Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1978-02-14 CC Agenda Packet
CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota AGENDA CM 78-50 CM 78-52 CM 78-46 CM 78-47 CM 78-48 CM 78-44 CM 78-45 CM 78-49 CM 78-51 Mound City Council February 14, 1978 City Hall 7:30 P.M. 1. Minutes 2. Water Meter Bid Pg. 504-506 3. Vacation - Cambridge Lane Pg. 501-503 4. Licenses & Permits A. Bingo Permit Pg. 499-500 B. Cigarette License Renewals Pg. 498 C. Garbage & Refuse Collection Renewals Pg. 497 5. Amendment to Subdivision Ordinance Pg. 494-496 6. Public Hearing - PDA Ordinance Pg. 487-493 7. Tax Forfeit Land (Material to be sent out on Monday) 8. Fees - Conditional Use Permits Pg. 483-486 9. Comments and Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit) 10. Purchase of Right-of-Way Pg. 481-482 1i. Transfer of Funds 12. Payment of Bills 13. Information Memorandums Pg. 441-480 14. Committee Reports 507 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 10, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-50 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Water Meter Bids Bids were advertised for water meters and one bid was received from the Badger Meter Company (copy attached). The bid received was: 5/8", Meter 5/8" Meter with Read-O-Matic 5/8" X 3/4" Meter 5/8" X 3/4" Meter with Read-O-Matic Generators and Outside Readers Adaptable to Present 5/8" Meters $23.40 34.20 26.28 37.08 16.10 Trade-in Allowance on old 5/8" Bronze Meter 3.00 The Public Works Director recommends acceptance of the bid (see letter attached). ON LAKE MINNETONKA INDIAN BURIAL.MOUNDS 534'1 MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (6"12) 472-1155 February 6, 1978 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mr. Kopp Public Works Director Water Meter Bids After having published and sent out bids for the upgrading of the City Water Meters, we received only one bid. It is recommended that the bid from Badger Meter Co. be accepted, if it is legal to award a bid under those circumstances. One point of explahation, the total cost of the project is higher than the estimate that was submitted, however, the end cost to the City after the residents have paid their cost will be only slightly higher, approximately fifteen thousand rather th~n the estimated thirteen thousand. Respectfully, Robert A. 4tin~r Public Works Director RAN/jcn Badger Meter, Inc. FIi I Products Division 4545 West Brown Deer Road Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53223 (414) 355-0400 City of Mound City Council 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 January 30, 1978 Gentlemen: In response to your request for bids on water meters, bids to be received until 2:00 p.m., February 6, 1978, we are pleased to submit the following proposal: Requirements Price Each Total 600 - 5/8" Badger Recordall Model 15, less corms. or 600 - 5/8" Badger Recordall Model 15, less conns., with Read-O-Marie $23.40 $14,040.00 $34.20 $20,520.00 800 - 5/8"x3/4" Badger Recordall Model 25, less conns. or 800 - 5/8"x3/4" Badger Reeordall Model 25, less corms., with Read-O-Marie $26.28 $21,02.4.00 $37.08 $29,664.00 650 ~ Generators and Outside Readers adaptable to Badger 5/8" Model A-Easy Read $16.10 $10,465.00 We will provide a trade-in allowance of $3.00 for each 5/8" used bronze meter you' return. Attached bulletins RD-1 and ROM 72 illustrate and describe the above meters. Also attached is Badger's ten year guarantee of meter accuracy along with revenue maintenance program. Terms are net, 30 days° Prices are based foo.bo Mound, Minnesota. Delivery of the meters can be made as required. Bid Bond in the amount of $4~800.00 attached. The opportunity of placing this proposal for your consideration is appreciated. Respectfully submitted, BADGER METER, INC. Robert Bourne, Ph.D. Assistant Secretary Attach.. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 10, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-52 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: Vacation - Cambridge Lane On November 8th, the Council considered the application for the v~cation of a portion of Cambridge Lane and tabled the request for an indication of approval or disapproval from the property owner across the street. Attached is a copy of a signed paper received from the property owner of Lot 6, Block 38, Wychwood. The next step for considering vacation is to call a public hearing which requires two weeks published and posted notice. A suggested date is either March 14 or March 21. Jan.27,1978 TO: The City Council of Mound, Mn. and any other appropriate authority, or concerned parties herein. On Jan. 20, 1978 I met with Mr. Robert J Carlson, my neighbor regarding a petition he has filed with the City of Mound petitioning the Council to vacate that portion of the service road between our properties which is presently closed by barricade. This street or alley is known as Cambridge Lane. This street separates Lot 6, Block 38, Wychwood belonging to the undersigned, and Lot 7 and Lot 8 owned and occupied by Mr. Carlson and his wife Genevieve. It is my understanding that the Mound City Council is willing to vacate that portion of the service road involved if my wife and I do not have any objections. That portion of the service road is not needed for access to our property, and we have no objections of any nature to the street being vacated forthwith, if deemed appropriate by the City Council of Mound. E. TON CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 9, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-46 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Bingo Permit The Minnetonka Post 398 of the American Legion has applied for Bingo permits for February 18, March 4 and November 4, 1978 and have requested that the $10,000 Bond be waived. CITY OF MOUND APPLICATION FOR BINGO PER>lIT (If ~n org~n~za~ion,'give organization na~e) ! (attach separate sheet if more room necessary) Is License fee attached? Yes No ~'"-Amount Fidelity Bond: (a) Amount (b) Name of Bonding Company. (c) Expiration date of Bond *(Minimum ~10,000.) * Note: Fraternal, religious, veteran and other non-profit organizations may request the Bond to be waived. Please indicate below if you are makin~ such a request. /~ature~ old'Person ~aking Aoo~icatio: CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 9, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-47 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Cigarette Licenses Cigarette Licenses expire February 28, 1978. been received: Grimm's Grocery Bob's Bait Shop Gas Hut, Inc. Metro "500", Inc. Mound Lanes, Inc. Snyder's Thrifty Drug Midwest Vending Company for: American Legion Post 398 Duane's 66 Station Koffee KUp,- Jude Candy & Tobacco Company, Inc.~~~ Mound Municipal Liquor Store ~~ ARA Service, Inc. for: The following renewals have How Dee ' s Briarwood Restaurant (2) Martin & Son Stage I Cafe Superamerica Store Surfside, Inc.~ - 4 ~ach~nes ~Le%~ard L. Kopp Tonka Toys CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 9, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-48 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Garbage and Refuse Collection Licenses Renewals Garbage and Refuse Collection Licenses expire February 28, 1978. The following renewals have been received: ~ ~'B~ackowiak ~ Son ~.~Mike' s Sanitation ~ ~Woodlake Sanitary Service 3 Trucks 1 Truck 1 Truck CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 8, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-44 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: Amendment to Subdivision Ordinance Council Memorandum 78-41 given at the February 7th meeting advised that the Attorney had written a proposed ordinance change for Chap- ter 22 which would require park dedication with subdivisions, etc. Attached is a copy of the proposed ordinance change. A public hearing is not necessary to change Chapter 22. ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 22.37 OF THE CITY CODE, ESTABLISHING DESIGN STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO PUBLIC SITES, OPEN SPACE AND PARK LAND DEDICATION IN THE SUBDI- VISION OF LAND The City of Mound does ordain: follows: Section 22.37 of the City Code is amended to read as Section 22.37. Design Standards, Fublic Sites and Open Space and Park Land Dedication. Subd. 1. Public Sites and Open Spaces. Where a proposed park, play~round, or other p~lic site shown on an adopted Comprehensive Plan or official map is embraced in 'part or in who~e, by a boundary of a proposed subdivision, and such public sites are not dedicated to the City, such ~ublic ground shall be shown as reserved land on the pre- liminary plat to allow the City the opportunity to consider and take action toward acquisition of such ~ublic grounq or park by purchase or other means prior to approval of the final plat. Subd. 2. Park Land Dedication. In every plat, replat, or subdivision of land allowinq development for residential, commercial, industrial or other uses or combination thereof, or in a Planned Development Area, or where a waiver is granted, a reasonable portion of such land, but not less than 10% if the propert~ is to be used for residential, multiple family residential, commercial business or industrial purposes, shall be set aside add dedicated by the tract owner or owners to the general public as open space for park playground purposes, public open space, or storm water holding areas or ponds. Said land shall be ~itable--f~r aforedescribed purposes and the City shall not be recuired to accept land which will not be usable for parks and playgrounds or which would require extensive expenditures on the part of the public to make them usable. The City shall have the option to require cash cohtribution in lieu of setting aside of dedicated land or in requiring a part of the land and the balance of the land value in cash. ~ is hereby determined that where a cash contribution is ~l~lue s~] he $]O,nn0 pcr acre. Any mo~ey so paid. to the City shall be placed in a special fund and used only for-- %he acquisition of land for parks and playgrounds, public open space and storm water holding areas or ponds, or the development of existing park and playground sites or debt retirement in connection with land previously acauired fox parks and playgrounds. Any lands which obtain a waiver of the subdivision reauire- ments, shall be subject to these regulations. Any cash contribution in lieu of land shall be based on 10% for resi- dential, multiple family residential, commercial or industrial uses of the total fair market value of the ]_and being s,ubdi- Vided. J~D_-~ul~ting th~ f~iz m~rket value, d~ed that Said value shall no[ ~xc~d $~0, For purposes of this ordinance, "fair market land value" is defined as the market value of the land within such plat, replat, or subdivision as of the date the plat, replat, or subdivision is presented to th__e City council for preliminary approval, or if no preliminary approval be given or required as of the date so presented for final approval as determined ~y the City.Assessor in the same manner as he determines the market value of land for tax purposes, excluding, in deter_____mi.n.in_g_ such value, all value added to such land by improvements other than utilities, streets, and other public i. mprovements serving such land., but including in such deter- mination the highest and best use to which the land can be put under the zoning districts then e'stablish-ed Or.proposed. This provision shall not apply to the division of platted lots which are being combined with other existing lots to increase lot sizes to conform to the larger sized lots required by the Zoning OrdinaDce. This exception is in ~ecggnition of 'the need to put undersized lots tocether to bring them into conformance with zoning requirements adopted after the original subdivision of properties, many of which predate aq~ zoning ~e_gulations of this City.-- Attest: Mayor City Clerk CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 8, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-45 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Public Hearing - PDA Ordinance At the Public Hearing for the proposed PDA Ordinance, the discussion was tabled until an ordinance change could be provided for changing the Subdivision Ordinance. The Council has that proposed change. Attached is a copy of a letter from the Attorney with suggested possible changes in the PDA ordinance that were discussed at the hearing. This will be listed on the February 14th Agenda. Lednard L. Kopp LAW OFFICES CLAYTON L. LI:F'EVERE HERBERT P. LEFLER CURTIS A. PEARSON J. DENNIS O'BRIEN JOHN E. D~AWZ DAVID J. KENNEDY JOHN B. DEAN L~'FEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON,O'BRIEN & DRAWZ IIOO FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 5540~ February 3, 1978 TELEPHONE (61;~) 333-054.3 Mr. Len Kopp, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Amendment of Subdivision Ordinance Dear Len: At the council meeting on January 31, 1978, the Council considered the proposed PDA ordinance. One of the questions which came up related to park dedication of open space. I indicated to the Council that our existing subdivision ordinance did not have a park dedication provision other than 22.37 which is not all that specific. The Council determined that they wanted to adopt a park land ordinance first and then in adopting a PDA ordinance, they would make reference to the subdivision ordinance requiring park dedication. I am enclosing herewith a proposed amendment to Sec. 22.37 which I believe accomplishes the purposes as requested by the Council. I think that upon adoption of this ordinance, the Council can then move forward with the PDA ordinance. The sections of the PDA ordinance which should be amended based on the p%~lic hearing of January 31 are as follows: or". In paragraph 5, delete the words "the reouired lot area 2. Paragraph 7 should be revised to read as follows: "7. Open space and park land dedication or cash in lieu thereof pursuant to the requirements of Sec. 22.37 of the City Code shall be required. The land which is to be set aside as open space shall be clearly indicated on the plan. Provisions for recreational area and for continual maintenance of that area not dedicated and accepted by the City shall be required." LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON. O'BRIEN & DRAWZ Page 2 Mr. Len Kopp, City Manager February 3, 1978 3. Paragraph 10 should be changed in that the reference to Section 26 should be changed to Section 22 which is the subdivision code. I believe with these changes the Coundil may reconsider the ordinances, and if everything meets with their satisfaction, they can move ahead to adopt the two ordinances. A public hearing is not required to amend %he subdivision ordinance. Under Minnesota Statutes Sec. 462.358, subdivision regulations have to be adopted by ordinance and under Subd. 3 the law states, "After a municipality adopts subdivision regulations, copies of the regulations shall be filed with the County Recorder as provided in Sec. 465.321 to 465.324". It is therefore imperative that a copy of our subdivision regulations be recorded with the County Recorder to make them effective. CAP: lh Enclosure Ver{ truly yours, Curtis A. Pearson City Atto rney ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 23.065 TO THE CITY CODE PROVIDING FOR A "PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA" WITHIN CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL USE DISTRICTS The City of Mound ordains: Section 23.065 is hereby added to the City Code and shall read as follows: 23.065 Planned Development Area a. Purpose. The purpose of this section of the zoning code is to provide a method by which parcels of land in the Residential Use District A-1 (Sec. 23.011), Residential Use District A-2 (Sec. 23.012), Residential Use District B (Sec. 23.05), and Residential Tommhouse Use District (Sec. 23.055), having unusual building characteristics due to subsoil conditions, topographic conditions, elevation of water table, unique environmental considerations, or because of the parcel's unusual Shape or location in relationship to lakes, trees or other natural resources requires more unique and controlled platting techniques to protect and promote the quality of life in the City. b. Standards and Requlations for Planned Development Area. The owner or owners of any tract or tracts of land in the afore- described residential districts may submit to the City Council for approval, a plan for the use and development of such a tract of land as a P.D.A. by making application for a Special Use Permit authorizing completiOn of the project according to the plan. The plan for the proposed project shall conform to the requirements of the use district within which the land is located except as herein- after modified. 