng of assessments to cover the construction of
Denbigh Road. Olson has agreed to convey a permanent and a temporary
easement to Mound, a copy of which is hereby attached and made Exhibit A on
the basis of the following terms approved by the City Council of Mound at its
meeting on August 22, 1989.
1. Mound shall pay Olson $4,129.01 for the permanent and
temporary easements that she is granting to Mound.*
2. Olson understands and agrees that Mound will levy special
assessments against her property in the amount of
$3,344.76. Olson hereby agrees to waive any objection or
right to appeal said assessment and acknowledges that the
• compensation paid by Mound and the agreed amount of the
assessments are a negotiated resolution of the rights of
the parties.
3. Mound agrees to replace a maple tree which will be removed
with the construction of Denbigh Road with a new maple tree
at least 6 inches in diameter and approximately 25 feet in
height.
4. Mound agrees to provide Olson and her attorney with a list
of any names of other residents who currently have private
rights over Olson's property for ingress and egress
purposes. Mound has gone further and has prepared a
document which is intended to resolve and waive private
rights against all the private parties, and said document
will be presented to Olson for her signature. If other
property owners abutting Denbigh Road all agree to execute
said document, Mound will place the document of record,
and this should waive most of the private rights. Mound
does not guarantee that this document will clear the
title, and if Olson wishes to pursue this further, she and
her attorney, Clarkson Lindley, will have the names of all
of the parties.
9
s
• Based upon the foregoing provisions, the parties hereby 9 9 P . p e y agree to
resolve their differences and Olson agrees to convey the easements to
Mound. Mound wishes to advise that they recommended a seven foot temporary
easement to slope the property, but Olson insisted that a four foot easement
was all she was willing to grant, since she felt this would save certain
vegetation on her property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands the
day and year first above written.
- �Zz - ;,.. &,��
Freda J. O1i on
Clarkson Lindle , Her AttorT- ,
CITY OF MOUND
BY _
Curtis A. Pearson, City At':; -, -f
•
•
CITY OF MOUND
1990 BUDGET REVENUE REPORT
JULY 1990 58.33%
JULY YTD PER CENT
BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVED
-- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - --
GENERAL FUND
Taxes
Intergovernmental
Business Licenses
Non - Business
Licenses and
Permits
Charges for
Services
Court Fines
Charges to Other
Departments
Other Revenue
TOTAL REVENUE
1262190
550328
552500
709690
780860
362934
385501
395359
9950
35
3187
6763
86700
8114
36895
49805
34800
730
5115
29685
95000
6005
35505
59495
20000
3679
13351
6649
49300
77
5138
44162
2338800
931902
1037192
1301608
43.77%
49.37%
32.03%
42.55%
14.70%
37.37%
66.76%
10.42%
44.35%
LIQUOR FUND
900000
86178
521586
378414
57.95%
WATER FUND
360000
32541
183115
176885
50.87%
SEWER FUND
590000
48112
334410
255590
56.68%
DOCKS FUND
62950
483
58053
4897
92.22%
CEMETERY FUND
2000
400
3400
-1400
170.00%
is
L
Zss,3
•
CITY OF MOUND
1990 BUDGET REPORT
EXPENDITURES
JULY 1990 58.33%
zsN
JULY
YTD
PER CENT
BUDGET
EXPENSE
EXPENSE
VARIANCE
EXPENDED
GENERAL FUND
- - - - --
- - - - --
- - - - --
- - - - --
Council
63890
5719
40586
23304
63.521
Cable TV
10150
0
9024
1126
88.91%
City Manager /Clerk
166310
11285
101855
64455
61.24$
Elections
11400
130
1784
9616
15.65%
Assessing
43320
48
408
42912
0.94%
Finance
162030
12274
93735
68295
57.85%
Computer
22150
1652
16590
5560
74.90%
Legal
80900
4717
33013
47887
40.81%
Police
717850
67202
457490
260360
63.73%
Civil Defense
2750
165
520
2230
18.91%
145000
7856
71153
7384
49.07%
• Planning/inspections
Recycling
60670
16490
48904
11766
80.61%
Streets
382890
31937
224415
158475
58.61%
Shop & Sto ;
61440
4944
37838
23602
61.59%
City Prope.c:y
84200
3574
45548
38652
54.10%
Parks
148560
16659
72332
76228
48.69%
Summer Recreation
11310
8435
8435
2875
74.58%
Contingencies
30000
0
4156
25844
13.85%
Transfers
122270
10048
70336
51934
57.53%
GENERAL FUND TOTAL
2327090
203135
1338122
988968
57.50%
Area Fire
Service Fund
214290
19102
135584
78706
63.27%
Liquor Fund
163450
12082
95239
68211
58.27%
Water Fund
347930
28505
233276
114654
67.05%
Sewer Fund
771560
62017
373042
398518
48.35%
Cemetery Fund
3680
0
1569
2111
42.64%
Docks Fund
62950
666
57465
5485
91.29%
zsN
Nftlonfl 1301 Pen
neOvarwa Avenue NW pMp
1"+e Washington, DC.
of 20004 Aeware
Ooe NOwr
MOO (202) 026.3000 mom . Fa Ywrr, tea.
Fax (202) 626.3043 Fro V= Aewdorr
Mayor New Dnwr la...
Sacord vice Aeeft
GandeE rood
Corrnerrw. OArrdo FWa.
ar c AUG 1 s o .� AM Aware
August 10, 1990 cPF fd.MWO
EwLsw Omwar
Dowd J ow
To: Mayors and Managers of Direct Member Cities
Executive Directors of State Municip Leagues
From: Donald J. Borut, Executive Director �f /I ((,W ill.�
Subject: Proposed Amendments to Natio Munici Al Polic y and
Separate Resolutions, Annual Congress of Cities,
December 1 -5, 1990, Houston, Texas
DUE: Friday, October 12, 1990
NLC's direct member cities and state municipal leagues are invited
to submit policy proposals and resolutions for consideration at the
NLC's Congress of Cities in Houston, Texas, December 1 -5, 1990.
Proceedures for submitting such proposals are described below.
DEADLINE FOR suBMISSION
All advance proposals to amend the NLC National Munin Policy
and advance separate resolutions must be submitted to:
Chairman, Resolutions Committee
National League of Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004
To assure sponsors full rights to the NLC policy process, and to
allow for distribution of advance proposals to NLC's membership,
proposals must be received in NLC's office by the end of business
on Friday, October 12, 1990.
o 758s
Aee F-M&MU flee be'dWF, Mayor us M901" CaMUrna • Prd L. Zhu am. Maya Sconand Nea Noon �w,*nd • W41Ma M. IWAp Newpo M. Maya MrAOnopoMO 00 a • JeOre f•.
QefeR Met[ n Nowt V r" . � mod/► Coundwomen r urga Den% Cdaedo . JWM P Fk, Mayo. S+wrw
�e ea • des " W Jwn flebr. Pro to m- coma tar • Craha L-4 a '% C-"o* wwon *A'V" Goopo . K- We (L &M he, a � me to
Cm*ro d MuMopeMee . f Lteh C - Cdoraeo . ely/an T. Cuserw. Do" Mora mwch a = orvwxnn . Jew :aw. Eactiww Dre ma G Co .#" Ccyr aoecie
Cwe/e► "aurdor r bonopoee WKWM • JOSSO f. D@ddM. MF,, . ypyorn P*" - arw • grol /.
� i Map SM LAW G!y UW+ . Jr. fJO1M�. C omen New York. Now YOM • NesYw r is ^. yraeemOn r i` »r A Ch&, a A'W' •• J" Qeneee. Jt, E�pDN
Pbv* wm LA*gL* d (ier • mKt%W Mwan" LAkWA . r. . . ' 're, SW ie
. JN Mrooe, twee • J -!:, rYOr, Ge1.+d me to,
3aft a 0 0 0 011-90h 0 011-90h f. bew. Mspa MMArwewra W oew fhrp Jeewe, Mayw. N~ Now ��•, . ,..• r y
, Am K-& . Courxy - MernGw Mrw
OrOe4 Help DrerwOOd, Meean . POW Kte f. E wnlq Dredp uOgr d ow M,mnpWFAG . (ie 0 I by�ser r , l ormeeeoar. Py cow Oregon 4 DC • P rreMe A.
OuuoM: W-0" r lugs • Need L U 10011L M%o wren Ronde • q�ne A. Yspr. E roAM dupe OeMOnonr M ks.apr Legg- • "a r Ofeae, Mery to am n Op" Os
Dow Abrrerrlor . Lr rAN Rhode Mred • e
n1e�Ma ErOOM Onao Norm Coova Wg» d %W I . • S A. fterrre/. O &XQIA Frme Nor Meow • furs f WMot
Moan cNowd • Ttreewo 4 *W. Maya icao�rM Mow 0■wJ CeMane eUeleerr G terr■eeer/, Era* Dewier up,,. (' CairA OM90, CAw • "G upoleow e►ua aoev
Page Two
• FORM OF SUBMISSION
National Munici al Policy for 1990, copies of which have been
previously furnished to all member cities and state leagues, is
the comprehensive policy statement of the National League of
Cities. It is subject to amendment at each annual business
meeting nf NLC. We Would appreciate your submitting changes to the
1990 National Mun icipal Policy using the format suggested on the
attached Insert.
Separate resolutions are short -term expressions of the membership
of the National League of Cities, typically endorsing or opposing
specific Congressional bills or current Presidential positions.
They do not become part of the continuing National Municipal Policy
document but are transmitted to appropriate federal officials
immediately following the annual meeting. Such resolutions auto-
matically die at the end of the calendar year following the
Congress of Cities at which they were passed. A suggested format
for resolutions appears on the reverse side of the attached insert.
Each Policy amendment or resolution should be accompanied by a one -
page explanation which describes the nature of the problem or
concern from the municipal perspective and discusses the proposed
action which should be taken to address the problem. The one -page
explanation will be distributed along with the proposed amendments
• or resolutions to all Policy Committee members. A suggested format
is enclosed.
PROCEDURES FOR CONSIDERATION OF ADVANCE SUBMISSIONS
All proposals received in NLC's offices before the end of business
on Friday, October 12, 1990, will be assigned to a policy committee
for consideration when the committees meet on Sunday, December 2, in
Houston. Members submitting proposals will be notified of the
committee to which their proposal is referred and the time and
place of the committee meeting. Sponsors of proposals or their
representatives Will be expected to appear before the full committee
to present and discuss their proposal.