1. The krac~ of land for which a project is proposed and a permit requested shall not be less than ten-(10) acres. 2. The application for a Special Use Permit shall state precisely the reasons for requesting the consideration of the property for P.D.A. 3. The application for the Special Use Permit shall include a detailed preliminary plan, and shall be submitted in complete conformance with the City subdivision regulations or with all variances detailed and explained. Variances ko the requirements of the subdivision ordinance may be approved by the City Council upon a showing that the public health safety and welfare will not be adversely affected and further that the development plan will no~ have an adverse effect on adjacent properties. All variances must be so noted on the preliminary plan at the time of application. 4o The number of dwelling units proposed for the entire' site shall not exceed the total number permitted under the density control provision for~e use district within which' the land is located. 5. The density in the plan shall not exceed the maximum for the zoning district. Any one (1) lot within the use district shall not be reduced to.less than 2/3's of ~he required lot area o~ front footage for the residential district within which the P.D.A. is to be completed. 6. Ail housing types included as permitted uses in the aforedescribed districts may be included in the P.D.A. Each lot as shown on the plan shall have indicated on it the maxi- mum number of dwelling units ~ be permitted within a single ~building. / 7. The lend'which is to be set aside as open space shall %be clearly indicated on the plan. Provisions for recreational rea and for continual maintenance of that area not dedicated nd accepted by the City shall be required. 8. The concept of cluster platting or zero lot line development will be reflected by the P.D.A. and must be shown on the plan and subject to all conditions imposed by the Special Use Permit. 9. No conveyance of property within the P.D.A. shall take place until the property is platted in conformance with the City subdivision regulations and M.S.A. 462.358 or unless specifically waived by the Special Use Permit. All bylaws, Home Owner's Association Articles of Incorporation, and Protective Covenants must be approved by the City Attorney and filed with the record plat. 10. Approval of a P.D.A. Special Use Permit shall be b the City Council after recommendation by the City Plan. ni~D~ Commission and all improvements required by Section~-'of the City Code shall be constructed by the developer at its sole cost. The applicant must provide the City with a surety bond or other financial guarantee to guarantee the construction of all improvements required in accordance with City specifications. 11. The land utilized by public u~ilities, such as easements for major facilities, such as electrical trans- mission lines, sewer lines and water mains, where such land is not available to the o%mer or developer for development because of such elements, shall not be considered as park of the gross acreage in computing the raaximum number of lots or density that may be created under the procedure described in this ordinance. 12. The maximum number of lots that may be approved shall be computed by subtracting, from the total gross acreage available for develoDment under this Planned Development Area procedure, the actual amount of street right-of-way required and that land in (11) which is not available, and by dividing the remaining area by the minimum lot area requirements of the existing "R" district or~stricts in which the development is to be located. 13. After approval of the Special Use Permit the applicant, owner or developer, before commencing any work or obtaining any building permits shall make a minimum cash deposit of $100 per acre or any portion of an acre thereof. The council shall establish the amount required for deposit at the time the P.D.A. is approved and this deposit shall be held in a special Developer's Escrow Account and shall be credited to the said applicant, owner or developer. Engineering and legal expenses incurred by the City of Mound in plan approval, office and field checking, checking and se%ting grade and drainage requirements, general supervisions, staking, inspection, drafting as-built drawings and all other engineering services performed .in the processing.of said development, and all ad- ministrative and legal expenses in examining title to the property and in reviewing all documents described in paragraph 9 for %he land being developed shall be charged to the afore- mentioned account and shall be credited to the City of Mound for the' payment of these expenses. If at any time it appears that a devicit will occur in any Developer's Escrow Account as determined by the City Engineer and/or the City Attorney, said officials shall recommend to the Council that an additional deposit is required and the Council may require that %he applicant, owner or. developer shall deposit additional funds in the Developer's Escrow Account. The City Engineer and City Attorney shall itemize all services and materials billed to any Developer's Escrow Account. The applicant, owner or developer making the deposit(s) in the Developer's Escrow Account shall be furnisheda copy of said itemized charges and any balance remaining in the account upon completing the project shall be returned to the depositor by the Clerk after all claims and charges thereto have been paid. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Approved by City Council Published in Official Newspaper CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 10, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-49 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Fees - Conditional Use Permits The Zoning Ordinance establishing Conditional Use Permits for Multiple Dwellings refers to a fee, but established no amount. Attached hereto are copies of surveys made on subdivision and other fees charged by neighboring communities. The Planning Commission has recommended fees for the following: Subdivisions: Minimum Charge $150.00 for each subdivision plus $5.00 for each parcel in the subdivision. Mound's present fee is $75.00 for each subdivision plus $5.00 for each parcel over 10 parcels. This would require an ordinance change in 22.40 Subdivision g. Conditional Use Permits - Multiple Dwellings The Planning Commission recommends a fee of $75.00 plus $5.00 per unit in the Multiple Dwelling Project. The Attorney will have to advise whether this should be an ordinance or resolution. Special Use Permits, PDA, Cluster Development Ordinance 334 in March 1975 changed Section 23.50 to charge $75.00 for Special Use Permits as then covered in the Zoning Ordinance. Since the Cluster Development Special Use Permit as covered in the P.D.A. Ordinance differs from the Special Use Permits formerly referred t~ the Planning Commission recom- mends a fee of $75.00 plus $5.00 for each unit in the Cluster Development. This is the same fee as that recommended for the Multiple Dwelling Conditional Use Permit. ...... I3~o~ard L. Kopp-3 i / / Minutes of MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION February 9, 1978 P~ESENT: Chairman ~uss Peterson, Lorraine Jackson, Gerry Smith, Greg Gipson, Helen Newell, Gary Paulsen, Council Rep. Gordy Swenson, City M~r. Len Kopp, City Planner Don Levens, Sec. Karene Uhe MINUTES **jackson moved and Smith seconded to approve ~ghe minutes from ]/~2/78, and 1/26/78 meetings as presented. Vote was unanimous. HOUSING STRATEGY The Housing Strategy was revised and completed as per attached. FEE SCHEDULE Based on surveys and actual cost report by Levens, the following motions are recommended for updating the fee schedule: **Newell moved to accept the recommendation for subdivision fees as presented by city staff. (Minimum charge to be ~]50 for each subdivision plus ~5 per parcel.)' Smith seconded and vote was unanimous. **Smith moved to suggest a Condi'tionat Use Permit fee for multiple dwellings be a minimum of ~75 basic plus ~5 per unit. Newell seconded and vote was unanimous. **Smith moved to apply the same permit fee schedule to Special Use Permit for Cluster Development or Planned Unit Development as is accepted for Conditional Use Permit for multiple dwellings. Gipson seconded and vote was unanimous. METRO~,uu:.~,-~r'r~rr~'r~-r'~ MEETINGS Metro Council is holding several meetings on housing in Feb. and March. Jackson volunteered to attend the 2/1~ meeting and report at next dis- cussion meeting. NO.~f-CONFOR?..[i?TG USE VARIANCES Discussion tabled until .March discussion meeting. ON ~E ~INN~ON~ INDIAN BUriAL ~OUND~ 534~ MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE MOUND, MINN~SOT~ 55364 (G~2) 472-~55 Feb:~mry 8, 1979 To: Leonard Xop~ City ~:~nager ~ Planner From: Don Leven§~:C~ y S~oject: Pert;it Fee Sm~vey Due to the increase in residential land develop;aent ~..;ith in the City co.,m~nmu~.es as to fees charged of Momnd~ %he staff surveyed local -', ' '~ £or various Ferr,~tso The results are listed below.' · la-o Rezon~ng Conditional Variance Final ~ ' i./inr, etcnka - ''~!0 : ~i~ Oro~o Residential Acc. Use ~30 Pr~nple Use $~0 per unit ?/Cor~.~n~. $!00 Sho~.~ood .~d.m Pra~rle !':'innetris ta Pll~,aouth :!~ce!s ior . ~.-'o~,~a (~.,.zs ..... ~,) lO0 lO (cr..at-n,, new lot 30 ( sf_:ecial 7,.;se ) 7~ 7~ ~o 30 per lot 200 up to ~0 lots 2~ 7~ .!: ): ,..~uBJECT: ' .~ I ~i~iETON,KA: .: t-t...'J.O -I J ~LYY, OUTH Leonard L. Kopp, City Manager Don Levens, City Planner Fees for Subdivision (comparison) ~ !C~e to the increase in residential land development within the City of Mound, ~ i~xe staff surveyed local communities as to fees charged for subdivisions. The results are below: /~f $150.00 for each subdivision plus $2.00 per parcel ~)77 $150.00 for each'subdivision plus 05.00 per parcel ~[f~[' $200.00 for each subdivision, fou~ parcels or less over five parcels $175.00 plus $10.00 per parcel 05.00 per acre - Minimum $100.00 Maximum $500.00 Final Plat $25.00 Rezoning $25.00 125 for each suYdivisio~ $75.00 for each subdivision plus $5.00 for each parcel over re, parcels, $125.00 maximum. The survey results indicated that Mound's subdivision fees are low in com- parison to other local communities. The staff recommends raising the minimum charge to $150.00 for each subdiv- ision plus $5.00 per parcel. >~'J~etrista CITY OF MOUND CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 10, 1978 COUNCIL ~MORANDUM NO. 78-51 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Lots 1 and 2, Block 14, Arden It was previously reported to the Council that we had an appraisal made of the subject property owned by Mr. Dolge. The appraisal in- dicated the property was worth $15,000 and the owner was asking $2O,OOO. The Council gave the Manager and Attorney permission to negotiate with Mr. Dolge. /~he Attorney and Manager met with Mr. Dolge on February 9th and ~iMr. an~'~rs. Dolge agreed to sell the property to the City for $15,000~; the City to assume the balance of the assessments ($592.08); the City to do all legal work and the seller to pay current taxes due x~f $20~87. Possession would be after April 1. The above agreement is recommended to the Council and a resolution authorizing the Mayor and Manager to enter into the agreement. This is the property at the corner of Brighton and Donald. _ · .......... ~ ................... Minn., .~ ...... ~ ........... .............................................................................................. .~... ~ ........... ~~ ........................................... as earnest mone7 aha in parr payment for the purchase o[ property ar nty ...... ~~ ................................... , Stare of Minnesota, and legally described as follows, to-wlr: ~nc]u~nB ail ~af~en ~n]~s) pianos, s~u~s an~ t~ees) ail s~o~m sash~ s~ofm ~oors~ ~e~acha~]e vestibn]es, screens, awninBs~ w~n~ow sha~es, blinds (~clu~nB venetian bHn~s), cummin m~s, ~ve~se ~o&, drapery ~o~s, H~h~nB Hxm~es ~n~ ~ulbs, ~lumMn ~xture~) ho~ wate~ tanks and heafin~ pIan~ (wkh'any burners, ~anks, stokers an~ ofl~e~ eHuipmcn~ use~ in connection ~hh), watc~ soflene~ an~ I~HuM B~s ~nk and controls (ff the prop~ DE sdlcO, sump pump, televMon antenna, ~to~, Nfikdn ~ishwasher, ~a~aBe ~sposal, ovens, cook top s~ovcs an~ cemral a~ condkion~nB ~pment, ff any, use~ l~ed on s~M ~mis~s and h~cludinB ~Iso ~he ~ollo~in~ ~son~I ~ope~: all of whit;h property the undersigned has zhis day sold to the buyer for the sum of: EarnestWhich ~e byhereinagrees to pays in~ t~owingandmanner,,./~e~e..., ~:~'Z / ~ 7~ mone3 paid .... ................. cash, on ~~~.t~...., the date of closing. ~c)'f :.4,~e ~~ree~~~v= a ...................................................... ~ .. 'Varran' ty Deed (robe jo: ,n by spouse, if any)conveyin, marketable ti~e to said ~~"~~ollowing exceptions: (a) Buil .:g and zoning laws, ordinances, State and Federal regulations. (b) IO,-:,orions relating to use or improvement of premises without effective forfeiture provision. (c) Re:. ~vation of any minerals or mineral rights to the State of Minnesota. (d) Ut:,% and drainage easements which do not interfere with present improvements. (e) Ri~Ms of tenants as follows: (Unless specified, not subje~ to t~D~cies) The buyer shall pay thc real estate taxes due in the year 19~ and any unpaid installments of special assessments payable therewith and thereafter. ~,r v,: ..... ~,::~tb .... ?1 ~r~:,t,? ..... es ~,,~--~mthe y,'=~ ~9 ....... :~ be h . ,--','~ ; 2-14-78 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 6, 1978 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 78-10 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: League of Cities Legislative Session Attached is information on the League of Cities Legislative Session on March 1. We would like to put in our reservations as soon as possible. Please advise if you wish to attend. ~-~Lebnard L. Kopp league of minnesota cities TO: Mayors, Managers and Clerks in Member Cities (Please call to the attention of the council) DATE: January 30, 1978 The League and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities are joining forces for amid-session Legislative Conference again this year, and we urge every member city to send at least ~e_rep~sentative to the conference and reception for legis- lators o~_W~edne~-~'~arch i-~ ....................... --~ The afternoon briefing session, beginning at 1:30 p.mo, will cover legislative issues that are at that time at a crucial stage of the legislative process. V~ile the actual agenda will depend on legislative developments, it appears at this time that topics may include: ~ax increment financing self-insurance uniform local government election day annexation phase-out of local police and fire funds From 5:00 until 7:30 p.m., the LMC and AMM are inviting all legislators to be our guests for cocktails, coffee and hors d'oeuvres. This is our opportunity to make face-to-face contact with local legislators and as such it is a very important part of our lobbying effort. The reception is informally on the agenda of both the majority and minority caucuses in the House and Senate and to date there are no conflicts, so we anticipate a very good turnout. We urge ~to be there to contact your legislator personally. The conference this year will be held at the Permanent Collection Gallery of the Minnesota Museum of Art. The address is Kellogg Boulevard and St. Peter Streets, St. Paul -- across from the St. Paul City Hall. (We have enclosed a map. ) There is moderate-cost parking nearby at the St. Paul Civic Center Ramp (also shown on the map). The conference fee for city officials is $10 for any.portion of the meeting. The fee is payable with the enclosed registration or at the meeting. Sincerely, Donald A. Slater Executive Director League of Minnesota Cities Executive Dire ctor Association of MetropolitanMunicipalities 3E)© t-;,eno',/~:r' Iotli!cling, 4.8(3 ce©~)r street;, seint p~:~u!, minnesota 55101 1978 Legislative Action Conference co-sponsored by the League of ~innesota Cities and Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Wednesday, March 1 Permanent Collection Gallery, Mirmesota Museum of Art Kellogg Boulevard and St. Peter Streets, St. Paul (across from St. Paul City Hall) 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. - Briefing session on key legislative issues 5:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. - Reception for Minnesota Legislators Darlyne M. Lang League of ~nnesota Cities 480 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 LEGISLATIVE ACTION CONFERENCE Wednesday, March 1 Please make reservation(s) for Action Conference. Enclosed is $ _ ~($10 per person) .... (-name for the Legislative Zne following persons will attend from my city: (Please print or type) NAME TITLE L i CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 9, 1978 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 78-11 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: Police Service - Independence The POlice Chief has received an invitation to bid on furnishing Police Service for Independence. Since Independence abutts Minnetrista, we can serve the area. Unless the City Council objects, we will place a bid on the serving Independence on the same basis and contract that we are serving other Communities. Leonard L. Kopp cc: Police Chief NOTIC SBec±al ~eet±~g - ?:30 9.M. - Be~aary~, 19~8 at DeeBSa~e~ City Hall. The Waste Control Commission will make a presentation to the Southwest Sanitary Sewer Advisory Board concerning Waste Disposal. You are invited to attend. Hazardous ~,~ SOUTHW~EST SANITARY SEWER ADVISORY BOARD 20225 Cottagewood Road in Deephaven EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 Area 1 -- Minnetonka Area 2 -- Eden Prairie Area 3 -- South of Minnesota River Area 4 -- Chanhassen and Chaska Area 5 -- Shorewood, Excelsior. Deephaven, Greenwood. Tonka Bay, Woodland Area 6 -- Wayzata, Orono, Long Lake, Medina Area 7 -- Victoria, Mound, St. Bonifacius, Minnetrista, Maple Plain, Independence, Spring Park ~INUTES OF MEETING HELD JANUARY 19, 1978 Present: Fransdal, Oberhauser, Widmer, Christianson, DeGhetto, Britzius and Folland. The minutes of the October 20, 1977 meeting were approved. It was reported that the balance in the treasury was $i04.35. As a result no billings will be made this year. Britzius reported on the Waste Control Commission meetings held November 15, December 20, 1977, January 5, and January 17, 1978. 1. New chairman of the WCC is Barbara Luckerman who presided at her first meeting on January 17, 1978. 2. EDA Action on Air Emissions at the Metro Plant. Reviewed reported alternatives considered by the WCC with no objections to discussion. 3. Noted acquisition under way for Shakopee sludge disposal site. 4. Noted local truck line acquisitions especially of Deephaven. 5. Discussed.amemo from Odde of the WCC about the study on "Alternative Waste Management"to be conducted. 6. Discussed the status of activity relating to Industrial Cost Recovery. 7. Noted in financial statements that WCC receipts are exceeding expenditures. Concerning construction projects in the Southwest Area it was reported by Folland that the Waconia Wastewater line will soon be in operation and that bids will be taken on the Orono-Long Lake Interceptor this spring. The matter of the construction of a hazardous Wasteland Disposal Facility was discussed. Britzius reports that the WCC would like to make a presentation to the Board and to others in.the Area. It was decided that the most convenient time would be at the next regular meeting to be held on April 20 but the WCC urged an earlier meeting. The date set was February 16, 7:30 P.M. at the Deephaven City Hall. There was conducted an election. By motion of DeGhetto, seconded by Fransdahl, and carried the 1977 officers were re-elected, 0berhauser,Chairman, Frane, Vice Chairman, Britzius, Secretary-Treasurer. A discussion about the handling of the Advisory Board funds resulted in a motion by Oberhauser, seconded by Widmer, and passed that the $104.35 balance be placed in a check account at a bank and that either Oberhauser or Britzius be authorized to sign checks. Britzius said he would select the First National bank of Minnetonka located at Trunk Highway 7 and Trunk Highway 101 in Minnetonka. Suite 300 Metro ~are Building, Sain~ Paul~Minnesota 55101('~/~ ~MO~NDUM January 26, 19~8~ TO: F ROM: SUBJECT: Metropolitan Urban Servi. ce Area and Freestanding Communities Joan Campbell, Chai~man, Euman Resources Committee Notice of Public Meeting to Discuss a Proposed Addition to the Metropolitan Council's Housing Review Guidelines ~~'~--~--~n~~ces ~o~=ittee will be held on ~onday,. February 27, 1978, at ~~the Metropolitan Council ~-~fo~to--di~"~-&~b~%-d'~a'a~d~i~'n--to~the Guidelines for Ranking Subsidized Housing Proposals, pages 114-117 of the Housing Chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide. Because your com- munity is among those recommended for subsidized housing and included in the Metropolitan Council's Allocation Plan for Sub- sidized Housing, the proposed addition to the Guidelines may be.of interest to you. The current Guidelines per,nit the development of elderly subsidized housin~ in co~unities that have or plan to have at least 60% of all their subsidized~housing for 'families. ~.e Pr0~osed addition to_~the Guideline~ estab!isheslstandards for t~' lo6a~i ~l~'h "'~~'~'~-~'~~'~d~' ~bY' a~" b6~unity~' ~ e'~['~ ~r~va 1 60% ~amily~subSi~i~zad~[[[h°~in9 units in' th~'~0'm~uni~Y Your co~ents, either written or at the public meeting, are welcome any time through February 27. For further info~ation, contact either Nancy Reeves (291-6307) or John Doyle (291-6378) of the Council Housing staff. Thank you for your cooperation. Attachments JC:NR:EM Proposed Addition to the. Housing Review Guidelines of the Metropolitan Council' (Insert on Page 116, left-hand column, of the Housing Guide.) In reviewing a local plan, the Council will take into consideration the following factors: At least 60 percent of the subsidized housing included in the plan shall 5e for families, after the elderly proposal is included. o If the community has an adopted Housing Assistance Plan (HAP), the HAP goals for subsidized housing shall reflect the. goals included in the local plan. The local plan shall take into consideration the Allocation Plan numerical goal for the community and shall not, as a general guideline, exceed the numerical goal by more than 100 percent in the case of First and Second Priority and Freestanding Com- munities., nor by more than 50 percent for Third Priority Communities. In establishing the revised numerical goal, the plan shall take into account actual and anticipated subsidy resources available to the Area, and shall indicate the specific federal or state subsidy programs that will. be used to meet the goal for family units. The plan shall contain information regarding the availability of eithe~ (a) an adequate supply of land appropriately zoned for multi-family new construction, or (b) an adequate supply of rental units that qualify for rent assistance for families. The plan shall also include information regarding developer or public housing agency~interest in providing the needed family units. HOUSING 114 H/7/77 Projects within the Rural Service Area: 1. Does the project meet housing review criteria? If no, the project is in conflict. If yes,-the following should be considered. 2. is the proiect located within the Commercial Agriculture Regions? If yes, the project is in conflict. If no, the project lies within the General Rural Use Regions and the following should be considered. 3. Does the project when fut'ly developed, result in fewer than 40 housing units or platted lots within the section where located? if no, the project is in .conflict. If yes, the following should be considered. 4. Does the community have an adequate on- site disposal ordinance ~s defined by the Met. ropolitan Council? If no, the project, is in conflict. If yes, the following should be considered. 5. Does the community have an adopted plan, consistent with Development Framework and with previous Council review comments, which d~ignates the area where the proiect is proposed as a rural service area and is the project consistent with that plan? Does the community have zoning and subdivision ordinances and a capi~ai program for the pro- vision of services and is the project consistent with these? If yes, the project is not in conflict with Council plans and policy. if no, the following should be considered. 6. In the absence of an adopted comprehensive pian reviewed by the Council, can the project, clearly be considered orderly and appropriate development for the area? If no, the project is in conflict. If yes, the follawing should be considered. 7. Will all affected units of government including school boards, counties, and municipalities certify and document by official action that they will provide adequate services to the development, assume responsibility for any pollution problems or demands for additional servic_-s generated by the development, and certify that the area where the project is to be located will be designated for rural use? If no, the project is in conflict. if yes, the project is not in conflict with Council plans and policies. GUIDELINES FOR RANKING SUBSID/ZED HO USING PROPOSALS The Housing Guide contains a number of policies which relate to federally subsidized housing. Guide- lines are needed to clarify, the relative weight and rank of these policies in recommending subsidized projects for funding. Under federal and state regulation, the Council reviews only "New Con- struct[on" proposals and does not review Section 8 "Existing Housing" proposals; therefore, unless' there are changes in regulations, these guidelines will apply only to New Cons~ruction proposals. in the past in reviewing appliCants for federal and state funding, a large number of the developments were 'proposed on sit~ with generally high levels · of ser,zic~s. Therefore, a ranking syszem based on Council policies and plans was developed to pro- vide an orderly and fair means of m.~king recom- mendations for funding from among the well- serviced proposals. It should be emphasized that subsidized h~using developrnent~, like ether housing proposals, mu~ meet the review criteria detailed in the General Housing Review Guidelines ar~I the Guidelines for Accessibility of Services and Facilities. In addition to these standards, required of all housing developments, subsidized housing proposals must be consistent with the Council's Subsidized Housing Allocation Plan priorities and numerical goals. Subsidized housing proposals will also be carefully examined to determine whether they would result in a concentration of lower-income housing in a single area or neighborhood; further iconcentrations of lower-income housing as the result of subsidized new construction will not be acceptable. Factors in funding priority Assuming that the subsidized housing proposals satisfy these review ~andards, the acceptable pro- HOUSING 115 H/7/77 posals will be ranked and recommended for prior- ity in funding as follows; Developments with units containing three or more bedrooms. The Council will give immed!ate top priority to any housing development which is pro- posed to include at least 20 percent of its units as subsidized family units containing three or more bedrooms. For such projects, the Council will set aside its normal priority area classifications and numerical goals and recommend highest priorities, except in the case of Minneapolis and St. Paul, which mu~t accommodate all projects within their estab- · lished numerical allocation. The proj~-=,ct must, of course, meet normal review criteria, such as being adequately provided with necessary services, having no negative environmental impact, and not constituting an excessive concentration of Iow-income families. How- ever, providud Council review criteria are satisfied, housing developments which will include subsidized three-or-mor~bedroom units for families will receive the Council's top prioriW for funding. Priority area and numerical goals according to the Council's Subsidized Housing Allocation Plan. Proposals are ordered according to the prior- ity of'the community in which they are pro- posed. The Allocation Plan is the single most important guiding principle for Council decision-making on subsidized housing, with the exception noted above aimed at s~imu- lating constru~ion of housing for Iow-income families. Proposals within the MUSA will be ranked according to their priority designation. Pro-. posals within the Freestanding Growth Centers will be ranked according to the level of services within the Freestanding Growth Centers with competing proposals. The community numerical goals for each of the proposed project~ will also be examined to ensure that the proposals will not be incon- sistent with the Council Allocation Plan. The Allocation Plan established that numerfca{ goals are best viewed as minimums for first and second-priority suburban communities within the MUSA and as maximums for the center cities and Freestanding Growth Centers. Third-priority suburban communities will be encouraged not to exceed their designated Allocation Plan goals, although proposals above the goals would not be rejected only on that basis. A~er proposals are grouped by priority areas, the following criteria wilt be used to rank within priority areas. Family Housing. As previously noted, developments which will contain at least 20 percent of their units with three or more bedrooms will receive immedi- ate top priodty regardless of Allocation Plan priority area or numerical goals. Family housing which will serve smaller families or contain less than 20 percent larger units will receive priority within the normal constraint~ of the Allocation Plan. For example, among competing proposals withirr a given priority area, the developments proposed fbr family housing would take priority over those pro- posed for elderly. In reviewing competing family housing pro- posals, the Council will §ire highest priority to proposals which are ec. onomically int~- grated and which propose to subsidize no more than 20 percent of their family units. Family proposals containing more than 20 per~nt sub- sidized unir~ will be carefully examined to ensure that the project will not contribute to concentr~'th~g lower-income per~ons in a single area (~.',~ ;~eighborhood. Joint Fami{y/Elderly Proposals. Proposals which combine family and elderly units in the same development or building will be given priority over all elderly propo- sals. Such projects will be examined to ensure that the site and building designs are condu- cive to a good living environment for both th.