If the policy committee accepts the proposal, it will be submitted
to the Resolutions Committee by the policy committee chairperson as
part of the committee report.
If the policy committee rejects the proposal, the fact that the
proposal was received by Friday, October 12, and was distributed to
members in advance permits the sponsor to appeal the policy
committee action to the resolutions Committee during their meeting
on Monday, December 3.
•
C ) 5 8'`
(Sample Resolution) w
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
OCEAN DIAPOSAL OF NUCLEAR WASTES
NMMS, the United Stav3s Nny has n proposal posal to dispose of up to 100 defueled
deocseissicned nuclear submarines during the next ewes decades; and
WHEREAS, one of the options is for ocean disposal of these s &urine; and
USURMS, the oceans are a food source for much of the world's popnlaticn, and
contominaticn of the food chain aould bave far reaching ihhplicatiansj
NCX, , BE " Rr MM the Nhti,onal Iaay * of Citisr should s� ;�poct r
19'72 ben ok � xwn dumping of nh 1ear wastes until it c m =M&
°
strated than .. , safety and of ooaen dismad Otters.
harm to huoe n health and thm er v . ant than other pric iical al �... "
tive methods of disposal. "i.
:. . {.. "
T?PINO iNaTRorrlmra • r
Since we try to distribute your
submission to BCC's membership exactly
as you submit it to us, it would help
if you could follow these guidelines.
• HaVins -- on inch an all sides.
• Ocutier 12 typing element.
• alder the words Wavaposed Resolution ",
type a one -line title.
• Make sure to type in the resolution's
sponsor (individual, city or state
municipal league) .
NOTES: You may submit a 5 inc
floppy disc, marked with the name of
the software (e.g. "Worcperfect ") and
a hard typed coy.
• You may also submit your resolution a
on : 1 meant Omer 'vocal EMIU age to
N C M attn: Althea Ray
=4 TIT
Date Received: (IF VE BIAM9
aft
e
•
Referred to: BIW
C>5r
TYPIn OOIDELINU
PROPOSED POLICY !
LJ
•
Indicate Chapter Haading:
Indicat r
Section Heading:
Indicate Sub - heading:
(Where applicable,
indicate sub- siction
number (s) or @pall
letter(@).)
Indicate tee proposed
for changed. 1pote: any
new lamgoago to underlined
a" language be removed,
Is osossed -ouE:
(suggested Format)
COMMUNITY i ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
3.01 National Urban Policy
B. Federal Policy Impact on Cities
There'is a critical need to shape the
multitude of (federat) national policies
impacting on cities into a comprehensive,
integrated whole.
Submitted by: (MUST BE COMPLETED)
Date Received:
Referred to:
(LEAVE BLANK)
(LEAVE BLANK)
.)588
iota Congress of Cities
Eoustoup teas
EZPLRIMTION OF PROPOSED POLICY
A1[EliDI[E)1T OR RESOLUTION
Sutmittsd by: Date:
(City or state c League)
Name:
Title:
•�s * *•��e��e• PLEASE TYPE SINGLE SPACE ONE SIDE ONLY •assls��se��sto *•s�•
.7
CIN
C � S Oq
Page Three
• PROCEDURE
FOR CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS NOT SUBMITTED RY PAIOAZ
OCTOBER 12th.
A member of a policy committee may offer amendments to National
Municipal Policy within that committee's jurisdiction or re ated
separate resolutions during the Pc•licy Committee meeting on Sunday,
December 2.
Policy Committees are composed of from three to seven members from
each state nominated by the state municipal league. Member cities
and state leagues are urged to work with their state committee
delegation if they are unable to submit their proposal prior to the
Friday, October 12, deadline.
The Resolutions Committee can consider only Policy Committee reports,
those proposals received in NLC's offices from member cities and
state municipal leagues by Friday, October 12, and recommendations of
individual Resolutions Committee members.
ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING
Any certified voting delegate of a member city or state league may
offer a National Municipal Policy amendment or a separate resolution
for consideration at the Annual Business Meeting on Wednesday,
December 5, 1990. However, any proposals not submitted to the voting
delegates by the Resolutions Committee or the Board of Directors must
be accompanied by a petition containing the signatures of ten voting
delegates, presented to the presiding officer of the Annual Business
Meeting no later than 1/2 hour prior to the meetisq's Call to Order.
To be accepted for floor consideration at the Annual Business
Meeting, such a petition must receive a majority vote of all
certified voting delegates present and voting.
All proposals to amend National Munici Polic and all separate
resolutions, however subm tted, require a 2/3 vote of delegates
present and voting for passage.
GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PROPOSALS
NLC's Board of Directors has adopted the following guidelines for
policy proposals to be considered for adoption at the Congress of
Cities:
•
asqb
Page Four
1. Whether acted upon as amendments to National Municipal Poles
or separate resolutions, policy proposals
a. shall - -in their subject matter -- concern shared policy
and program needs, issues or problems of the nation's
municipal governments;
b. shall be concerned with fe deral government policy and,
therefore, be addressed to federal government policy -
makers;
c. shall neither contradict nor duplicate existing NLC
policy statements, except where they are intended to
amend or repeal such policy;
d. shall not compromise the independence or integrity of
individual member cities to pursue any course of action
adopted by appropriate municipal policy- making bodies;
and
•
e. shall not compromise the budget - ma: „ program
determining or priority setting role of the NLC Board.
2. As basic, continuing organizational policy positions, proposed O
amendments to National Municipal Folicy should specify city
positions on federal roles and responsibilities, policy goals,
purpo3ea, principles and /or program characteristics within the
broad subject areas covered by existing policy or authorized by
Board action. They should not refer to proposed Congressional
legislation by title, sponsor's name or bill number.
3. Non - continuing separate resolutions should be restricted to
those action- specific items of short -term utility addressed to
the Congress or the P.esident. in separate resolutions,
specific reference to proposed legislation by title, sponsor'a
name or bill number is appropriate.
4. Separate resolutions shall be considered only when they do not
conflict with or contradict existing National Municipal Policy
Further information regarding the NLC policy process may be secured
prior to the Congress of Cities from:
William E. Davis, Director
Office of Policy Analysis and Development
National LeAgue of Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20G04
(202) 626 -3030
Z�l
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
July 23. 1990
Cosarehensly
City Planner, Mark Koegler, gave a brief overview of what a com-
prehensive plan is, and reasons why Mound should maintain a plan.
Koegler then briefly reviewed the eight major sections of the
plan, those being: physical Inventory, socio- economic, goals and
policies, land use, housing, transportation, recreation and im-
plementation.
Koegler stated that this public hearing is for a major comprehen-
sive plan amendment; the City has already adopted a plan, It is
gust being updated. Koegler added that after the joint meeting
regarding the Downtown Study on August 7th. changes may yet be
made to the land use section, however these changes will be
covered at the public hearing held by the City Council.
Vice Choir Michael opened the public hearing.
Tom Casey referred to a four -page letter he wrote to the Commls-
sion which was handed out prior to the meeting. Casey emphasized
the Importance of environmental protection and natural and open
space. Casey a l s o commenter; on Pelican Point being retained as
an open park, the need to encourage bicycling, and the shortage
of natural upland areas.
Vice Chair Michael ci4sed the public hearing.
The Commission discussed the use of nature conservation areas
being dumping grounds verses green space.
The commission decided to review Casey's comments in the order
presented:
1. The Commission determined that this suggestion to adopt lo-
cal ordinances pertaining to the listed issues does not
belong in the comprehensive plan.
2. The Commission agreed to have staff add phraseology to pane
10, paragraph 9, implying that a formal policy needs to be
adopted to require that all City land propo - ed to be sold is
reviewed by the Park and Open Space Commission ane the Plan-
ning Commission for feasibility as a park or nature conser-
vation area.
•
6 09472
3.
The Commission determined that the comprehensive plan. on
page 9 Item 2, already covers the encouragement of preser-
vation of public parcels, and the zoning code already covers
private parcels.
4.
The Commission agreed that pages I1 -12 In the transportation
section should specifically encourage bicycles as part of
Its transportation policy.
5.
The Commission agreed that page 12, Item 6 in the goals and
policies section should specifically include the adoption of
nature conservation areas as a goal.
6.
The ma of the Planning Commission did not agree that
the comprehensive plan should include the option of Pelican
Point being perk or a nature conservation area.
7.
Relating to Lost Lake development, Casey is "correct to as-
sume that the language" on page 42, paragraph 3. Includes
the option of preserving Lost Lake as a P u b l i c park or Na-
ture Conservation Area. The Commission confirmed that
"development" means AIM type of development, including
parks. etc.
S.
The Commission determined that the Intent of the plan !�houtd
remain "as Is" relating to the westedge tract.
9.
This issue has already been well address in discussions
relating to the proposed Housing Maintenance Code.
10.
The Commission agreed that the City should provide incen-
tives to encourage bicycling or walking as alternative means
of transportation.
II.
No discussion.
12.
The Commission agreed that this item should be reviewed by
the Park Commission. Casey confirmed that the Park Commis-
sion has already rejected this language.
13.
Does "Nature Conservation Area" need to be legally defined?
The Commission agreed that the Park Commission may add a
definition within the context of the plan.
14.
No discussion.
15.
No discussion.
16.
This is already covered on page 77. paragraph 1.
17.
No discussion.
18. The Planning Commission agreed to leave page 86, paragraph 5
"as Is."
19. No discus�lon.
20. The Commission agreed to amend the plan as suggested: Page
128. paragraph 4 "Ali decisions pertaining to the develop-
ment of parks and open sp ace with the City of Mound are
reviewed by the Parks and Open Space Commission."
A copy of Mr. Casey's letter Is attached as "Exhibit A" to these
minutes. 0
NOTION made by welland, seconded by Thal to recommend
approval of the Comprehensive Plan as amended, Motion
Z � carried unanimously.
PsalaiT e RECEIVED ,I UL 2 3 1990
• July 23, 1990
Planning Commission
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Mound Comprehensive Plan Update
Dear Planning Commission,
Thank you for this opportunity to comment on Mound's
Comprehensive Plan Update. As a member of the City of Mound
Park and Open Space Commission, I have reviewed the Park and
Recreation Section of the plan, but this is my first
opportunity to review the proposed plan in its entirety.