~ family and elderly tenants. Elderly housing developments, which if ap~cved, vv~uld be located in communities with at le~; 60 percent existing or planned ~mily subsidi?:?d housing. Among elderly proposals, developments to approved must be located in communities HOUSING! 116 H/7/77 with at least 60 percent of their total sub- sidized housing existing or planned for families after the elderly proposal is included. Family subsidized units can include both hous- ing which the community already has as well as units which the community plans to pro- vide in the next three years. The plan for provision of units would have to be adopted by the Iocat city council. The following illustrates how this would work. If a devel- oper proposes a 40-unit elderly development, it can receive priority if the community has 60 family units, either existing or definitely planned. This priority is consistent witch the Councii's intent to encourage family housing by giving priority to an elderly project when a community has a clear intent to meet its family needs. The outline below illus~rat~ how this list of prior- ities would rank various project=. -This rankin~ system seems to work well and represent Council policies, with the excerption that in order to meet ~he 60 percent family goal the Council may need to give priority to ail-family proposals regardless of their Allocation Plan priority. If there were a large number of elderly proposals meeting the priority criteria in high-priority communities, it might be that there would be insufficient funding to fund family units in a third-priority community._ If this were the c~se in any funding cycle, the Council would set aside priority area criteria to m~t the 60 percent family goal. Order of funding priorities for subsidized housing Large Family Subsidized housing At least 20 percent of units having three or more bedrooms (highest priority). First-Priority Communities: 1. Family project 20 percent or less subsidized 2. Family project over 20 percent subsidized 3. Joint family/elderly proposal 4. Elderly project proposed in communities that have at least 60 percent existing or planned subsidiz~ family units Second-Priority Communities: 1. Family project 20 percent or less subsidized 2. Family project over 20 Percent subsidized 3. · Joint family/elderly proposal 4. Elderly project proposad in communities that have at least 60 percent existing or planned subsidized family units Third-Priority Communities: 1. Family project 20 percent or less subsidized 2. Family project over 20 percent subsidized 3. Joint family/elderly proposal 4. Elderly project proposed in communities that have at least 60 percent existing or planned subsidized family units . ln-conflic~ recommendations In addition to the guidelines for e~ablishing pri- ority, there are a number of Counci! policies which could resuJt in an "in-conflict" recommendation being §iron. The "inconflict" r~ommendation means essentially that the Council is recommend- lng against funding to the Department of Housing and Urban Development or the State Housing Financ~ Agency. This r~ommendation could be given for the following reasons: Inadequacies of the site or level of services, negative environmental impact, etc. These reasons are historically the major rea- son for A-95 in-conflict recommendations. More details on these criteria are found in the Housing Project Review Guidelines. Proposal exceeds the communi~ numerical goals of the Allocation Plan. This would occur when proposals are submit- ted which exceed the community's allocated number of units according to the Council's Allocation Plan. This would most likely be a problem with proposals in the center cities and third-priority communities, where the numerical goals are viewed as maximums. According to Council policy, first, and second- priority suburban communities may exceed HOUSING 117 H/7/77 the Allocation Plan's numerical goals. Cur- rent proposals would be added to other approved funding in the community, includ- ing Section 8 Existing Housing programs as well as New Construct/on programs, and any other federal or state subsidy programs to deter- mine the total number of subsidized units a community has received. Proposals would provide elderly subsidized housing in a community which has not provided or does not have plans for providing at least 60 percent family 'units. Council policy states that communities should provide subsidized family and elderly units. The Council has approved elderly projects in communities only with the provision that the community is providing or has definite plans to provide at least 60 percent family housing. The only exception to this would be if units were to be totally lost to the Area because no other recommended proiects could be found economically feasible to HUD or MHFA. Proposal is to be located in the Rural Service Area. Council policies designate that subsidized 'housing should be located either within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or within the 14 Freestanding Growth Centers. Pro- posels located in other than these locations will be found in confti~.' Proposal would further the concentration of Iow-income persons. Proposals will not be approved if they would increase the concentration of lower-income persons in a single neighborhood or area. For example, completely subsidized family pro- jects in predominately lower-income center city neighborhoods are unlikely to be recom- mended for funding by the Council. On the other hand, a completely subsidized family development in a generally middle-income suburban community may not, in the Council's judgment, constitute a concentration of lower-income persons in an area or neighbor- hood. In summary, subsidiz~l housing pro- posals will be examined carefully to ensure that they will not unduly concentrate Iow- income persons either within the project, or within the area where they are to be located. Freestanding growth centers 'Freestanding Growth Centers are treated as a separate category. Fourteen percent of units will be available to these communities. The free- standing c. anters will compete again~ each other for the available funding rather than a§ainst the urban communities within the MUSA. Proposals within the Freestanding Growth Centers will be ranked according to the level Of services within the Freestanding Growth Canters with competin.e. proposals. HOUSING PLAN REVIEW GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF HOUSING COMPONENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANS The Council is required to review and cornme~t on all local and county comprehensive plans. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act specifies that a comprehensive plan must "include a housing element containing standards, plans and program.- for providing adequate housing opportunities to meet existing and proje~ed local and regional housing needs, including but not limited to th.- use. of official controls and land-use planning to pro- mote the availability of land for the devstopm:?.n~. of Iow-and-moderate-income housing." The law further specifies that the plan must contain a. housing implementation program to ~r,"/out th~ above objectives, it is clear that the legislation intends for comprehensive plans to contain housing elements which specifically deal with lower-income housing concerns. Distinction between urban and rural plans Experience in reviewing the housing components of comprehensive plans has indicated that distinc~ tions need to be made as to what is required in terms of a housing plan from urban and rural communities. Rural communitibs, according to Council policy, do not have an obligation to pro- vide increased low-and-moderate.income sub- sidized housing, while urban communities (those within the MUSA) clearly do have such responsi- bilities, in addition, urban communities are planning for growth while, according to Develop,. ment Framework policies,.rural communities 4' 7 GEORGE S. PILLSBURY Senator 42nd District 1320 Bracketts Point Road Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 473-9634 Offices: 130 State Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 2964121 930 Dain Tower Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 338-3873 Senate State of Minnesota February 1, 1978 Mr. Leonard L. Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Len: Thank you for advising me of the Mound Council's position on Senate File 865 and House File 1381. Frankly, I have mixed feelings about it. Obviously, I want to reduce the number of drivers on the road who are under the influence of alcohol but, at the same time, I am not convinced that this bill is the best approach to that problem. Again, good to hear from you and best to all. Si~y, COMMITTEES · Elections, Employment, Finance, Rules and Administration · Commission on Minnesota's Future · Legislative Audit Commission SERVING · Corcoran, Dayton, Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenfield, Greenwood, Hanover, Hassan, Independence, Long Lake, l.oretto, Maple Grove, Maple Plain, Medina, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Mound, Orono, Rogers, St. Bonifacius, Shorew6od, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Wayzata, Woodland ST~TE OF ~IIh'~h-E$OTA I)Et~ARU~')[ER'T OF PUBLIC SERR~ICE 7TH FLOOR AMERICAN CENTER BLDG. KELLOGG ,% ROBERT STS. SAINT PAUL 85101 TO ALL MUNICIPALITIES AND COUNTIES SERVED BY: February l, 1978 Minnesota Gas Company Re: In the Matter of the Petition of Minnesota Gas Company Request for Authority to Change its Schedule of Gas Rates for Retail Customers Within the State of Minnesota. Docket No. G 008 / GR-77-1237 This letter is to notify all affected municipalities and counties of the Minnesota Gas Company rate increase petition currently before the Minnesota Public Service Commission and to provide you with information concerning pro- cedures for intervention. The utility has applied to the Commission for increased rates that will generate approximately $16.9 million in additional revenues from its approxi- mately 360,000 customers in the State of Minnesota, assuming the application of new rates to all customers. The amount requested represents an 8.2% increase in revenues. The hearings on its petition will be held at the folllowing dates and lo- cations: March 6-10, 1978 April 10-14, 1978 May 15-19, 1978 9:30 a.m., Large Xearing Room, 7th Floor, American Center Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 9:30 a.m., Large Hearing Room, 7th Floor, American Center Bull ding, St. Paul, Minnesota 9:30 a.m., Large Hearing Room, 7th Floor, American Center Building, St. Paul, Minnesota General Public Hearings are Scheduled for: April 5, 1978 at 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. in Minneapolis* April 19, 1978 at 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. in Brainerd* April 25, 1978 in Willmar* April 26, 1978 in Luverne** April 27, 1978 in Mankato** * Place has not been decided ** Place and Time have not been decided Persons (including municipalities and counties) who do not wish to become parties to this proceeding may in the discretion of the Hearing Examiner have the opportunity to present testimony and submit exhibits at the scheduled General Public Hearings on the dates and at the locations shown above without petitioning to intervene as parties. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ,.~"~.,~ February l, 1978 Page Two Any person (including municipalities and counties) desiring to become a party to the proceedings must file a Petition. to Intervene pursuant to Rule 210 of the Office of Hearing Examiners. Copies of these rules are available from the Office of Hearing Examiners, 1745 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55104. Any person permitted to intervene may be allowed by the Hearing Examiner to file a written brief without acquiring the status of a party; or file a written brief, introduce evidence and cross-examine witnesses at the hearing, but without acquiring the status of a party; or intervene as a party with all the rights of a party. All Petitions to Intervene must be filed with both .the Department of Pub- lic Service and the Office of Hearing Examiners. The granting or denial of the Petition to Intervene is discretionary with the Hearing Examiner conducting the hearing. If you have' questions concerning Minnesota Gas Company's rate increase petition or on procedures for participation in these proceedings, please contact the under- signed. Very ~r~jjly yours, ~ ,~'/Jw rJnJ~J. Anderson Di ~ctor TM:tc Metropolitan Transit Commission 801 American Center Building February 1, 1978 Mr. Leonard L. Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 May"wood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612/22 ] -0939 RE: MTC-CIP ~9.01(12e)-78 Passenger Waiting Shelter Program Dear Mr. Kopp: On Wednesday, January 25, 1978, the Metropolitan Transit Commission approved the installation of 99 passenger waiting shelters for the 1978 construction season. As you may know, the MTC did not construct shelters during 1977. Therefore, those sites briginally proposed for construction in 1977 have been given first priority for the 1978 program. Potential shelter sites originally anticipated for construc- tion in 1978 will now be considered as part of future shelter projects. Attached to this letter is an Exhibit B which shows shelter sites which are being considered for'construction in your City, but which cannot now be considered for construction as part of our 1978 program. Subject to future funding considerations, we will be preparing for later projects which may allow for inclusion of these sites. If there are any additional locations which you would like the MTC to consider for future shelter installations, please contact us by April 1, 1978. If you wish to discuss the 1978 shelter program or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Laurence R. Schumi Assistant Engineer LRS/ag Attachment ON LAKE ~,'I|HN~c'TON}(A INDIAN I~URIAL I',t0UND'~:i 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD TEI_EPHONE MOUND, MINNESOTA 5,5364 (612) 472-1155 February 2, 1978 Mr. Paul Henry 5056 Sulgrove Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Henry: You were present at the January 24th Council meeting when your land pro- blem was discussed. The Engineer has visited Lot 6 and finds that we can release the South 55 feet for sale. Prior to releasing the land, the Council made two stipulations: 1. That.you deposit with the City $75.00 to cover engineering and other fees. 2. That you pay a double permit fee for building without a permit. If you will send or bring in a check for the $75.00 plus $88.50 for the double permit fee, we will send the necessary documents to.the. ~County asking them to place on sale the South 55 feet of Lot 6, Block 28, Whipple. Yours truly, /'L) , .... } City Manager LLK/ms cc: Building Inspector ~/City Council B~-.roa ' ~.':~,~-.s,-,~, ,-'~ Joy F!emS. a~ ("'~.,. ,:'~ R~-I~, r~,~,~.,,,~ Pois(;on~ and Sec. The minutes fz'om tq ~ ] 1//21/f,, meehi u,,:.