The plan repeatedly states that Mound is "fully developed,"
that urban uses occupy 90% of the total land area. (see page
21.) Because of this, it is important from a Park and Open
Space point of view that the entire plan be reviewed to
determine how the plan will affect our last remaining open
space, or what I like to call "green space."
Briefly, green space is important for three reasons:
1. Economic - Most people like to live in areas which
are close to green spaces. Property values generally
reflect this idea, except near high -use parks where
noise and trash may be a problem;
2. Aesthetic - People think green space is beautiful and
desire to live close to forests and wetlands. They
don't like to see green spaces lost to development;
and
3. Environmental - Preservation of green space is
important to minimize the "Green House Effect,"
provide habitat for diminishing numbers of plants and
animals, provide healthy recreational opportunities,
etc.
Therefore, it is from this perspective that I will comment on
the plan, with references to page and paragraph numbers.
1. Pace 9 Policy No. 3 - The sentence states only that
Mound should " ... support state and federal programs
for the protection of the environment. The
City of Mound should also be a leader and innovator
by designing its own programs to protect the
environment without waiting for cues from the state
and federal government. Examples of this include
adoption of the following local ordinances:
2 I/
a. Regulation of the use of fertilizers, •
pesticides, and herbicides;
b. Protection of Trees - see the City of vden
Prairie ordinance for an example;
C. Amend the Mound City Code to allow the
Propagation of native plants over 12" high.
(The present ordinance prohibits this and
classifies all plants over 12" high as
weeds.);
d. Create a disposal mechanism for milfoil,
yard wastes, and plants required to be cut
by city dock permit holders; and
e. Initiate a Private Registry Program for land
owners who volunteer to preserve their land.
(The Nature Conservancy is a good source for
advice about how to set up this program.)
2. Page 10 paragraph 9 - A formal policy needs to ne
adopted to require that all City land proposed to be
sold is reviewed by the Park and Open Space
Commission for feasibility as a park or Nature
Conservation Area.
3. Page 10 - Another paragraph should be added in the
Land policy section to state that the City of
Mound should encourage preservation of public and
private parcels ;:;s green space.
4. Pages 11 -12 - The Transportation Section should
specifically encourage bicycles as part of its is
transportation poll -y.
5. Page 12 -13 - The Recreation Section should
specifically include the adoption of Nature
Conservation Areas as a goal.
6. Page 40 - Pelican Point is a beautiful 16 acre parcel
with shoreland and old- growth white pine, a tree of
relative scarcity in the Lake Minnetonka area. The
plan should include the option of this parcel being a
park or Nature Conservation Area. (On August 9,
1990, the Park and Open Space Commission will be
looking at this parcel for feasibility as a Nature
Conservation Area.)
7. P age 42, p aragraph 3 - Am I correct to assume that
the languc.-3e, "It is in the best intere� of the City
to encoura. . . ?dient development of this parcel
includes t ".e option of preserving Lost Lake as a
public park or Nature Conservation Area?
8. Page 4 la paragraph - The language, the
Westedge tract will eventually be developed," should
specifically include the option of development as a
park or Nature Conservation Area.
•
2
•
9.
Page 54, paragraph 2 - The proposed Housing
Maintenance Code should include a provision granting
a tenant the right to repair the property and deduct
the repair bill from the rent if the landlord fails
to repair the property within a reasonable period of
time.
10.
Page 70 paragraph 2 - The City of Mound should
provide incentives to encourage bicycling or walking
as alternative means of transportation.
Possibilities could include: marked bike routes on
city street:., the installation of more bike racks on
city property, a deliberate policy to discourage or
reduce car parking spaces on city property, official
recognition and nominal rewards for citizens who use
alternative means of transportation, a City Bike -T.-
Work Week, and a policy discouraging citizens from
driving cars to city meetings.
11.
Page 71_, paragraph 3 - Increased attention should be
directed to Pelican Point, Lost Lake, and the
Westedge area for inclusion as a park or Nature
Conservation Area.
12.
Page 71,_ paragraph 4 - Amend the first sentence to
read, "The goal of this plan is to provide
recreati- opportunities to meet the needs of all
•
Mound re nts and to preserve the 1Q ant and animal
life t s z means as will leave them unimpaired
the e njoyment of present and fu ture Generations.'*
This language adds the goal of land stewardship to
our Comprehensive Plan.
13.
Page 77 paragraph 1 - Permanent Preserve lands are,
indeed, mostly wetlands that are already protected by
State law and city ordinance. Little upland property
is designated as a permanent preserve. The City of
Mound designated a small upland parcel on Drummond
Road as Nature Conservation Area. This designation
needs to be legally defined by city ordinance to
assure permanent protection. Other natural areas
need to be systematically reviewed to determine
feasibility as a Nature Conservation Area.
14.
Page 80 paragra 2 - The plan identifies a shortage
of community parks by approximately 30 acres.
Pelican Point (16 acres), Lost Lake, and the Westedge
parcels should be thoroughly examined as properties
to alleviate this shortage.
15.
Page 83 - Please note that natural park -like arEF;-
are the number one citizen priority for recreation
facilities. These priorities should be reflected in
the Comprehensive Plan.
s
Z 5 ,f &
Thank you for kind attention to these remarks. If you have
any further questions in this regard, please call me at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
Tom Casey
2854 Cambridge Lane
Mound, MN
472 -1099
0
4
259-7
•
16.
Pace 83,- paragraph 3 - Contrary to this paragraph,
the City of Mound does have a deficiency in natural
upland areas. These areas should be permanently
preserved for low impact recreation such as hiking
and nature study.
17.
Pace 8� paragraph 8 - A form mechanism should be
in place to require the Parks and Open Space
Commission to review tax forfeited land and other
city land up for sale for feasibility as a park or
Nature Conservation Area.
18.
Pace 86_, paragraph 5 - This paragraph implies that
commercial development will occur on Lost Lake
unless soil conditions preclude development. The
establishment of a park on the entire parcel should
not be conditioned upon soil conditions. There may
be other reasons why a park should be established
apart from the question of suitable soil for
commercial development.
19.
Pace 21 - Additional parking is proposed for Mound
Bay Park. This was never approved by the Park and
Open Space Commission. In my opinion, preservation
of park green space is more important than
sacrificing this space for additional parking.
20.
Pace 128, paragraph 4 - This sentence should be
•
amended to read, "All decisions pertaining to the
development of parks and open :;p within the City
of Mound are reviewed by the Parks and Open Space
Commission."
Thank you for kind attention to these remarks. If you have
any further questions in this regard, please call me at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
Tom Casey
2854 Cambridge Lane
Mound, MN
472 -1099
0
4
259-7
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
• MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 1990
Those present were: Chair Bill Meyer, Vice Chair Geoff Michael,
Commission. ( en Smith, Jerry Clapsaddle, Bill Thal, Frank
Weiland anc :; Mueller, Council Representative Liz Jensen,
City Manager td Shukle, City Planner Mark Koegler, Building Offi-
cial Jon Sutherland, and Secretary Peggy James. Absent and ex-
cused was: Commissioner Bill Voss.
The following citizens were also present: Chester Stuteville,
Dennis 8 Kelly Hildebrandt, Melvin 3 Sharon Zuckman, Gary
Phleger, John & Cheryl Dale, Howard Barrett, Mike Perrine, and
Gerald Smith.
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
MINUTES:
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by '',apsaddle, to approve
the Planning Commission Minutes of July 23, 1990 as sub-
mitted. Motion carried unanimously.
BOARD OF APPEALS:
• a. Case No. 90 -925: Chester Stuteville, 4878 Edgewater Drive,
Lot 14, Subd. of Lots 1 & 32 Skara b Lindguists Ravenswood
PID #13- 117 -24 41 0043. VARIANCE: side Yard setback.
Building Official, Jon Sutherland reviewed the applicarits request
to construct a garage 4.8 feet from the side property line. The
garage is to be 24' x 20'. The existing dwelling structure is
setback 4.8 feet from the side property line. Staff recommended
approval of the 1.2 foot side yard setback variance to the
north /side property line as F;own on the survey.
Thal questioned if the garage could not be moved to the south to
conform to the required 6 foot side yard setback. The applicant,
Chester Stuteville, explained his request, and confirmed that he
wants the garage to be in -line with the present structure 3t the
north side. Since the house is only 18.6 feet wide, and the
proposed garage is 20 feet wide, the garage will protrude 1.5'
from the house to the south. Turn- around area and the tree in
the yard were discussed.
Mueller commented that the would like to see the amount of hard-
cover reduced, or kept to a minimum.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Weiland, to recon-
mend approval of the 1.2 foot side yard setback variance
to construction a 24' x 20' attached accessory building.
Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be reviewed by the City Council on August 28,
1990.
259' ?
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 2
b. Case No. 90 -926: Melvin Zuckman 5012 Tuxedo Blvd. , RLS
1150, Tract A, PIO 24- 1 17 -24 -43 0034. MINOR SUBDIVISION
AND VARIANCE.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, breifly reviewed the history of this
request. In 1989 the City filed a complaint in District Court
seeking removal of the fire damaged structure and removal of a
second illegal dwelling unit located near Tuxedo Blvd. Another
portion of the complaint was based on information received in
1989 that the structure abuttlig Tuxedo Blvd. had been converted
to a two - family residence without rezoning approval or issuance
of any building permits. If this issue cannot be settled as part
of the current subdivision /variance request, the City will cer-
tify the case as being ready for trial and will proceed with
litigation.
•
Koegler then reviewed the current request for a minor subdivision
and three variances: 1) to construct a house on property which
does not abut a dedicated public street, 2) a 15.5 foot front
yard setback variance for the house on Parcel 8, and 3) a 5.5
foot side yard setback variance also for the house on Parcel B.
The proposed Parcel A has a lot area of 11,600 square feet and •
Parcel B has a total area of 10,015 square feet.
The applicant is proposing to reconstruct the driveway with an
average slope of 20% along the eastern property line which is in-
consistent with City provisions. The driveway is proposed to be
10 feet wide on Parcel A. however, all access drives are required
to be 12 feet wide. A tuckunder garage is proposed on the north
side of the building which is both unorthodox and unacceptable.
The City Planner commented that both himself and the City Attor-
ney feel that the proposed subdivision is a reasonable way to
resolve this issue since it finally accomplishes the City of
Mound's major objective which is to remove the fire damaged
structure.
Staff recommended approval of the minor suvbidivsion establishing
parcels A and B as per the survey dated 8 -6 -90 prepared by Coffin
8 Grondberg, Inc. incluAing the following variances: a lot fron-
tage variance for Parcel A, recognition of a 15.5 foot front yard
setback variance for the structure on Parcel B, and recognition
of a 5.5 foot sine yard setback variance for the structure on
Parcel B. This approval 1s subject to the full compliance by the
applicant with the conditions listed on the attached EXHIBIT A.
Mr. Zuckman's attorney, Gary Phleger, informed the Commission •
that the tuckunder garage is no longer being proposed. He ex-
plained that the applicant does not intend to construct a garage
however, are aware that a garage site must be indicated. The
plan to oroposE an alternative garage site.
Zsfq
Planning Commis�iOn Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 3
Weiland expressed a concern with the access drive /easement and
the safety for emergency vehicles. Koegler confirmed that the
closest point from the proposed house to the Ordinary High Water
Is 54 feet.
Mr. Phleger spoke on Zuckman's behalf In responding the the City
Planner's recommendation. in relation to Condition #29 Phleger
stated that the Zuckman's want to use some material from the ex-
isting building, such as plumbing fixtures, and therefore, would
prefer to leave the existing structure standing during construc-
tion of the new. The Planner stated that due to the City
Attorney's opinion, Condition #2 should stay as written.
Phleger asked the Commission to consider allowing the "two -
family" use for the structure on Parcel B. He explained that
this structure was previously used for a Dentist office with an
apartment above. The City Planner recommended that no change be
made.
Cheryl Dale of 5024 Tuxedo Blvd. has lived next door to the
. Zuckman's since they purchased the property. Mr! Dale exten-
sively review the history of the subject property. She stated
that both her and her husband, John Dale, are opposed to the sub -
division, and believe the structure on rroposed Parcel A should
be removed.
Mr. Mel Zuckman breifly reviewed the history of his case. He
stated that he wants to do the right thing.
Mr. Mike Perrine of 5006 Tuxedo Blvd., a neighbor to Mr.
Zuckman's property, is opposed to the subdivision request.
Mr. Perrine and Mrs. Dale expressed a concern regarding the
notifications to the adjoining neighbors, notices were not
received until the day of the meeting. They would like property
owners within 350 feet notified for the City Council meeting.
Mr. Howard Barrett of 5000 Tuxedo Blvd. commented that he is in
favor of the subdivision.
The Commission expressed concern about how they can enforce
single family occupancy in the house on proposed parcel B.
Sharon Zuckman confirmed that there is a single pet-on living
upstairs, and one couple living downstairs.
Meyer commented cn the configuration of the proposed subdivision
line and the issue of setting a precedent for dividing lakeshore
lots and allowing access via easement (bottle neck lot:,).
Phleger argued that this case is different since there are exist-
ing structures on the parcel. It was determined tl•. -:c precidence
Is history.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 4 is
ML',iV made by Mueller, seconded by Smith to recommend
denial of the City Planner's recommendation for the fol-
lowing reasons: l) Parcel A does not abut a dedicated
public way, 2) the slope and topography of the proposed
driveway is quest +onable, 3) a future garage site has
not been determined, 4) the proposed driveway on Parcel
A is too narrow for emergency vehicles, and 5) due to
the shape,and topography of the property, the best "use"
would be as one parcel. Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be reviewed by the City Council on August 28,
1990.
C. Case No. 90 -927: Dennis Hildebrandt, 5229 Waterbury Road,
Whipple, Lots 6, 7, 9 8, Block 19, PID #25- 117 -24 -21 0138
VARIANCE: rear yard setback.
Building Official, .nor. Sutherland, reviewed the applicant's
request for a 8.5 foot rear yard setback variance. The applicant
proposes to construct a garage addition consisting of 370 square
feet onto the existing 484 square foot garage, therefore. creat-
ing an accessory structure of 854 square feet. Zoning Ordinance
Section 23.407(3) states, in residential districts, no acessory
bulldirj shall exceed 840 square feet of floor area except by
cora';;onal use permit.
Staff recommended approval of the variance of 8.5 feet to the
required rear property line setback of 15 feet contingent upon
the applicant submitting plans in conformance with the 840 square
feet as required by Ordinance Section 23.407(3).
The applicant, Dennis Hildebrandt, stated that he feels the
square footage should be determined by the interior useable
space. Both the Building Official and City Planner agreed that
the square footage is measured from the footprint.
Hildebrandt stated that he wishes to use the additional garage
space for storage of his recreational vehicles, including a boat
and snowmobiles.
Thal was oncerned about a hardship. He concluded that if the
applicant was requesting to build within 10 feet of the rear
property ine it would be easier to accept (if the rear was con -
side , side yard, the setback requirement would be 10 feet).
Jense, greed, and commented that he has room to expand into the
side yard. Jen ?n also commented on allowing variances for a
minimum size structure, and the proposed structure is not mini-
mum. 0
2(00 i
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 5
MOTION made by Clapsaddie, seconded by Meyer, to recom-
mend approval of staff recommendation.
The applicant confirmed that he has an alternative plan which
will conform to the 840 square feet by eliminating a 3' x 4'
square.
Jensen questioned why a variance situation should be created on
an existing conforming structure when there are other alterna-
tives. Meyer commented on the fact that the applicant want to
enclose his recreational vehicles, and the variances does not ap-
pear to infringe on anyone or anything.
MOTION FAILED 3 to 5 (those in favor were: Clap le,
Meyer, and Mueller; those opposed were: Weiland, Thal,
Jensen, Smith and Michael).
Thal, Jensen, Weiland, and Smith commented that he would approve
a garage to be built 10 feet from the rear yard, which is what
the side yard setback would be.
• This case will be reviewed by the City Council on August 28,
1990.
Meyer commented on the fact that our ordinance does not allow for
a standard three car garage, and feels the ordinance should be
reviewed in the future. It was determined this would be dis-
cussed later in the meeting.
d. Case No. 90 -930: Gerald Smith, SOS Printing, 2361 Wilshire
Blvd., Shirley hills Unit F. Lots 29 - 36, Block 3, PID #13-
117-24-34 0051 - 0058. VARIANCE: sign.
The City Planner explained that the applicant is seeking a sign
variance for two signs, the largest one being 32 square feet, and
the other being 24 square feet. The signs will be placed on the
north wall of the building facing the parking lot for use by the
lower level tenant's employees and customers. The two existing
signs on the premises, a fabric canopy and a low freestanding
sign (approx. 4'x4') along the front of the building are In con-
formance with the ordinance.
Staff recommended approval fo the 24 square foot sign identifying
the lower level tenant providing that the sign is constructed of
wood or a similar durable rr.�terial and is affixed to the building
where the former Westonka School of Dance sign was located. The
0 sign shall contain only the name of the applicable tenant(s).
2(00_
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 6 is
Staff further recommended denial of the variance for the 2' x 16'
"Printing" sign that is proposed for the upper portion of the
north wall of the building because it is inconsistent with the
Intent of the sign ordinance. The sign ordinance presently al-
lows SOS Printing to install a larger, taller free - standing sign
along the Wilshire Blvd. frontage. Such a sign would enhance the
visibility of the business.
The Commission discussed visibility of the "Printing" sign to
Shoreline Drive. They also compared the proposed signage to sur-
rounding signage. Applicant, Gerry Smith, commented that these
new signs are ,Just a part of a plan to beautify the entire ex-
terior of the building.
The Commission compared t' e impact of the w a l l s i g n compared to
the type of free standing sign which is allowed by the ordinance.
It was agreed that if the wall signs could be allowed in lieu of
a taller and larger free standing sign, this would be acceptable.
They discussed the possibility of limiting the size of the exist -
ing signage.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recom- •
mend the City Council approve a variance to allow both
wall: signs to be errected upon the condition that the
existlrg free standing sign does not increase in size.
Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be heard by the City Council on August 28, 1990.
e. Case No. 90 -929: John Grossoehme, 5001 Woodridge Road,
Shirley Hills Unit A. Lots 10 & 11, Block 4, PID #13- 117 -24
44 0047. VARIANCE: side yard setback.
Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the applicant's
request for a 3 foot side yard variance to allow construction of
a 3.5' x 8' landing with a stairway. The landing Is to serve as
sn exit for a new three season porch addition. Proper exiting is
a factor, it is the applicant's desire to add an additional exit
rather than enlarge existing exits to meet the minimum 3'0" x
6'8" as required by the Uniform Building Code. Due to the shape
of the lot, and the location of the house, it appears this is the
only acceptable location for the exit door.
Staff recommended approval of the 3 foot side yard setback
variance to allow construction of a 3.5' x 8' landing and stair-
way providing exiting and access to the rear yard.
The applicant was not present. The Commission discussed the fact
that the house currently conforms to all setback and lot area
requirements, and options are avaiible for an exit. The existing
exit could be enlarged, or an exit can be placed at the east side
of the structure.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
. Page 7
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Thal to table the
variance request to allow the owner time to reconsider
his plan. Motion carried 6 to 2 (those In favor were
Clapsaddle, Mueller. Thal, Meyer, .Jensen and Mlchaelt
those opposed were Weiland and Smith).
Welland and Smith opposed because they would have preferred to
make a definite decision on the request.
LMCD Multiple Dock Application for Harrison Harbor Twin Home As-
sociation.
The Commission had no opposition on this request.
DNR Applic tion #91 -6003: Dan Burnes, 2130 Noble Lane
The Commission had not comments on this application.
Meetina dates to be held at school during construction
City Manager, Ed Shukle, explained to the Commission that the
• Planning Commission meetings of August 27, September 10, Septem-
ber 24, October 8, and October 22 will be held at the school at
5600 Lynwood Blvd. on these dates due to City Hall construction.
A map will be enclosed with the packets showing the exact loca-
tion of the meeting room.
City Council Representative's Repo
Liz Jensen reviewed the City Council minutes of July 24, 1990.
Discussion: Park Commission
MOTION wade by Meyer, seccnded by Mueller to commend the
Park Commission on their hard work and Accomplishments
on improving the parks throughout the last year. Motion
carried unanimously.
Public Works Storage Materials
Mueller commented on the need for a non permiable blanket and /or
some type of surface under the salt piles being stored at the Is-
land Park Garage.
Maximum Size for Accessory S tructures.