~ ,;,':;m~:~ ::;~!::,:::['oved ~).s pres,ent,.e.d, Fleming reported -that she had bees. !itppo:kr.t;:,ed. r:s ].airson. from 'hhe Youth ~, (,,Omm As ~'~Nese 'two g.~ oo_p~, mee Corem ~o the CommuniLy ~' ' · ..... , , oex, v'ices AdvS.sor. v ' on ~he same night.~ she advised ~hat tho Yot.tt! Corem,, look into thei~ meetins night. ';o the first Hon, atL[f;h[ of eYeP.F month~ if mi{hr is open. --~ ~ ......... ' ~-~' and vi~ih to ~' " ~"- Uhe atto.- ' Po~at:;i't .r~:r~:~..t,e~ on pzo,o.[t ....... triad,, bl. oom.Lrq:,t,on~ s ,_. , .. ' ........ ,~-"' : '"'~fi "':ed D:Lrecto~ oe who wouJ.a se-~:, t~ o.t-~'~:~i.:]s o~' ?unnin~:~ the nStno5' ~Pors:'a~ q">,~ ~hen ' ~'" "' ~ ...... '~ the ' '-' a Yott%h i:,u~plov,~en" O< r~ .... :-, '~ a pz.o~oc)so.:_ ~'ox' ~x :.d J_ t.:., .: .:'n ::: rt:: O r,.. .... . .d :i. Ch'i:e:' a~d '::):ceso'nt;8'~::.ola wJ 't a'{ ..... .:-,..)!s%on and Uhe ~ ...... t,o tae Par,.. (k:'.'::u:. ~}toiP J/'lg/'/n r:: .<:t. art<, '" ......... ." i .... " _.. ::eau:, ~u::m,. ,~',~,--:,:::: 2/20/"Z8~ and :)_:;:' '7~'1 +'r~ tlD p. UO~}Oo<:,._L fOX' ROX'[; " ' :" '*~ ..... ' ...... . ~'nm,'°a. 1 :411 gO to < ,,~,'5! seelt:L'r:,:,; '['.t'{?. f .'.<:. <..0 JOHN E, DERUS CtIAIRMAN February 6, 1978 PttONE 348-3086 Mr. Len Kopp, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Kopp: Just a short note to let you know how much I appreciated the oppor- tunity to speak before the Mound City Council last TuesdaY. I only hope that it was as beneficial for you as it was for me. If I can ever be of service to you in the future, please feel free to call on me. Siye[qly, : ~ommissioner John E. Derus, Chairman :Nennepin County Board of Commissioners ~J JED:mf 8700 west 36th street west c'701,~ st. louis park, minnesota 554~'I February 4, 1978 telephone 933°2445 ,¢-.,, I ' e in Coun~ ~,lunic~ ~li~ies ~' ~Y~ 3 To : Suburban nenn p y p ,~' ~ ~ / Suburban Public Heal[h Nursing Service, Inc.. ~ t % Re: 1978 Services This letter is in response to many questions regarding: (1) 1978 Community Health Services subsidized programs and the broader range of services traditionally pro- vided your municipality at the needed per capita cost. (2) The newly incorporated SPHNS, Inc and its relation- ship to the 3oint Powers organization. Re No. 1 above: A copy of a report prepared at the request of the 3oint Powers Board of Directors is enclosed. It outlines the services of SPHNS, Inc; it identifies those which are Community Health Services subsidized and those which are provided your resi- dents by virtue of City Council action. Re No. 2 above: SPHNS, Inc. is an entity unto itself, independent, at this time, of the Joint Powers organization. It is for this reason that we are oommunioating direotly with municipalities. We can fully appreciate that with changes in Community Health Services subsidized programs and creation of the Joint Powers organization there may be need for clarification. We hope this communique will serve that purpose. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. We would also ask you to please call us if you know of, or hear of, any person/family who could benefit from any of the services described in the enclosed material. su.~q3, orted by t~ funds from municipalities of suburban henneoin county & the united way ~F~PAP~D FO~ JO~t BOJ3,D OF DIRECTORS , January ~ ~, 1978 8700 west 36th street west 2011 55426 December 13, 1977 st. louis park, minnesota telephone 933°2445 Legislation enacted in 1951 transferred authority and responsibility for providing public health nursing services from the county to local units of government electing to participate in a nursing district. %~is legislation was the forerunner of joint powers agreements. The statutes, under which SPtlNS has been operating, define classifications of Nursing Committee or Board membership and limit such membership to 9 persons. The joint powers agreement provides for considerably more input and involvement by municipalities entering into such agreement than does the current authority-- SPHNS endorses the broader base of authority and responsibility. SPHNS was the first nursing agency in Minnesota to receive certification as a provider of Medicare home health services. The capability of SPHNS to deliver public health nursing sez~ices has been demonstrated throughout its many years of operation. In this current year of Community Health Service programs, it exceeded service expectations of the initial allocation and has been granted additional funds. The additional funds were available to SPHNS because of under utilization in other areas. An appropriate mix of practitioners allows for a matching of skills of the care giver to the needs of patients. S_PH~S currently employs: Professional Staff: 10 full time, state certified, public health nurses 2 part time.',, state certified, public health nurses for child health clinic program and health consultation to day care centers 7 full time licensed practical nurses 1 part time physical therapist consultant 1 part time intake nurse, public health prepared, responsible for intake, coordination of the aide program and tuberculosis control activities sun~oortec] bv tax fur~ from municioalities of suburban hennec~in county a the united v~a? ~' Aide Staff: Office Staff: (full time) full time nursing supervisor with a Masters degree in public health executive director, also M.P.H. prepared full time home health aides accountant/office manager bookkeeper/secretary billing and statistical clerk clerk typists Service personnel are organized in teams or groups according to. geographic area. This allows for more equitable distribution of case load, earlier response to referrals and better coverage during absences of the primary care giver. In the followin~ outline of services, effort has been made to briefly describe SPHN$ programs within the three broa~ areas of public health nursing provided. for in the 1978 Community HealthServices Plan. Asterisks identify Community Health Service subsidized programs. HOME HEALTt{ SERVICES *a) Nq?~ing Car~: medically delegated fuuctions, examples of which are injections, dressing changes, physiological functioning measures, irrigations, rehabilitation programs, etc. *b) .H_ome Heal.th- Aide ca~: personal care (bathing, skin, hair and nail care),.ambulation assistance, food preparation and light house- keeping, tasks. NOTE: It is anticipated that a United Way allocation to SPHNS, in the amount of $57,258, will cover the cost of aide services to families of limited financial resources. c) .~ysical. Th~M~pM Co~%ta~ion.for fullest utilization of nursing skills in patient rehabilitation. Contractual arrangements with ~Curative Services provide for in-home physical~ occupational and speech therapy and coordination with nursing service to Medicare beneficiaries, Information and referral service is provided in behalf of all other patients and attending physicians. 'd) .Tp~ch~s-.Couasel.in~{: Persons with a diagnosed disease/disability who require no physical care are often in need of teaching counsel- ing and/or assessment and monitoring of physical status, medication regime, special dietary needs or activity tolerance in order to improve or maintain current levels of health. II. III. COMMUNITY NURSING SERVICES *a) Health Promotion: Preventive health services to essentially well persons include assessment, teaching and counseling regarding maternal and child care practices, normal growth and development, nutrition, signs and symptoms of illness and preventive measures to reduce the incident of illness and family stress. b) Da% Care Center and Group Home Health Consultation{,' to improve skills of day care center staff and group home parents in identi- fying health problems in children or in identifying children at high risk of inadequate physical, social and emotional growth and development; to improve knowledge and utilization of community resources for management of problems; c) Senior Citizen High Rise Hea%th ~.ro~rams.: incorporates teaching- counseling and health promotion in a one to one relationshiP or group setting; blood pressure screening programs with referral and follow up as indicated. . DISEASE PREVENTION AND CONTROL SERVICES a) Chil~ Health Clinic: Physical examinations, diagnostic tests, immunizations and health counseling for children thru the age of 5 years. Financial eligibility, criteria are utilized for enroll- me~t in the clinic program. Immunization Clinics: for protection against diphtheria, whooping cough, tetanus, measles, german measles, polio and mumps. c) Tuberculosis Control: All newly diagnosed cases of tuberculosis are reported to SPHNS for contact investigation in effort to locate the source case and possible transmission of the disease to others. The telephone may be utilized in control efforts to the extent such is deemed practical and "safe". Written and verbal interchange is maintained between the Minnesota Department of Health, Hennepin County Chest Clinic, private physicians and SPHNS for a coordinated tuber- culosis control program. b) COST OF COMMUNITY HEALTh'SERVICE PROGRAMS *Home Nursing Care Blue Cross, Medicare fiscal intermediary, calcula- (page 2, I a) tion of SPHNS per visit cost during 1976 is $30. Utilizing Medicare accepted methodology, SPHNS calculation of nursing care visit costs for the period January - June, 1977 is.$33. *Home Health Aide Care (page 2, I b) Blue Cross calculation of cost per aide yisit during calender 1976 is $14. Because of the nature of aide service¢ SPHNS charges for services on an hourly basis~ fractionalizing charges for services in excess of one hour. Costs based on January - June~ 1977, activity were $10 per hour. *Health Promotion (page ~, II a) visit costs during the period January through June, 1977 were $20 per visit. As per Blue Cross reports, SPHNS visit costs for the home care services rank among the lowest within the metropolitan area. Although no similar data are available for costs comparisons in the area of health promotion visits, one may assume the favorable comparison to carry over into that and other areas of service as well. COST OF SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAMS (page 2, I c, d: page 3, II b,c: page 3, III a,b,c) The cost of such services is, to some extent, dependent upon the size of the pop- . ulation base upon which a capitation rate is applied. 1978 cost of these services to our current membership with a population of 269,570, is estimated to be 35¢ per capita. N EWStETTER 10711 T.G. EVENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Municipal Finance Consultants First National Bank Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 612/338-3535 Temporary Financing: A Short-Term Program Any public entity may, on occasion, face financial needs to which temporary financing offers the most appropriate solution. By way of definition, temporary financing is composed of two basic types: "Cash Flow" and "Construction Financing". Cash Flow financing is designed to pay operations and maintenance where costs are incurred more rapidly than designated funds are received. Construction Financing allows capital expenditures pending receipts of grants/aids, future assessments, or revenues, whereby the exact amount of permanent financing will not be known until close to the construction completion date. Issuers which may require temporary financing include School Districts, Cities, Special Districts, and Counties to fund operational requirements prior to receipt of taxes and aids, or to fund municipal utility improvement projects where grants/aids, and definitive financing will not be apportioned until the system is nearly operational. This financing vehicle can be considered in planning for housing, transportation, redevelopment and urban renewal as well. Each state has special authorization requirements and restrictions concerning temporary financing. Basic to sound financial principles is the fundamental premise that the entity possess sufficient sources of revenue to repay the debt obligations at maturity, including revenue derived from permanent financing when required. Although temporary financing serves an appropriate function, it cannot be used as a substitute for proper financial planning. T.G. Evensen & Associates, Inc., a firm long established in comprehensive, fiscal planning, can be of valuable assistance to your community in solving your temporary financing needs. Financial planning at project inception may substantially reduce cash flow deficiency. Whether your temporary financing is accomplished through negotiated or public bidding, you can rest assured that the result of an Evensen handled plan is thorough and to the community's own best interest. Feel free to contact us to discuss this, and other financial options~ specific to your community needs. I.N'I'E~T RATES AND BOND Yl~r,r~S Short-term interest rotes remained fairly level in early December. Holding its own in 1977 against a record volume of $44,91%798,916, the municipal market still promises attractive rates for issuers of municipal bonds. Although the softening of the market in ;lanuary has caused the Bond Buyer's 20-Bond Index to drift to 5.7~% at mid-month, indicating slightly higher borrowing costs, the graph above demonstrates that reinvestment potential is also rising. The graphs included on this page were published at the courtesy of the U.5. Dept. of Commerce. TOTAL OUTPUT, INCOME, AND SPENDING CROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT MONEY, CREDIT, AND SECURITY MARKETS MONEY STOCK LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER. PEARSON. O'BRIEN & DRAWZ I100 !~IIR~-T NATIONAL BANK ~3UILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA S~402 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 February 8, 1978 Re: Continental Telephone |6121 333-0543 Fo~P~oF£sSION^LS£.v,c£sF~£ND~:.E:D from July'l, 1977 through December 31, 1977 including receipt of letter from Public Service Commission, letter to City Manager re company costs; telephone conference with Com- missioner Parrish and Bob Carlson of the PSC, confer Bill Flynn; call from Commissioner Sasseville; confer Len and George Pillsbury; study file; to St. Paul re hearing; confer officials; telephone conference Bill Flynn; telephone conference Mary Weinstein, attorney for company; confer Len; telephone conference Dick Schieffer, Maple Plain attorney re Commission action; draft letter to Mayor, Council, City Manager outlining program and what has happened with the PSC; confer Bill Flynn directing him to proceed with lawsuit; receipt of letters from PSC and John McNulty re status - Demand for Recons. idera- tion - confer City Council; calls to Goetz, Sasseville, Len; memorandum from McNulty re rehearing; telephone conference PSC, confer with Len re hearing; Confer Martin Weinstein re Demand for Reconsideration; confer Bill Flynn with update on case..