• Meyer commented on the need to revise our ordinance on the sub-
ject of garage sizes. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, com-
mented that he will contact other cities to compare their
requirements for accessory structures.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 13, 1990
Page 8
•
MOTION made by WeIIand, seconded by Thal to OdJourn the
meeting at 10:59 P.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Cha ?r, Bill Mever
Attest:
As
E/
E
�00
®lair 'e'
(p. 1 of 2)
tuckman Planning Report
AugNst 8, 19pQ
Page Four
1. Prior to this issue being reviewed by the City Council,
the applicant shall file a variance application for the
above identified variances and submit the appropriate
application fee.
2. No building permit for the new structure on Parcel A
shad be issued until the applicant has obtained a
demolition permit for the boat house /summz r cottage and
removed a'.1 portions of the old structure except as
modified herein. Further, the applicant shall obtain any
required building permits and inspections to convert the
Vlegal two- family residence on Parcel B to a single -
family structure. Such conversion shall occur prior to
the City Clerk's release of the resolution approving the
minor subdivision for recording with Hennepin County.
3. The proposed retaining wall utilizing two foundation
walls from the boat house /summer cottage shall be
permitted if it complies with building code requirements.
If required by the Building Official, certification, by
a registered str-,ctural engineer and details of the
fencing along the top of the gall will be provided prix-
to the issuance of a building permit fnr the of
structure on Parcel A.
4. The applicants survey shall be revised to remove the tu(
under garage and driveway along the north side of th{
property and replace it either with a south facing tuck
under garage and required retaining wall , an attached
garage, or the identiOication of a detached garage site
on the property as required by City Code.
5. The applicant shall submit a grading and erosion control
plan for review dnd approval by the city engineer prior
to receipt of any building and /or demolition permits for
either Parcels A or B.
6, ThP applicant shall provide the City of Mound with a
performance bond, letter of credit or other acceptable
financial guarantee in the amount of $5,000 to guarantee
removal o* the boat house /summer cottage structure within
one year of City Council approval of the minor
subdivision, The financial guarantee shall be in a form
acceptable to the city attorney. The City Clerk shall
not be authorized to release the resolution approving the
minor subdivision for recording with Hennepin County
prior to receipt of the financial guarantee.
r ,•
®ISIT 'A
(p. 2 of 2)
Zuckman Planning Report
August 8, 1990
Page Five
1. New utility services to Parcel A shall be installed
within the identified drivewak easement area. Plans for
the utility services shall eviewed and approved by
the city engineer and sic wr,•�s department. This
requirement will be ,d if the applicant can
demonstrate that ut111t, services serving Parcel A
complying with current city standards presently exists
within the proposed easement Area.
Pursuant to Section 23.506.2 (5) of
variance approval shall expire one
Council approval.
the Mound Zoning Code, the
year after the date of City
•
0
•
? /Vv-I
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
• A G E N D A
Regular Meeting, 7 :30 p.m., Wednesday, August 22, 1990
Tonka Bay City Hall
4901 Manitou Road (County Road 19)
RECD AUG 2 0 MO
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Reading of Minutes: 7 -25-90 Regular Meeting
4. Public Cassients - from persons in attendance not on agenda
5. Reports
A. Standing Committees
1) EATER STRUCTURES, Chair Grathwol
a) Approval of minutes, meeting of 8 -11 -90
. b) Temporary low water variance extension to 100' with a change
in configuration to accommodate canopies, and 1990 dock license
renewal for Clay Cliffs Homeowners Association.
c) 1990 dock license renewals for Eagle Bluff Association and Windward
Marine, recommending approval.
d) Park Hill /Park Island Apartments request for decrease in license
application fee for 44 slips, to 3 usable slips; recommending
denial of fee allowance request, and order removal of boats within
30 days.
e) Re- affirm operating policy of no refunds on multiple dock license
application fees in the case of licensee Lyle Berman, Wayzata
Bay, wherein he renewed and paid application fee, then used lees
than 5 slips.
f) Recommendation to draft an ordinance to clarify the code definition
of a commercial marina per 7/2/90 letter from attorney.
g) Additional business recommended by the committee.
2) ENVIRONMENT, Chair Reese
3) LAKE UEE, Chair Pillsbury
a) Approval of minutes, meeting of 8 -20 -90
(over) Z (005
LAKE MINNETONY 4. CONSERVATION DISl RICT
LMCD Board Agenda
August 22, 1990
Page 2
b) Deposit refunds: recommend approval for Lake Masters Swim Club,
Minnetonka Challenge 5 -Mile Swim, and Zuhrah Shrine Skippers
Boat Parade, both having met conditions of their permits.
c) Reconsiderat'.•, water ski ordinance amendment to reduce the
observer rule ioc all forms of towing persons on the lake, based
upon committee recommendation of 8/20/90.
d) Additional business recommended by the committee.
S. A. 4. ADVISORY, Chair Rascop
a) Management Plan review status.
b) Response to public comment on Management Plan.
B. Chair Cochran, report
C. Financial Report, Treasurer Lawman
•
1) Statement of Cash Transactions, month ending 7 -31 -90
2) Audit of voucher* ~or payment
3) Second quarter financial .......Wary and year -to -date budget progress
D. Executive Director, Stromen
1) Report on office space requirements.
2) Additional reports.
6. Unfinished Business
7. Now Business
8. Adjournment
to-16-90
AVO AUG 2 01990
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Board of Directors
Regular Meeting, 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, July 25, 1990
Tonka Bay City Hall
1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair
Foster at 7:30 p.m.
2. Roll Call.
Members Present: Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; Bert Foster,
Vice Chair, Deephaven; James Grathwol, Excelsior; Robert
Pillsbury, Minnetonka; Jan Boswinkel, Secretary, Minnetonka
Beach; John Lewman, Treasurer, Minnetrista; Thomas Reese, Mound;
JoEllen Hurr, Orono; Robert Rascop, Shorewood. Also present:
Sgt. Wm. Chandler, Sheriff's Water Patrol; Charles LeFevere,
Counsel; gore Paurus, Project Manager; Rachel Thibault,
Administrative Technician; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director.
Members Absent: David Cochran, Chair, Greenwood; Marvin
Bjorlin, Tonka Bay; John Malinka, Victoria; Thomas
Martlason, Wayzata; Robert Slocum, Woodland.
3. Reading of Minutes: Reese moved, Grathwol seconded, to
apprcvP. the minutes of the 6 -27 -90 meeting as corrected by
showing Babcock voted aye on item 5.C.2.e, Water Ski Observer
Rule. Motion carried unanimotisly.
4. Public Comments: There were no comments from persons in
attendance not on the agenda.
5. Reports
A. Standing Committees
1) WATLR STRUCTURES, Chair Grathwol
a) Minutes. Grathwol moved, Reese seconded, approval
of the minutes of the 7 -14 -90 meeting as submitted. Motion
carried, Rascop abstaining, not being in attendance.
b) District Mooring Field Temporary Low Water Variance
- Wayzata Yacht Club
Robert Albright, Vice Commodore, WYC, presented a site
plan of the mooring field as of 7 -25 -90 showing the 600' line and
three moorings in site 2, requesting the variance allow six
moorings in site 2 as submitted on the application. Albright
also submitted a written approval of tre relocation from neighbor
Rosekrans.
Grathwol moved, Pillsbury seconded, approval of a temporary
low water variance adjustment as shown on the site plan dated
July 25, 1990 (6 moorings in site 2 ) , subject to bein,,, in accord
with the City of Wayzata Conditional Use Permit granted to the
Wayzata Yacht Club. Motion carried, Rascop voting nay.
1 7 4 e"'
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS July 25, 1990
Babcock raised the question of LMCD authority vs. City
authority. Grathwol responded there can be overlapping
authority in some cases and in this case it is the conditional
use permit under which the Yacht Club is allowed to operate.
c) City of Deephaven Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW)
Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to determine that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not needed, to recommend
approval of the Findings of Fact and Conclusion as submitted by
the Executive Director and approval of the new dock license and
special density li, of the City of Dcesp'taven.
The Executive Director reported the MN DNR comment that
no treated lumber is to be used that would contaminate fish Cr
other aquatic organisms has been removed from the Findings of
Fact. The MN DNR understands treated lumber must be used and
will not have an adverse affect on the Lake.
The Executive Director explained the MN DNR comment
regarding development of a long -range plan for dock expansions
results from the unusual number of EAWs submitted in recent
months as a result of the moratorium.
Hurr asked who has the responsibility for covering the
costs of preparing an EAW. The Executive Director responded that
the EAW is the responsibility of the responding governing unit
according to E.Q.B. rules. He said the costs of preparing an
E.A.W. were not taken into consideration when permit fees were
established.
Motion for approval passed unanimously.
Hurr moved, Rascop seconded, to refer a study of the
E.A.W. application and deposit fees to the Water Structures
C mmittee. Motion carried unanimously.
d) Dock License Renewals
Grathwol moved, BoswinkAl seconded, approval of the
following dock license renewals:
Crystal Bay Service, Crystal Bay, Orono
Harrison Harbor, Harrison Bay, Mound
Seton Twin Homes, Mound
noting Harrison Harbor is being back licensed for 1989. Late
fees are included for the renewals with Seton Twin Homes being
credited for the $25 fee they paid earlier when low water
prevented the use of the docks. A condition is to be placed on
the Crystal Bay Service license clarifying the terms of the
license as related to watercraft storage. Motion carried
•
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS July 25, 1990
• f) Lakeside !farina Dock Location
The Executive Director r
owner of Lakeside Marina that their
do not meet full compliance with the
reconfiguration of the docks being
advise whether he needs more than
correction.
sported he has informed the
floating docks as installed
application regarding exact
replaced. The owner will
the ten days allowed for
5. A. 2) BNVIRONMENT, Chair Reese
Reese reported the milfoil harvesting program is
running behind projections. A flexible plan is being developed
to work ten hour days, Monday through Thursday, eight on Fridays
through August. It may be necessary to shorten the season to
stay within the budget by ending in August.
Rascop complimented Paurus and the harvesting crew for
the cutting they did during the Olympic Festival in the lower
lake.
Reese identified the weed harvester hydraulic system as
creating major operating problems. The manufacturer is involved
to assure warranty coverage is provided wherever applicable.