- confer Public Service Commission personnel re Demand; prepare for appearance; breakfast conference with John McNulty, Marty Weinstein; calls to Len and Bill Flynn; travel St. Paul to appear at Commission meeting re Demand for Reconsi~ .ration; confer Maple Plain attorney and Len; calls to Kopp and newspaper ~_-e status; confer Flynn re District Court case; letter to City Manac'..~r re pretrial conference; phone conference with Flynn re proceedi)~ with court case; letter received from Flynn; review PSC opinions in Pine Island and Lakedale Telephone cases; Receipt of Notice; confer Len by phone; confer Flynn re hearing; phone conferences with Mr. McNulty re meeting for settlement; meeting with John McNulty and Marcie Wallace re Continental Telephone offer of settlement; numerous calls with Flynn, Kopp and Dick Schieffer re settlement and meeting; call to John McNulty; confer with Mayor, Kopp, Flynn and Kopp to arrange meetings and confer re settlement; telephone conference with John McNulty re various questions re settlement offer; confer PSC representatives; confer by phone with Marty Weinstein and. Len re arrangements; telephone conference with John McNulty; draft memo for Mound and Maple Plain ~ouncils; dinner meeting for ten; confer with Flynn; phone conferences with Schieffer, Weinstein, McNulty and other par-~ies outlining agreement; confer with John McNulty re procedures ......... ~-~-,~,,~o~, ~-~-~-~ ~-~-~,,,, ~'~u~3 , to council; City of Mound P age 2 Continental Telephone Also, work done by William Flynn, including: Telephone conference with Curt Pearson; review company request for reconsideration;~ prepare outline of response; telephone conference with Pearson; research law on res judicata and estoppel; research law on agency reconsideration of order; prepare response to company demand for reconsideration; attend PSC hearing in St. Paul; office conference with Curt Pearson; phone conference with Lorraine Pelton of PSC to obtain orders; telephone conference with Deputy Adminis- trator of ttennepin District Court; telephone conference with Pearson; prepared memorandum to file; review of PSC orders received; prepare letter to court administrator; review notices from court and hearing examiner's, offices; review of motion and memorandum, of Continental; research law on venue and jurisdiction and all cases relating to appeal from the PSC; research law on jurisdictional grounds for dismissal; prepare outline of memorandum in opposition to motion; prepare memorandum in opposition to motion to dismiss; phone con- ference with Curt; revise settlement figures; prepare final draft of report; telephone conference with Curt regarding city council action; and all other calls, letters and related services $3,678.00 Disbursement: Minnesota Department of Public Services 3.25 $3,681.25 I declare under penalties of law that this account, claim or demand is just anti, cor- rect and thaj;;~"~ part of it has b~,,~'~.'.~aid. ,. LAW OFFICES LEFEVE~E, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ IIOO FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesoha 55364 Re: Mound vs. McAthie February 8, 1978 'TELEPHONE 161Z) 333-0543 including telephone conference with Attorney Gilbert and letter to Len Kopp; review data s~mitted by Attorney Gilbert; confer Examiner of Titles; report City Council; telephone conference with attorney for Petitioner re allegations; review area, visit site; receipt of letter from McAthie's attorney, review, letter to City; phone conference with John Hendrickson re litigation, calls, letters and all other professional services $175.00 I declare under penalties of !aw that this account, claim or demand is just and ~c~r~ rect and thio pad: of it ha~s, beeD~a~. LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE. LEFLER. PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota I100 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55~02 February 9, 1978 55364 ~E/EPHONE Fo--P-o~-[S$,ON^L$[.VIC¢$R¢.O~.£13 from July 1, 1977 through December 31, 1977 including: County Road 44 Water Conference with Engineer re special 'assessment; telephone calls to June McCarthy and her attorney, Charles Carmichael; review of matter; call to Mr. Carmichael and effort to talk to Mrs. McCarthy; letter to Mrs. McCarthy re check from city and appeal; call from attorney Carrol and receipt of letter from Carrol, review Notice of Appeal; check with courthouse re filing of appeals $150.00 I declare under penalties of law that.th~ account, clairmor demand is just and cot/ / rect and th,a~.f¢9 part, of it h~,s. b.,~.~.pai~. / $~,natur~ of Ct~im~nt LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRiEN & DRAWZ City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota IIOO FIt~ST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MI N N Eso'rA February 8, 19 78 55364 Re: Improvements TELEPHONE rO"P"O~SS,O~..LSE.v,C~SR£.O~ from July 1, 1977 through December 31, 1977 including the following: [,/ Grandvlew Lynwood Storm Sewer Receipt of easements from. Engineering;-letter to North Star Abstract Company; receipt of abstract and preparation of easements; receive and review revised layout; draft new easement; call to North Star Abstract re order; review of easements as revised; calls to Ray and Len re easements; receipt of abstract and drafting easement; re- wording abstract; file easements; receipt of letter from Lyle Swanson; draft contract; letter to Mr. Kopp transmitting contract; and all calls, letters and other related professional services $300.00 6/~77 Special Assessments Receipt of letter from Len; calls to Marge and Mary re notice revised; letter to city with corrected notice; telephone call from Fener re special assessment complaint; calls to Marge re Dorchester $ 75.00 ~/Improvement 77-68 Westonka Road Phone conference with Marge Stutsman re notices combined - Public hearing $ 25.00 *"Street and Storm Sewer Projects Receipt of report from McCombs-Knutson; confer re various methods of special assessment with City Engineer $ 25.00 I declare under penalties of law that this account, claim.or demand is just and c&~- re:t and tha2t..~,if'o part 9~ it has be~n'paPJ. ../ Signature of Claimant $425.00 LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON,O'BRIEN & DRAWZ I100 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 February 8. 1978 City of 5341 Haywood Road ~.!ound, ~innesota 55364 Re: Hornet v. City of Mound TELEPHONE (612) 333- O543 ro~P.o~ss,o.^~s~.v,cEsa~.~.~ in July of 1977 including receipt and review of complaint; draft answer; confer Len re answer; serve answer $100.00 I decl~.re ui']der Penalties of law that t~is account,, claim or demand is lust and cor- rect and tha'[ no paA of it has been Paid. LAW OFFICES L~-FEVEFtE. LEFLER. PEARSON. O'BRIEN & DRAWZ MINNEAPOLIS. NIIN N ESOTA City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Mound v. Roelofs ./ February 8, 1978 (612) 333-0543 FORPROF~SS,ONALSERV, CESREND£R~O Professional services rendered from July 1, 1977 through December 31, 1977 including letter to Len Kopp and City Council re case; work on brief; review of typed material on brief, complete brief; complete review and revision of brief., serve on court and petitioner's attorney; review Roger Reed's reply to brief; receive and review proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order, letter to Court and City Manager; receipt of letter from Roger Reed, confer Manager; call from Bob Minor re easement re Johnson demands for maintenance; to courthouse to obtain exhibits; letter to Len Kopp returning trial exhibits; transmit successful order to City; calls, letters and all other professional services $375.00 i declare under penalties 0f law that this account, cla..i~ or demand is just p,~d.,cor- ~ecl: and/t~.~no part of ithas _.be/e~tJaid. _ Si&m~tur~ of Cla~rnant LAW OFFICES L~-FEVEF~E. LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA February 8, 1978 City of Mound 5341 Manhood Road Mound, ~4inneso%a 55364 Re: Mound vs. Schlee - State of Minnesota ro~p~o~s,o.^~s£.~,~s~~~.~ in November, 1977 including research at office of Examiner of Titles re land title summons, Lot 13 of Koehler's 2nd Addition; telephone conference with Len Kopp $50.00 LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ City of Mound 5341 May%~ood Road Mound, Minnesota Re: IIOO FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDt~IG MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA February 8, 1978 55364 Zoning Ordinance Review ~"P--OF£$S,O,^~S~,¢~SRC~D£~ in Decen~er of 1977 including beginning review of zoning ordinance; office conference with Len Kopp and Dan Levens re zoning changes; coma~ence drafting; draft ordinance; work on revisions; dictate changes; letter to Len; calls to Len; transmit ordinance $750.00 I declare under penalti~ of law that this account, claim~or d~mand is just anti-cor- rect and tha/V~;o part of it has b. ee~p'~id. ~i~'O~ ~imant LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ IIOO FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Land Acquisitions February 7, 1978 FoRPROFESS'ONALS£RVI¢£SR£NDER~D from July 1, 1977 through December 31, 1977 including the following: Tuxedo Right of Way Acquisition: Telephone conference with Pat Keefe, Loberg, attorney William Hanley, Bernie Otten re five easements, call to Banco; call from Klanderud re Phillippi relocation benefits; call from Kopp; calls from Butch Shager; call to attorney; telephone conference Klanderud, receipt of letter from Len; confer Ray re Phillippi, to courthouse, check at Title Examiner's office; call from Ray re Lot 45, Block 7, Shankin easement, review; letter to property owner; confer with Dorothy McClure, attorney, Department of Revenue; record Shankin easement; To Mound to review appraisal and consult with City Manager; meet property owner and negotiate purchase; prepare purchase agreement; check on easement document number; review of materials presented re Phillippi; order RPA, letter to Title Insurance Company; work on Scott, Ridley, Lockrem easements; confer Registrar of Titles re State deeds; confer Forfeit Land Division re Winsor State deeds; obtain certified copy of easement for NW Banco; courthouse work; receipt of letter from County, letter to Banco Mortgage; letter to Len Kopp; Review abstract in Phillippi matter; letter to ~r. Schwappach; First Guaranty and Len Kopp; call from Klanderud re Lockrem; confer by phone with Schwappach re Phillippi matter; to courthouse to confer with Registrar of Titles, Tax Forfeit Land Section, Stodeter ease- ment; record Jerdee easement; calls from Kopp and call to C. Liles; telephone conference with Ss~ Segal re Phillippi closing and First Guaranty; receipt of letter from City, letter to Ray explaining need for owner's duplicate certificate of title; attend Phillippi closing; office conference re closing; confer Sam Segall re ~eed; meeting with Segall and Schwappach and call to Len re closingF office con- ference with Gordy Swenson, deliver check, call to Len; call from Phillippi, letter to Phillippi, letter to City Manager and Council; letter to Phillippi re closing; Telephone conference Klanderud re Lockrem easement; review Sun~m~ons and Complaint (Phillippi); letter to Len re service; draft complaint and notice of lis pendens; receive affidavit of service; office City of Mound Page 2 - Land Acquisitions conference with Attorney Larson; office conference Ray Klanderud, review Reder deed, letter to Segall and First Guaranty; confer Len re Phillippi bank loan, telephone conference with Watson; confer Registrar of Titles re State deeds, convince them to accept for record; Notification from bank re easement not properly executed; get re- signed; tax forfeit problem with Followell easement; problem with Lindahl easement; review Phillippi file for status; receipt and review of letter from McCom~s-Knutson re new layout; letter to Phillippi; research re calendar advancement; arrange closing; confer by phone with Phillippi, Segall and First Guaranty; closing on house; to courthouse, pay taxes; Examiner of Titles office; two calls from Larry Liles re closing; confer with Examiner of Titles re Probate Deed; calls to Segall, Bill Seltz; letter to Seltz; calls from Klanderud and Jorgensen; Telephone conference re five State parcels; confer Klanderud; letter to Len re tax forfeited deeds; memo abstract; follow-up re new ease- ments; file easements and deeds; confer with County Finance Department re state tax deeds; draft seven new revised easements re road realign- ment; to courthouse re Grimm easement; description missing from abstract; telephone call to Gordon Taylor re Lockrem certificate; wOrk on Lockrem and Windsor easements; confer K0Pp and Swanson, Registrar of Titles re same; call from S. Nelson re State tax deeds; call from Ray re Jorgensen, Lockrem, Smala, Peterson easements; file State deed; receive and review six state deeds; review other data; Receipt of material re Lindahl from City; record Lindahl easement; review with Don Schultz; to courthouse to confer with Finance Depart- ment re deed and cancellation of assessments; work with Don Schultz review of all easements; call to Len re two easements to be redrafted; to courthouse to check certificate re ownership, call and letter to Len re same; attempt to record Watson easement; call and letter to Len re same; call to Len re case review; call to Hanley re Loberg; Letter to Examiner and attorney re Lot..13, Kohler's Addition; complete review of project and status of all easements; call to Attorney Hanley re Loberg and call from Attorney Kleven; confer Len re various ease- ments, status, review of all materials; two calls from Earl Wilson re Suburban Builders easement; call from Klanderud re Loberg and ten outstanding easements; call from Dennis Halloran re easement certifi- cate; letter to Attorney Kleven re Loberg easement; to'courthouse to check on six ceztificates; record five deeds and easements; call from Arno Winsor re building site; call to Len; work on Carpels, Probate Court; record Windsor easement; confer Len and Wilson re Sykes; call to Mary Marske re Winsor; review document; and all other related calls, letters and professional services [ d~cl~:e under penalties of law that [bis a~..o,m,, cla;m or demand is just.and cot- $3,042.25 rect and tha~ho pa~ of ~-bas. b~n oa~d ..... ' ~/ . City of Mound Page 3 - Land Acquisitions ~cquisition of School Property - Receipt of letter from Len re acquisition of school property, review 1975 file; call to Roger Reed; letter from City; prepare purchase agreement; telephone conference Attorney Reed re purchase, need for RPA and how to handle; to' courthouse to record deed; review deeds and tax status at Registrar of Titles office; call from Reed; letter to Len re purchase; convey deed; review and rewrite title opinion, transmit to Len $225.00 Total Land Acquisitions - Tuxedo Road and School PTperty S3~267~.25 ! dac!are under penalties of law that this ac:count, claim/:or demand is ]us~and cor- rect and th)~o part of~/RTha~a%en paid. $iA-n~ture of Claimant CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 6, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-42 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: Tuxedo Easements The owners of Lot 13, Block 6, Arden, have agreed to an easement under the following: Permanent Easement Temporary Easement Trees - 2,565 square feet - 2,110 square feet $1,282.50 211.00 500.00 $1,993.50 It is recommended the easements be authorized. -- ~onard L. Kopp 12 !0 I '8 D i~-,3 I ' ....... 56700 ""-,.¢. hae o{ .~EZ4 oF 3¢c¢ion 24,77.117, \19 ....! 20 SOCIATES, INC. .3RS ~ SITE EA5 E/V/E/VT' SU£VEY ¥OF 7-//;:F/-;~ /70,4D SA.DY5- WILLIAM A.-[4C DONALD day~0 ~,'OL_,,~), a municipal o:-,~rt of '-:-~,_,.~_ first _oa~t,- a~d ~'=:.,_.::* Ci9_'~' 0!. ....... .... ' ~Ltnn [:Et, r.)ezrt~, O~. t;lT:q-'cc';-'T': ?b- ..... ~ ~' ' of thc fJr:~t part co:~s:Lc:~ra~-to-: c)~ thc st::t of O2~3~ r:-~rr~,p. AND Ol.z~,], r'rw~"~ COUSiDE'',-,~' ': "~ ~n hand~_.-~-_a* by said party of the ~.~ .... ~--~;-. ..... y part, thc receipt o~_ v,..].c:h is h~reb, acknow].edgc~d, do__ hereby 9rant and convey unto the ~;aid party of the [;ec:ond park, it:s successors -~, ~ assigns, thc following- A perpetual easement for street and utility purposes o~v~r, under and across the following described tract.: /' Lot 13, Block 6, ARDEN, according t:o the recorded plat thereof. Said easement lying southerly of a lind 30.0 feet: n.ortherly of .and parallel with the following described line:. Commencing at the southeast corner, of Sect:ion 24, Io0-msh~p 117 Range 24- thence on an assumed bearing of l,;est along the south line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 24 a distance of 170.86 feet to the point of beginning; thence continue West along said south line 567.00 feet; thence North 86 degrees 34 minutes 08 seconds West 280.00 feet and there termina'tinz. : Together with a temporary construction easement over and across that part of said Lot 13 lying southerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 13 distant 20.0 feet northeasterly of the' southeasterly -. corner of said Lot 13; thence northwesterly 80.0 feet to a ]point: 30 feet northerly of the southerly line of said Lot 13; thence sOuthwesterly 60.0 feet to a point 17 feet northerly of the southerly line of said Lot 13; thence west to a ': point on, the westerly line of said Lot 13 distant 17.0 feet northeasterly of the southwest corner of said ~[.or ~ ~ ~_].~_,_,~ ~-~z .... ' ' -- - CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 6, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-39 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Public Hearing on Rezoning Part of Lot 54, ~ipple Shores At the January 10, 1978 meeting, the Council ordered a Public Hearing on the subject "Rezoning". (Refer to CM 78-2 - Pages 89-106) Attached is a copy of the rezoning application and resolution ordering the hearing. ~L~o~ard L. KoPp' ~ F ! ¢37 !1 ,, .* $ · . P ,.~..:._.:_~. :.-.. i~'_. :-.. PLACE -,t'. ---;"- 20:'- ' -'* -"2'3 ;-"":-~'-"27;:- ...... ";. / · ...~ APPLICATION FOR VILLAGE OF MOUND LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTIQN PLAT ~ ? TELEPHONE (use). 7v~ . Signature of Applicant Address ~b~ '~/ T Applicant's Interest in Properly Minutes of MOUND ADVISORY PLtl~NING COb~'~iISSION December 22, 1977 PRESENT: Chairman Lou Oberdeck, Cklair Hesse, Helen Newell, Russ Peterson, Lorraine Jackson, Gerald Smith, Council Rep. Gordy Swenson, City Mgr. Leonard Kopp, City Planner Don Levens, and Sec. Karene Uhe MINUTES The minutes from the 11/16 meeting were unanimously approved as presented. i~BOARDO~FAPPEALS MI~ WIR~Z, 3301 Warner Lane Lot 54, Whipple Shores, Map Rezoning 15 **Newell moved and Peterson seconded to recommend that khe application. for division and rezoning of part of Lot 54 Whipple Shores be approved with the following stipu!a~ions: 1. East portion fronting on Warner Lane be zoned Residential B to conform with present zoning in adjacent blocks 6 and 19. A bond shall be posted with the city to assure that the non-conforming and deteriorating garage be removed or moved to meet the required front and side yard requirements. 2. ~est portion fronting on lakeshore with access off Waterbury Rd. shall remain Residential A-1 to conform with other lakeshore lots in the area. A space for a two car garage shall be provided at the east end of the parcel within the required side yard and setbacks. 3- A certified survey supporting the area requirements for each parcel. shall be filed %,~th the city before the date of the public hearing. Vote was in favor, with Hesse opposed. as sounding fair. Applicant responded to motion 2. RONALD D. BAT~.'iAN, 2640 Galway Rd. Lot P/8,9,10, Block 22, Seton, Map 7 Street Front and Rear Yard Variances **Newell moved to recommend that Galway Rd. be designated as the prime frontage and presently unopened Clare Lsne be considered as the secondary front for determining side yards and setbacks for Parcel 3767 in Plat 37950. The remaining two parcels in the block have access off Shannon Lane. Peterson seconded and vote was unanimous. 3. DE~.INIS DANGER/MEL BACKLIN, 1779 Wildhurst Lots 3,P/4, Block 13, Shadywood Pt. Street Front Variance P~:SOLUTION NO. 78-3 RESOLUTION ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED A~4ENDMENT OF CHAPTER 23~ MOUND CODE OF ORDINANCES · ENTITLED, "ZONING" - Part of Parcel 5700 Plat 37990 WHEREAS, a request has been made to the City Council for rezoning of part of Parcel 5700, Plat 37990, from Residential A-1 to Multiple Dwelling "B", and %'~EP~AS, the City Planning Commission has made a favorable recommenda- tion thereof, and %~EREAS, the City Council desires that a hearing be had upon the same, NOW, THEREFORE~ BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, ~UND~ MINNESOTA: That a public hearing be held on the 7th day of February, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. at the City Hall~ to consider the proposal to amend Chapter 23, Mound Code of Ordinances entitled, "Zoning", by removing from Residential A-1 the following described property and adding to Multiple Dwelling "B": That part of Lot 54, Whipple Shores, which lies easterly of a line drawn from a point on the northerly line of said Lot 54 distance 141.6 feet westerly of the northeast corner of said Lot 54 and then southeasterly to a point in the southerly line of said Lot 54 distance 83.1 feet westerly of the southeast corner of said Lot 54. (Part of Parcel 5700 Plat 37990) That the applicant pay all legal costs. That the Clerk-Treasurer be directed to duly publish notice of the same and is further directed to mail notice thereof to owners of properties situated wholly or partially within 350 feet thereof. Adopted by the City Council this 10th day of January, 1978. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 6, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-38 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Bids - Police Equipment Bids have been received on four (4) items of Police equipment budgeted for this year. They are: 1. Emergency Oxygen Equipment (5 Robertshaw Units - plus filling & testing 4 existing units) Hillcrest Safety & Equipment $1,870.00' Medical Oxygen & Equipment Co. 1,686.00 * Bid does not include testing & refilling present equipment. 2. Traffic Radar Equipment Kustom Signal Co. - 2KRll Radar Units $5,070.00 This is the only manufacturer - no other bidders available. We will get a $1,342.50 grant from the National Highway Safety Training Act. 3e Transcriber and Recorders (1 transcriber, 6 portable recorders, 1 telephone hookup line and 30 cassette tapes) Dictaphone Corporation $1,937.42 Wahl and Wahl Corp. 1,854.15 The Police Chief recommends the Dictaphone bid because: We thor- oughly tested all of the equipment of both manufacturers and found that the Linear Equipment to be unacceptable for the following reasons: The transcriber does not have automatic electronic cueing, which is a necessary feature utilized by our secretaries for com- pleting "hot" reports (those needing immediate transcribing) in a timely manner. Secondly, the controls on the dictaphone are more workable and accessable for the secretaries to utilize. Thirdly, the dictaphone is solid state and less likely to have breakdowns. The Linear portable recorders are unacceptable because they do not properly erase prior conversations on the tapes, thereby increasing chances of errors on reports. Further, the controls on the Linear cause skips or blank, space in the tapes when they are shut off and on. The Dictaphone equipment has excellent controls and demonstra- ted none of the problems of the Linear. It is requested and highly recommended that we accept the bid of Dictaphone Corp., even though COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-38 SUBJECT: Bids - Police Equipment February 6, 1978 - Page 2 it is $83.47 higher than the Wahl and Wahl bid. 4. Breathalizer and Simulator Law Enforcement Equipment Company Striker Guns, Inc. $1,025.05 1,020.00 The low bid of Striker Guns, Inc. is recommended. We will get a grant of $510.00 from the National Highway Safety Training Act toward this purchase. ON LAKE MINNETONKA INDIAN IDURIAL. MOUNDS 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 February 3, 1978 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Leonard Kopp Chief Charles Johnson Equipment Purchases 1. Emergency Oxygen Equipment - 1978 budgeted purchase Bids: 1. Hillcrest Safety and Equipment Co. - 5 Robertshaw oxygen units $1,870.00 2. Medical Oxygen and Equipment Co. - 5 Robertshaw oxygen units 1,686.00 (This bid also includes the retesting and filling of four existing tanks now owned by city, a service not included in the Hillcrest Safety bid.) This equipment is budgeted for 1978. It will be used in place of old outdated inefficient units. The old oxygen units average over ten years old and are now effective only for inhalation of pure oxygen, which is often not advisable in emergency situations, further, the pure oxygen can only be administered with an outdated mask. The new units are used as resuscitators (used in conjunction with CPR), have variable flow inhalator function and as an aspirator. In addition, the new units are equipped with a selection of masks. They also will double the amounC of oxygen carried in each of the squads. It is recommended that we accept the Medical Oxygen and Equipment Co. bid. Traffic Radar Equipment - 1978 budgeted purchase Bid: Kustom Signal Co. - 2 KRll traffic radar units with trade in of TR6 radar unit - Less National Highway Safety Training Act grant refund for above equipment - Total City Cost $5,070.00 -1,342.50 $3,727.50 This is the only acceptable bid as no other manufacturer supplies this equipment with the below listed necessary features built into the unit. In researching needed features for traffic radar, it was determined it should be on K-band because it is a less crowded frequency, very efficient, and unlikely to Mr. Kopp Feb. 3, 1978 Page Two be picked up by most "fuzz-busters". Secondly, the unit should have a manual signal lock up for a fail-safe method of defeating the "fuzz-buster". Thirdly, the unit should be solid state circuitry. Fourth, the unit should be adaptable to add on equipment such as automatic traffic counters and cameras. Fifth, it should be automatic and. contain capability of fail-safe internal calibration. Sixth, it should be capable of computing speed and distance to miles per hour. The Kustom Signal equipment is the only manufacturer that provides these features. This unit has been tested by the Minn. Highway Patrol and found it to be excellent equipment. It is now in use by the Minn. Highway Patrol. Further, it has been tested and has met the specifications of the Wisconsin, North Dakota, and New York State Police and is being used by each. 3. Transcriber and portable recorders - 1978 budgeted purchase Bids: 1. Dictaphone Corp. - 1 transcriber, 6 portable recorders, 1 telephone hookup line and 30 cassette tapes - 2. Wahl and Wahl Corp. - 1 Linear transcriber, 6 portable recorders, 1 telephone hookup line and 30 cassette tapes - $1,937.62 1,854.15 It is requested and highly recommended that we accept the bid of Dictaphone Corp., even though it is $83.47 higher than the Wahl and Wahl bid. We thoroughly tested a~l of the equipment of both manufacturers and found that the Linear Equipment to be unacceptable for the following reasons: The transcriber does not have automatic electronic cueing, which is a necessary feature utilized by our secre- taries for completing "hot" reports (those needing immediate transcribing) in a timely manner. Secondly, the controls on the dictaphone~are more workable and accessable for the secretaries to utilize. Thirdly, the dictaphone is solid state and less likely to have breakdowns. The Linear portable recorders are unacceptable because they do not properly erase prior conversations on the tapes, thereby increasing chances of errors on reports. Further, the controls on the Linear cause skips or blank space in the tapes when they are shut off and on. The Dictaphone equipment has excellent controls and demonstrated none of the ~'P~0blems of the Linear. 4. Breathalyzer and Simulator - 1978 budgeted purchase Bids: 1. 2. Law Enforcement Equipment Co. - Breathalyzer and Simulator $1,025.05 Striker Guns, Inc. - Breathalyzer and Simulator 1,020.00 Less National Highway Safety Training Act to city - 510.00 Total cost to city $510.00 It is recommended that we take the bid of Striker Guns, Inc., at $1,020. The breathalyzer now being used by the department was purchased in 1969. In 1977 it was submitted to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension for repairs. Eldon Eugstead, Head of the Dept. of Breathalyzers at BCA, recommended that the present machine be used no longer as the primary testing machine for the dept., but rather be set aside as a backup due to the frequency of malfunctions and the age of the. machine. The above listed bids are for the Smith and Wesson Simulator which is the only state authorized breathalyzer machine as it is the only machine that is acceptable as evidence in court. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 6, 1978 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 78-40 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council The City Manager Wychwood Bridge - Final Plans The County has prepared tlle final plans for Wychwood Bridge and the Council's approval is required. Two resolutions are needed: 1. Resolution approving final plans and specifications. (Copy attached) o A resolution authorizing the Mayor and Manager to enter into a "Construction Cooperative Agreement" with the County - A copy of the proposed agreement is attached. Mound's estimated share for the bridge construction is $8,378.90. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. Soufh Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 935-3381 6 February 1978 Mr. Leonard L. Kopp, Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Kopp: Re: County State Aid Highway No. 125 County Project 7585 Submitted herewith are one set of plans, two copies of the proposal, three copies of a construction cooperative agreement and a sample copy of a resolution approving plans and specifications for the above referenced project for which arrangements are being made to call for bids. If the special provisions in the proposal are satisfactory, please have your engineer approve the proposal provided for that purpose and return it to this office. The other proposal is for your files. It is desirable that we have an approved copy of said proposal in our files before we release the authorization for publication of the advertisement for bids. If the agreement is satisfactory, please have all three copies signed by the appro- priate City Officials and return to this office. Upon completion of the remaining signatures by County Officials, we will send you one fully executed copy of the agreement for your files. Also, please return a certified copy of the resolution authOrizing the mayor and manager to sign the agreement. A resolution approving plans, specifications, and special provisions must be passed by the City Council prior to our advertisement for bids. We will be happy to review the plans, or any of the documents, with you at your convenience if you have any questions concerning them. V~ry truly rs, ~ ~.