5. A. 3) LAEB USS, Chair Pillsbury
a) Minutes Pillsbury moved, Foster seconded, approval
of the minutes of the meeting of 7 -16 -90 as submitted. Motion
carried.
b) Sub - committee Appointment
Foster moved, Boswinkel seconded, approval of a
subcommittee to review the Hennepin County Joint and Cooperative
Agreement between the Sheriff's dater Patrol and LMCD consisting
of JoEllen Hurr, Orono; Bert Foster,Deephaven; Douglas Babcock,
Spring Park and Sgt. Wm. Chandler of the Sheriff's Water Patrol
or his designee. Motion carried unanimously.
c) Deposit Refunds
Pillsbury moved, Rascop seconded, to approve the
following deposit refunds: Minnetonka Bass Club, American
Scholarship Foundation, Minnetonka Crossing, and Mound City Days,
all having met the conditions of their event permits. Motion
carried unanimously.
d) Water Ski (Towing Persons) Ordinance Amendment
The Executive Director submitted an amended copy of the
proposed ordinance which will allow for exceptions to Sec.3.10,
Subd. 1, of the Ordinance governing towing of persons by
watercraft. The cop, submitted clarified the clause regarding
the code provisions before Memorial Day and after Labor Day.
•
3 ZO/Z.
LMCD Board of Directors July 25, 1990
Chandler submitted the following re- wording of Subd.lb
as requested by the Hennepin County Attorney: Sheriff may order
Observer. Whenever it appears in the judgment of the Deputy `hat
the public safety requires an observer, the Deputy may order an
operator to provide an observer or to cease all towing activity.
The refusal or failure to comply with such an order shall be a
misdemeanor.
Foster moved, Pillsbury seconded, approval of the third
reading of the proposed ordinance. Discussion indicated
Boswinkel, Grathwol and Rascop are opposed to the amendment and
the necessary eight votes were not available for passage.
Foster moved, Grathwol seconded to table the proposed
ordinance amendment and to refer it back to the Lake Use
Committee. Motion carried unanimously.
e) hater Patrol Report
Chandler reported on two personal injury accidents.
Prosecutions on them with the County Attorney are pending.
Chandler said 60 BWIs have been issued, 58 of them on
Lake Minnetonka, including one by the MN DNR Conservation
officor. He also stated the five mile "Minnetonka Crossing" swim
event was accomplished with no incidents.
Pillsbury reported that all except one SunKat pontoon
allowed on a special event permit based at Lord Fletchers have
been relocated out of the state. Public interest did not support
the operation.
5. A. 4. ADVISORY COMMITTSB, Chair Rascop
Rascop reported work continues on the final review.
The likely last meeting to review responses to the public coeaent
on the Management Plan will be 5:30 p.m., Wednesday, August 1.
The Board received a request from David Arndorfer that
the retainage on the contract with Arndorfer Associates, Inc. be
reduced by $10,000, leaving a balance of $15,000. If approved
Arndorfer requested $7,000 be paid to Barr Engineering Company
and the balance to Arndorfer Associates.
Rascop coved, Foster seconded, approval of a reduction
in the retainage on the contract with Arndorfer Associ< <.s.es by
$10,000 leaving $15,000 in the contract, subject to rece,pt of
all documents held by the contiractor including computer discs.
Motion carried unanimously.
LeFevere stated the funds could be disbursed as
requested by Arndorfer without any liability to the District.
5. B. Foster for .,uanrd►i
11 Reservations were invit =:d from Board memo : ° for
the Public Officials' lake inspection tour, Saturday, Augusc 4,
10 a m. to 1 p.m. 0
Z&/ 3 4
LMCD Board of Directors July 25, 1990
S 2) An Inter- Agency Dredging Agreement meeting with MN
DNR and MCWD is planned for noon, Friday, July 29 Rascop and
Foster indicated they would attend.
5. C. Prosecution Progress Report, Attorney Steve Tallen,
Holmes do Gravens .
Steve Tallen submitted a summary of his prosecuting
attorney activity and court fine revenue from November 1989
through June 1990. It was noted cost of jail tiro was not
included in summary. Staff will include that. There was
discussion of ways to approach the Judiciary to make them more
cognizant of the importance the District places on safety
violations. If practical, the Board would like a report on the
fines being levied for various infractions.
5. D. Financial Report, Treasurer Lowman
1) Lowman submitted the statement of cash transactions
for the month ending 6 -30 -90 and it was ordered filed.
2) Lawman submitted the list of bills payable, noting
check 6302 to Prof. Fundraising Services in the amount of $373.77
for a Save the Lake address list is a recommended settlement with
the vendor. The original list of 4800 names was not satisfactory
to some Board members. The vendor has agreed to review the list
is and identify 1000 prospects for the district. Reese questioned
check 6288 to Smith and Nephew in the amount of $973.20 for
U.F.O. - General Supplies. It appeared more than the quoted
price. Staff agreed to re- examine the billing.
Pillsbury moved, Grathwol seconded, approval of checks
numbered 6228 through 6302 in the amount of $51,611.67, check
6302 to be held until the vendor has furnished a list of 1000
names not on the district's current Save the Lake mailing list
and check 6288 subject to an audit of the bill to determine its
accuracy. Motion carried, Hurr voting nay.
3) Lawman reported the second quarter financial
summary and year -to -date budget progress sports have been
returned to the auditor for clarification.
4) The City of Tonka Bay has requested someone from
the Board be present at their August 14 meeting to discuss the
1991 budget. Lawman will attend.
5. E. Executive Director, Strommen
1) Staff progress Strommen reported newly hired
Administrative Technician Thibault has been in +-
variety of her duties. She is working '..7 ; vu multiple dock
license renewals for inspecti dock license renewals
should all be in the mail ` ,- - ..na end of July. itiascop sa.'..: +.
should be a cost acr ng of the time spent r)n licensing and
the information f-.,: ished to the '.,vck' com t�
5
uiV
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS July 25, 1990
Aimee Meyer has finished her contract service as of 7-25 -90
She helped organize the computer reporting for the weekly weed
harvest reports.
Strommen reported a search for office locations in the
area continues to be explored.
2) Cochran and Strommen will make a management plan
presentation to the Wayzata Rotary Club. A flip chart has been
prepared for the presentation.
3) The Executive Director will make a presentation to
the Hubbard County Coalition of Lake Associations, Saturday,
August 18, at Little Sand Lake, Nevis. The program is sponsored
by the Mississippi Headwater3 Board.
4) The :.xecutive Director reported he attended a Corps
of Engineers meeting on the Federal Manual on Wetlands July 25
He had an opportunity to make contact with the representative of
the regional and also state Fish and Wild Life Division of the
Corps. He has material from the meeting available at the office.
S. Unfinished Business There was no unfinished business to
consider.
7. Now Busi&m! -s There was no new business brought forward.
8. Ad3ourfuveni Pillsbury moved, Boswinkel seconded, that the
meeting be „:.;rued. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting
was adjourned &L 9:20 p.m. 0
David Cochran, Chair
Jan Boswinkel, Secretary
2
2
DECD AUG 2 01990
• 0 LARK MINNETONKA CONSBHOATION DISTRICT
Action Report: Wa''_1:. Structures and Environment Committee
Meeting: Saturday, August 11, 1990, 7:30 a.m.
Shorewood City Hall
Members Present: James Grathwol, Chair, Excelsior; Marvin
B3orlin, Tonka Bay; Robert Pillsbury, Minnetonka; Robert Rascop,
Shorewood; Jan Boswinkel, Minnetonka Beach (as noted). Also
Present: Rachel Thibault, Administrative Technician.
The meeting was c �Ied to order by Grathwol at 7:30 a.m., a quorum
declared present.
1. Park Hill and Park Island Apartments (Spring Park) -
Regarding Multiply Dock License Fee.
The Park Hill /Park Island Apartment complex is licensed for
44 boats. Earlier this year they paid a $25.00 fee to maintain
their' ieense status because the docks were not usable due to the
low water. Since then the lake level has risen and there are
three boats docked at the location. This violation was called to
the attention of the Committee at the July 14th meeting. At that
time t*e Committee consensus was to charge the full fee if any of
the docks are used.
Michael Gorra, the licensee, requested reconsideration. He
offered to pay the dock fees for the three boats, but considers
requiring the full fee for 44 boats as being unreasonable.
Grathwol explained the LMCD Ordinance does not allow a partial
payment. Rascop moved, Pillsbury seconded, to recommend to
the Board that the boats docked at Park Hill /Park Island
Aprrt"nts be removed within thirty days. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. Gicense Renewals.
A. Clay Cliffe Home Owner Association ( Tonka Bay)
Rascop moved, Pillsbury seconded, to recommend to the
Board approval of the Clay Cliffe Home Owners association
multiple dock license and to approve a temporary low water
variance to extend to 100 feet with change in configuration to
accommodate canopies. Motion carried unanimously.
Staff was instructed to place a tickler on the Clay Cl._ffe
file as a reminder to obtain an as -built of their permanent decks
when temporary extensions are no longer needed.
B. Eagle Bluff Association (Hinnetrista)
Bfcrlin moved, Rascop seconded, to recommend !ci the
Board app- val of the Eagle Bluff Association multiple dock
license, w_.hout change. Motion carried unanimously.
1
Water Structures and Environment Committee August 11, 1990
2. Minnetonka Transportation Museum - Re KjDn ehat
The committee received a letter from the Minnesota
Transportation Museum regarding the plans to restore and float
the ;906 streetcar steamboat Iiicnehaha for public passenger
service on Lake Minnetonka. The museum, anticipating a complete
restoration, requested advice and feedback from the LMCD.
Because the restoration will take approximately 6 years, the
Museum is to be advised the current Board cannot commit a future
Board. At time of making an application, the Hinnehaha would be
treated as any other applicant. Staff was directed to send the
Museum a copy of the current charter boat and liquor license
applications and ordinances and to advise them they are welcome
to attend a Board meeting.
Boswinkel arrived.
3. Lyle Berman (Bushaway Road, Wayzata) - 1990 license fee
Lyle Berman renewed his 1990 multiple dock license which
allows him to dock five boats. Berman had commented, upon
request for a better site plan, that he would no longer have five
boats and did not need the multiple dock 'License.
B3orlin moved, Pillsbury seconded, to recommend to the Board
that the operating policy governing no refunds on multiple dock
licenses be re- affirmed in the case of a licensee, Lyle Berman,
Wayzata, wherein the licensee did not utilize the five -slip
multiple dock license after renewal and payment of fees. Motion
carried unanimously.
4. Direction to Staff
Grathwol suggested the following statisti be prepared to
develop a data base to substantiate the recreational facilities
provided on the Lake:
1. A physical inventory of docks with 3 or more
restricted boats.
2. Maintain a list of multiple docks .3howing:
a. Docks between 100' and 200'
b. Docks more than 6 ieet wide
3. Acquire a data base of wetlands below the 929.4
OHWL
4. Obtain the local lakeshore zoning from member
cities
Members added additional suggert.ions.
5. Staff Report - Inspections
Thibault reported that about half of the dock inspections
have been completed and most were in compliance. Letters have
been written licensees whose docks were beyond the temporary low
water variance extensions and whose dock configurations did not
comply with the licensed site plans.
Z (P/ I
2
Water Structures and Dock Committee August 11, 1990
is 11. heed Harvesting Report
There was no formal report on weed harvesting. The
committee received a statistical Eurasian Water Milfoil Harvest
report covering the period from 5/23 through 8/3
12. Adjournment
There was no farther business to come before the Committee
and the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 a.m.
FOR THE COMITTEE:
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director
•
4
James Grathwol, Chair
Z(o/ F
CITY COUNCIL PACKET - 8 -28 -90 #3
Water Structures and Dock Committee August 11, 1990
11. Need Harvesting Report 0
There was no formal report on weed harvesting. The
committee received a statistical Eurasian Water Nilfoil Harvest
report covering the period from 5/23 through 8/3
12. Adjournment
There was no further business to come before the Committee
and the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 a.m.
FOR THE COMMITTEE:
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director James Grathwol, Chair
•
s
•
7.(PI
4
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
0 MOUND ADVISORY PARK i OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
AUGUST 9, 1990
Present were: Chair Marilyn Byrnes, Commissioners Tom Casey,
Neil Weber, Shirley Andersen, Brian Asleson, Steve Burke, and
Cathy Bailey, Council Representative Phyllis Jensen, Park Direc-
tor Jim Fackler, Dock Inspector Dell Rudolph and Secretary Peggy
James.
The following were also present: Council Members: Liz Jensen,
Andrea Ahrens, and Skip Johnson; Planning Commissioners: Geoff
Michael, Bill Meyer, Jerry Clapsaddle, and Michael Mueller.
Park Tour
The tour bus left the depot at approximately 5 :40 p.m. The theme
of the tour was natural areas / potential nature conservation
areas. Parks which have received recent improvements were also
visited.
Chair Byrnes called the regular meeting to order at 7:57 p.m.
Minutes
MOTION made by Weber, seconded by Casey to approve the
Park Commission Minutes of Ju 1 y 12, 1990 as submitted.
Motion carried unanimiously.
1 .._. -)IY1. 17W4 KIN17 _-3 r7Z W - 17
The Commission did not have any specific comments on this ap-
plication.
The Dock inspector informed the Commission that these docks hove
been in use for the last couple of years and there has never been
a problem with them.
MOTION made by Weber, seconded by As1eson to recommwo
approval of the Harrison Harbor Twin Home Association's
Multiple Dock Application. Motion carried unanimously.
1 .
Dell reviewed his Commercial and Multiple Dock Inspection Report
• for 1990. All of the docks appeared to be in good condition.
Z420
Park Commission Minutes
A'Apust 9 1990
Page 2
Phyllis Jessen reviewed the Park related issues discussed by the
City Council at their July meetings. She also updated the Com-
mission on the subject of Adopt -a -Park, Planter, etc. Jessen
suggested that a public meeting be held at the September 13th
Park Commission meeting. She explained that the schools and
clubs are now arranging their schedules for next spring, so this
would be a good time to start Vie program. The Commission deter-
mined that they should approve the Adopt -a -Park program prior to
holding a public meeting.
MOTION mmide by Weber, seconded by Anderson to recommend
to the City Council that they approve an Adopt -a -Park,
Green Ares, Planter, Approach or Street Right -of -Way
orolp m for the City of Vaxnd. Motion carried unanim-
ously.
Tax Forfeit Property
Casey suggested that the policy which was approved by the City
Council "to refer all future tax forfeit parcels that come from
Hennepin County to the Planning Commission and Park s Open Space
Commission for their review and recommendations" be formalized
and put in ordinance form. After a long discussion, the Commis-
sion determined that they would prefer to retain this procedure
as a policy, rather than an ordinance, since it works well as is.
irk Director's Report
Jim Fackler updated the Commission on current happenings in his
Department.
Bailey questioned the Park Director about the possibility of
providing a handout for cemetery plot owners to inform them of
rules and regulations for flowers, plantings, etc. Jim confirmed
that a handout can be created, and the City Clerk can distribute
them when plots are purchased.
Dell commented on the large number of boats /docks being put into
the lake so late in the season since the water has come up.
Deli also suggested to the Commission that the dock ordinance
needs to be revised, and that it should be discussed at the Sep- .
tember meeting.
Zo7. 1
Park Commissi Minutes
August 9, 1990
Page 3
Casey and Asleson suggested that the September Park Commission
Agenda also include discussion on Nature Conservation Areas.
Discussion on this issue should includet creating a definition,
locations of potential nature areas, restrictions on these areas,
etc.
MOTION made by Casey, saoondsd by Asleson to have the
issue of Nature Conservation Areas on the Septemim 13,
1990 Park Commission agenda.
7 l • 1 1 �� 'L r i • _ it l•,'
Byre as conf i rmed that J i m G 1 asoe w i l l be at the September 13th
meeting to recap the 1990 park program, and that Grant will also
be invited to attend the meeting.
MOTION made by Haberp seoondad by Anderson to adjourn
the PW i Open Space Commission Meeting at 19sS2 p.m.
Mutton carried unanimously.
•
21022
/97rOn rya►.
CoE� OF P4uC,E •
.0 ,£rl mqeegl ,
- Twdnfie ycxk roe e*saw1n6- .
TmE 4gcoon m orrcfe.
-T in Pa -fine rxly r Yet
7 rho. nano- - To Como-
To InV Wo/v4 /ICI y ,c .4 rw
0nCcWl rf 5 0/ T1 THE
J- i/ TRAO #19UE J60-A 0
4leon c ,Oek: U0" n
r A
C lan e ST4FF,
c ank� AIAIA- Ti4l gpl T Vd;
T mk TU
PI�U/'1�l l4n CUWeT�Gtt y
�s Frq� X45 .� f�►r� ca�C,Eirhfp
�jk�15 S rMi9Tl Oil 1 S Sk TTA.,t 0
f 0
Z&2 3
BULLETIN
VT AMaa 090
SPECIAL ME IENBBRSHIP MEETING
118811: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1990
IS=: MXNNZAPOLI8 CONVENTION CENTER
1301 South Second Avenue
Roots 212
Minneapolis, Minnesota
PURPOSE: TO CONSIDIM BY -LAMS AMENDMENT AND DOES INCREASE
TIME: 7:30 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER
0
Angust 21, 1990
Kevin Fraaell,
Purpose
6. Consider Does Increase Approval Resolution (Attached).
7. Other Business.
8. Adjournment.
1. Call to order.
2. Welcome to Minneapolis Convention Center.
3. Brief Synopsis of Mission Task Force Report -
Chair.
4. Presidents Comments - Larry Bakken.
5. Consider Amenfbent to AM By -Lava Article III,
(Attached) -
BPZCIAL NOTES:
A. This is an extremely important meeting and each city should have
at least one person present to cast its vote.
S. Tours of this beautiful new facility will be provided starting
at 6:45 P.M. Tours will start inside the main lobby.
C. This notice has been mailed to Mayors, Managers /Administrators
and Delegates individually.
SEE DIRECTIONS, MAP AND PARKING INFORMATION ATTACKED
•
-I-
183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008
Z(97 V
L
Ld
zo;S
r
all
tll �t�
is lop ! _
•
w ay
y rri
\ LMLL
J f
SAV ArMNN
k
I ❑ i t!
'OC
-2d-
-- 94 from the East ISt.paull
Take the 11th Street exit: Follow 11th Street until Tcu reach
2nd Avenue, turn left onto tad Avenue and follow 2nd Avenue
directly to the Convention Csnter.
-- 44 from the Best and Northwest
Cat the 4th Street exit: follew 4th Street to 2nd Avenue.
turn right onto 2nd Avenue mad follow 2nd Avenue directly to
the Conreatioo Center.
231► from the South 121poststten
Take Downtown exits to the 11th Street exit: Follow i lth
Street to 2ad Avenue. turn left onto 2nd Avenue and continue
to the Convention Center.
-- 331. from the !forth
Take 331► to the Washington exit: Take a right on washinSt cn.
follow 'Washington to 2nd Avenue. turn left onto 2nd Avenue.
Follow 2nd Avenue directIT to the Convention Center.
-- Hishwac ail from the best
Take Downtown exit (12th Street): Follow to 2nd Avenue and
turn right, follow 2nd Avenue dire;tlx to the Corventicr.
Center.
The current PUBLIC t\TRr1NCE is located on Grant Street between
let and 2nd Avenues, next to Kesler Chart:.
I suggest either the Plaza hunicipal Ramp directlF in front cf
the Convention Center (the underground ramp) or the Orcaestr:.
Hall Ramp. There is a $3.30 charge for parking.
•
Z&VO
-2b-
REBOL�1'i'ION TO APPROVE 1991 WZS RATE
U IT RESOLVED TOW THE AM BOARD OF DIRWYONS SWILL BE
AtRHORIEED TO LEVY A 1991 WU Air WW Op To A. 1WIIHAI OF 1190 OF A
CITY *S 1990 Ell= EIOWMT. THIS IIICREASE SHALL DE USED TO HIRE AN
ADDITIONAL STAFF PARSON TO ASSIST IN ACBIEVI316 THE XXM= PURPOSE
OF THE AIM AS OONT1110 ED IN ARTICLE III OF THE ANN WY LAWS AID AS
IMP OMMMniD IN THE MISSION AND 1IP BERVICES TASK PONCE
REPORT.
A Copy of this report was sailed to each member city Jane a, 1990.
1IOTE: A does increase which exceeds the cost of living as measured
by tW CPT for the ppzaceding calendar year must be approved
by tuaber municipalities pursuant to Article V, BeCU 9 of
the AMII sr- -Lows.
(Se brief job description below)
Job Title: Communications and Research Director
HA202 OP WMW N
This is a position with responsibilities ift performing public
information Association program arrangements and a variety of
s�Mrc� _ ass -
•
The work involves personal contacts with municipal officials, state
officials &W the general public in the operation of the Association's
program and activities.
MAJOR AREAS or Eg 1.MASIS
a. 'Cba6unickte with amber cities and officials.
b. Direct fad maintain the Legislative contact System.
C' Establish 6. public relations process including media contacts.
d. Assist staffing ANN committees.
e. Monitor Metropolitan Agencies activities.
f. Research issues as required.
A. Communicate with member cities and officials.
Manage and direct the preparation, editing, publication and
distribution of the periodic newsletter.
Assist preparation and distribution of bulletins and other
membership written communication.
S. Direct and maintain the Legislative Contact System.
Assist the Executive Director and Director of Legislative Affairs
in developing, organising, promoting, and administering a
comprehensive program of coordinated lobbying activities for
member city officials.
VA61 -3-
•
Assist n start functions for the Legislative
000adinating oo■.ittee (LAC).
Oowcdinate meetings) with metropolitan legislators and local
efticials to discuss AM priority issues.
C. his& a public relations process including media contacts.
Osfelop/write and lase news/press releases on significant MW
even" such as membership meetinve outreach breakrasts, legislator
•setings, election or offioers, ley appointments, etc.
OMrelep distribution system for lase oriented news releases and
M � releases tailored for specific types
of
D. Assist staffing Am awnittees.
S. Moeitor 1Ntr000litan AM= activities.
Monitor the agendas and attend meetings as directed on a routine
basis and report agency activities of interest to other 11101 staff.
Assist in developing a more proactive stance for setting the
Metropolitan agenda.
F. Roammah issues as required.
Research specific issues as needed
that can be used in lobbying by staff
f�asples Could include cc" risons of
sere on a per capita basis.
M QOAMMCATIONS
and prepare in depth reports
and contact persons.
city expenditures for various
A combination substantially equivalent to a BS degree in political
science or journalism with accumulated experience in journalism,
public relations and government research.
•
-4-
ZbZ S
aklICLE III
Um purposes of the association of metropolitan Municipalities shall •
be toe
1.
2 .
3.
a. Serve as a forum through which all municipalities or groups of
municipalities may develop and propose policies and positions on
matters of concern to the metropolitan municipalities and develop
strategies for advocating those policies and positions.
S. Serve as a forum for the i - rchange of ideas and information
among muunioipalities in the metropolitan area and to foster
intermunisipal cooperation.
6. Assist member cities to resolve disputes W. other cities and
agent ea. 0
7. Develop and provide, either alone or in concert with the League
of Kinnesota Cities or other organisations or agencies, programs
of technical assistance to member municipalities.
a.
9. roster, generate and promote information and data concerning the
problems and issues and proposed solutions affecting municipal
government in the metropolitan area to the State Legislature, in
particular., and to the public at large.
10. Enhance eneetwelo the effectiveness improvement of
��pal government in the metropolitan area by holding
conferences and by fostering pertinent research projects.
4r- le- wsrk- elesely- wfth- lhs- bee�e- ef- ltfenesela- 8flfes -fn -the
inl members- el- lh4s- llssse4stlen- sf- Melrspeiflan
Mdefefpalfl�es*
11. Coordinate the efforts of AM members to romote their interests
within the League of K nnesota C t es.
U
-S-
?,(02�1
iffectively express in a unified voice, policies concerning the
structure, powers and otber matters relating to municipal
goverment for the municipalities in the metropolitan area to
•
•
•
•* !a- slrf�e- ts- aake- tha- �ttsps�� ten -eres- and- �ls- eapseer�t
12.
-6-
Legend: 1. New working is underlined.
2. Wording to be deleted is crossed out.
3. Unchanged wording is printed as is.
Kn Ali 23 =
LAKE MINNETONKA CUNSnVATION DISTRICT .
Action Report= Lake Use Committee
Meeting: Monday, August 20, 1990, 4:30 p.m., Shorewood
City Hall
tlembers Present: Robert Pillsbury, Chair, Minnetonka; Douglas
Babcock, Spring Park; David Cochran, Greenwood; James Grathwol,
Excelsior; Thomas Reese, Mound. Also pretant: Sgt. Wm.
Chandler, Sheriff's Water Patrol; Rachel Thibault, Administrative
Technician; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director.
The meeting was called to order by Chair Pillsbury, declaring a
quorum present.
1. Review Water Ski (Towing Persons) Ordinance Amendment
The committee received a draft of an ordinance relating to
towing persons by watercraft as re- worded to reflect changes
discussed at the July 25 Board meeting. At that meeting the
proposal Was tabled and returned to the committee when it was
apparent there were not enough votes among the members present to
P&33 the Ordinance.
Grathwol said he is ambivalent about the proposed change in
the observer rule. He does not see the need for a change, but he
recognizes the "sunset" provision allows for a period to see if
there is a safety risk. Cochran does not favor a change to
accoi- modate a small group. Babcock said he has decided to favor
the change. Reese expressed the opinion that the change would
encourage people to use the lake during off hours and will be
helpful to people who do not live on the Lake.
Grathwol moved, Pillsbury seconded, to return the re- worded
Ordinance Relating to Towing Persons by Watercraft to the Board
without a recommendation. Motion carried, Reese did not vote.
2. Critique of Public Officials Boat Tour of August 4.
The Committee agreed the tour was successful. Cochran said
he would prefer one boat in the future by either cutting down on
the number of people invited or using a large boat. Pillsbury
said he would like to see the tour begin at 10:30 a.m. instead of
10:00 a.m. Pillsbury also suggested beginning the planning process
earlier. Grathwol forwarded a comment from a guest that there
might be better participation if invitations were sent out forty -
five days in advance with a follow -up. Strommen reported there
were 97 reservations and ten no- shows.
The Executive Director is to explore the availability of the
Lady of the Lake for next year's tour.
•
71031
1
.7
0
Lake Use Committee
3. Deposit Refunds
!lotion carried unanimously.
August 20, 1990
Grathwol moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to the Board
the following deposit refunds:
a. Lake Masters Swim Club, Minnetonka Challenge 5 Nile Swim
(7- 21 -90)
b. Zuhrah Shrine Skippers Boat Parade (7- 15 -90)
4. hater Patrol Report
Chandler said there have been five personal injury and four
peopertar - damage accidents reportad.. to the State:, Tbete . Jwve ,+been
TO -Me. issued, 7e by the. Water. Patrol, two. bp..4dwwJW' p J pas
by the City of Orono police. The total for Hennepin County is 64
DWI *. Chandler detailed the circumstances of #.hs.buradUm op a
22' boat in Brown's Bay, and a personal injury accident when a
bosRam-: 491.1 out of a boat. . WE- moat interest. was. she sinking of
*Mimbeatrer boat. Paamadis+e PrAzAagam. sus August l ltb. -fit waR, p Wed
f -_s j I m No-ontire• party want• t�ff,oterp end of the apWe; 4 eqk_ for
a wedding ceremony r"ultiag- •- •is the stern - taking oe, , eater
q
unnoticed by the pilot, the boat filling with wat tool **,,to
pump out. The Water Patrol response time was tw pinyte % It
was aided -in •removing passengers JW a pontoon from ti*. Minnetonka
Yasht. The" were eo . injurLqw. ;, ,_ �.•
Chandler said,:tbe hater Pstsal. meeting v,th the Lako.area
investi'tators to break a. aws wU d: boat theft- riag.,, ; z
3688ponding to '& saashlNPO Cochran J&A-: ,Ut4 :- the
Csantp� Ittorney will• DOti pleAOT� ahiYcBlli `: Mf
Park 9ay. 1 %*4 ar ftts&1 dR - ' i
s��ii atbibt� �'e�i�at „iia�rweaaor= !shalaSNt.,KA.tmY E'
bs” _ �iiad tented: of atbtx �li�it: response t�sQlii{ atl4 ., �'!s�oue
pers hum al : uA: - the. W#&4w Flats A ! when he assiatod a wapnal
watercraft operator who had been injured after losing control of
Nis watetbL'al+�: in . -�'� .1 •'t1N s � L }• ; }.•. .;..• . t : T ..
a. listing
b A. ,
13t was
dsiat.�,- and
Patrol and
7:30 a. m.
noti f Led
Date' of 6 kmwitt It �: " : m: •• '
.agreed, the tp: review the kennepin Cpiibty
Cooperative;; 4grelllA"t3,*tw*en , the, ; Sherif ;, hater
the LHCD will meet 4W Wednesday, September. 12th at
a place to be detervAned and committee. rembers $,jk be
S. Additional Business Recommended by the Committee
Inter - Agency Agreement on Dredging. The Executive Director
reported that following a meeting with DNR and Watershed District
• representatives, foster, Cochran and himself, the DNR was to
respond "ith a further revised draft. The Executive - Director
will follow up on the draft Agreement status.
'21(4) 3; -_
Lake Use Committee August 20, 1990
Gayle's Marina - Storage of Barges. Thibault reported an
inspection was made and a letter sent to Gayle's Marina advising
him barge storage on shore is in violation of his dock license.
The City of Orono indicates they have no ordinance prohibiting
the use of barges. A dredging license from the Watershed
District is required, but Gayle has not made application. The
Executive Director reported there have been complaints from
neighbors about the visual impact of the barges one of which .
holds a large land crane. He reported Gayle has removed a 6' x
24' gas promotion siji he had erected on his docks. Thibault has
been working with Hurr on the dock inspection at Gayle's Marina.
Administrative Technician Report. Thibault reported noting
a number of temporary low water extensions that are going beyond
what was approved, o as much as 100'. She has been writing
letters to the offenders advising them that 1991 low water
variances will be strictly enforced and only allowed where
full need is demonstrated.
Adjournment There being no further business to come before
the meeting, the Chair declared the meeting ad3ourned at 5:10 p.m.
FOR THE COMMITTEE;
,
Eugene C':rommen Executive Director Robert Pillsbury, Chair •
�J
D to 3 -3
3
Voaa ARcNq
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL BE HELD IN THE BOARD ROOM ON AUGUST 28, SEPTWlZR 12 (WED)
ROOK SEPTEMBER 2TT(.EOCTOBER EITHER AND OCTOBER 23. (THE 10 -8 MEETING WILL BE EIT IN 04NFERENUE Fj'%
OR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WILL BE HELD IN THE CONFIMENCE ROOM ON SEPTEMBER 18 AND
AND OCTOBER 16th
pAltKtNi. L v
•
i
•