~" /~. ~.~:~ 'Al~' ~,.,.,..,~/'~ Don S Spielmann,~P.E Chief-Design Division DSS/WGM:lar Enclosure HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity, employer At a duly authorized meeting of the City Council of Minnesota,.the following resolution was moved and adopted: Mound RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Plans for Hennepin County Project No. 7585 showing proposed alignment, profiles, grades, and cross sections, together with specifications and special provisions for the (construction), (~t~~), (N~~, of CountX State Aid Highway No. 125 within the limits of the City as a (State) (~ma~mby) Aid Project have been prepared and presented to the City. NOW THEREFORE IT IS RESOLVED: That said plans, specifications, and special provisions be in all things approved. Dated this day of , 19 CERTIFICATIOH State of Minnesota County of Hennepin City of Mound I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of 19 (Seal) Mound Mound at a meeting thereof held in the City of , Minnesota on the day of as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession. /\greei~!ent No. PW 4,1-06~77 Coul~t.,' Projeck I,io. 7585 ;~ou~!/ State A~'J tI'ighway No, 125 % )t: Mound ;;OU~t.~ oF Ilenncpin uONSTRUC. ION COOt~.:~RkT IVE flG~EEMENT AGREEMENT Made and entered into this ..... da3 of 19 , by and between the County of H~.~nepirl~ .': body t)oiitic anc~ corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesoi:a~ herei~:::fteF referred to as the "Co~n~y and the City of Mound~ a body politic and corpo~.:~e under the laws of the State ef Minnesota, hereinafter referred ~:o as (:~e "Ci~y". NI lNESSETH: NHffREAS, l'he County and th~ City for some time hav'~ been r~egotiatin~j bring about the improvemen'~ of that portion of County S~:ate Aid ltighway No. between Emerald Drive and Brighton Bouqevard (Eng~neer's S~ation 2C)2+90 Station 2'10+00) as shown on the County Engineer's plan f~.m County Proje(:t No, 7585, which improvement contempla'~es and includes grad~ng~ bituminous base~ bituminous sur'Facing, drainage, retaining waTTs, Bridge No. 27606~ and other relate,~ improv~:.ments~ and W~i;'.?~'AS~ The above described project 3 ]es within the cc, rporate limi[s the City, and NHEREAS, ~he County Engineer has herc.~;ofore on October 12~ 1977 prepared an engineer's estimate of the quantities and ur:At prices of materials and Ia[~or for the above described project and an estimat~ of the i:o~al cost for Contract work in the s~n of Six Hundred Six~y-One Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Eight Dollars and Twenty Five Cents ($661,438.25). ?~ copy of said estimate (marked Exhibit "A") is attached hereto and by th'it reference is made a part hereof~ and NHEREAS~ It is contemplated that said w~rk be carried out by the part'ies hereto under, the provisions of M.S. Sec, 162.17~ Subd. 1. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREE'D: ThaC the Count. y or its agents will ad~ert~se for bids for the work and construction of ~he aforesaid Project ~xio, 7585.: ~-~d receivF, and (q~ei'~ bid~ pursuant to said advertisement and ent~r into a :~ontract with i:he successful bidder' at thc unit price~ specified in the bid ~;f such bidder, according law in such case provided for counties. The Contract will be in form and will include the plans and specifications prepared by the County or its agents, which said plans and specifications are by th~s reference made a part hereof. II The County will administer the Contract and inspect the construction of the contract work contemplated herewith. However, the City Engineer of llound shall cooperate with the County Engineer and his staff at their request to the extent necessary, but will have no responsibility for the supervision of the work. III The County or its agents shall acqui, re all rights of way, permits and/or easements required for the construction of said project. The final total cost of all rights of way, permits and/or easements required for the construction of the said project, plus all costs incurred by the County in acquiring said rights of way, permits and/or easements shall be apportioned 50 percent to Hennepin County and 50 percent to the City of I,lound. The right of way costs incurred as described herein shall include all acquisition costs including, but not limited to, any and all damages occurring to any person or persons, including private utilities in relocating or removing or adjusting main conduits or other structures located in or upon the land taken and within the present right of way~ or damage in procuring such right of way, whether such damage is caused by the County or the City in the performance of such contract with respect to the improvement of County State Aid Highway No. 125 as 'shown on the plans for County Project No. 7585. The County will periodi~cally, as parcels are acquired, prepare and submit to the City itemized accounts showing right of way and acquisition costs incurred by the County. The City share of said costs shall become due and payable w~thin thirty (30) days after submittal. The estimated right of way expenses described herein are indicated in said Exhibit "A" attached hereto. IV l'he City s!~a'll reimburse ti~e County for its share in the construction costs of the Contract work fo'~' said project and the total final con'tract constru~ c. ion costs shall be apportioned as set forth in the division of cost statement ii~ said Exhibit "A" attached hereto. It is further agreed that the Engineer's Estimate -2- referred to on Page 1 of this agreement is an estimate of the construction costs for the Contract work on said project and that the unit prices set forth in the contract with the successful bidder and the final quantities as measured by 'the Engineer shall govern in computing the total final contract construction cost for apportioning the cost o'F said project according to the provisions of this paragraph. V In addition to payment of the City's proportionate share of the contract construction and right of way costs, the City also agrees to pay to the County a sum equal to twenty percent (20%) of the amount computed as the City's share of the said contract construction costs, it being understood that said additional payment by the City is itsproportionate share of all engineering costs incurred by the County in connection with the work perfor, med within the corporate limits of the City. VI Within sixty (60).days after an award by the County to the successful bidder, · the City shall deposit with the Finance Division Director of Hennepin County, ninety percent (90%) o'~ the estimated City share in the contract constructicn and engineering costs for the project. Said estimated City share shall be based on actual contract unit prices for estimated quantities shown in the plans. The remaining ten percent (10%) is to be paid to the County upon the completion of the project and submittal to the City of the County Engineer's Final Estimate for the project showing the'City's final share in the contract construction and engineer- ing costs for the project. × Upon payment of the Final Estimate to the successful bidder by Hennepin Co[mty, any amount remaining as a balance in the deposit account will be returned to the City; likewise any amount due the County by the City upon payment of the Final Estimate by the County shall then be paid by the City as it final payment for the construction and engineering cost of this project. VII The County Engineer will prepare monthly progress reports as provided in the specifications. A copy o'f these reports will be furnished to the City upon VIII All records kept by the City and the County with respect to this project shall be subject to examination by the representatives of each. -3- IX The County reserves the right not to issue any permits for a period of five (5) years after completion o'F tile project for any service cuts in the roadway surfacing of the County ttighway included in this project for any installation of underground utilities which would be considered as new work; service cuts shall be allowed for the maintenance and repair of any existing underground utilities. X It is agreed that the City will remove and replace all City owned signs that are within the construction limits of this project, all at City expense. XI It is agreed that the County, at its expense, shall place all the necessary no parking signs and the City, at its expense, shall provide the enforce~.~ent for the prohibition of on-street parking within its corporate limits on that portion of County State Aid Highway No. 125 constructed under this project. Any modification of the above parking restriction shall not be made without first obtaining a resolution from the County Board of Commissioners permitting said modification. XII It is understood and agreed that upon completion of the improvement proposed herein, all new concrete sidewalk included in said improvement shall become the property of the. City and all maintenance, restoration, repair or replacement required thereafter shall be performed by the City at its own expense. The maintenance responsibility hereinbefore provided shall not preclude the restoration, repair or replacement of the said sidewalk under a subsequent agreement executed between the County and the City with costs shared as provided in said agreement. XIII It is further agreed that each party to this agreement shall not be respon- sible or liable'to the other or to any other person or persons whomsoever for any claims, damages, actions, or causes of actions of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the performancn of any work or part hereof by the o'I~h~]~= as provided herein; and each party further agrees to defend at its sole cosL and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of -4- performance of its own work as provided herein. XIV It is further agreed that any and all employees of the City and all other persons engaged by the City in the performance of any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the City shall not be considered employees of the County, and that any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein shall in no way be the obligation or r~sponsi- bility of the County. Also, any and all employees of the County and all other persons engaged by the County in the performance of any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the County shall not be considered employees of the City, and that any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and anY and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein shall i.n no way be the obligation or responsibility of the City. XV ~he provisions of M.S. 181.59 and of any applicable local ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination and the affirmative action policy statement of Hennepin County shall be considered a part of this agreement as though fully set forth herein. -5- IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, The parties hereto have caused this agreement to be first above written. CITY OF MOUND (Seal) By: Mayor Date' Date: COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ATTEST: By: Chairman of its' County Board Date: Deputy County Auditor Date: Upon proper execution, this agreement will be legally valid and binding and upon date of approval is in compliance with all laws relating to the subject matter hereto. tassistant County Attoryy RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL By: Deputy County Administ'rator Date: By: Associate County Administrator and County Engineer Date' Approved as to execution By: Assistant County Attorney By: Director, Department of Transportation Date: Date: ,....4 UUUUU~U~ i ~L~O0~~~ LC) ~"~ 0 ~0 Or-- 0 U 0 L~) 4J4J 0 r~ U 0 ;.-~. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washing-fon Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 935-3381 February 2, 1978 Mr. Don Levin, Planner City of Mound 5545 Shoreline Boulevard Mound, MN 55366 Dear Mr. Levin RE: PrOposed Plat ~ "Beachside Apartments CSAH 125 - Northside 450 feet west of Lakewood Lane Section 24, Township 117, Range 24 Hennepin County Plat No; 619 Review and Recommendations Thank you.for.submitting this plat for our review. We reviewed the proposed plat and have the following comments:. The proposed new access street, located along the plats east 'edge, is acceptable. No other direct access to the County road will be permitted. The developer'must apply for and receive an approved entrance permit before beginning access construction. Plans showing proposed access geometrics and proposed final drainage pro- visions must be submitted with the entrance permit application. Entrance permit forms are available from our Traffic Division, 935-3381. Please inform the developer that any planned construction within County right of way must receive County Engineer approval before beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction {utility permits required), trail development and landscaping. All areas within County right of way disturbed during construc- tion must be restored by the developer. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal oppoflunhh¢ employer The proposed plat is approximately 100 feet east of the construc- tion limits of Hennepin County Project No. 7584. This is a bridge reconstruction project and is scheduled for 1978 construc- tion. Please contact our Construction'Division for any additional information concerning this project. The proposed plat should be submitted to.the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, Minnehaha Watershed District, and the DNR for review and comment. Please direct any response or questions on the above comments to Douglas Mattson at this office. /incerely ~ ?~James M. Woid, P.E. Chief, Planning and Programming Division JMW: DBM: bg DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. Soulh Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 935-3381 '( February 2, 1978 Mr. Don Levin, Planner City of Mound 5545 Shoreline Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 Re: Trip Generation and Capacity Estimates for the proposed Beachside Apartment Project. Dear Mr. Levin: In response to the City's request, we are estimating the traffic volume generated by the 58 dwelling units to be 400 trips per day. If access is provided to both Bartlett Boulevard (County Road 125) and Maywood Road, we expect approx.imately half of the trips to use each access. In the event that the only access is to Bartlett Boulevard, we foresee no capacity problems resulting. .The intersection of the new street and Bartlett Boulevard should experience no additional problems with the added traffic volumes. No additional problems are expected at the inter- section of Commerce Boulevard and Bartlett Boulevard. ~w~e can be of furthe? assistance, please cal'l c~vne ~a~sumo~o, v.k. Tr"a*ffic Divi sion us at 935-3381. WAM/bg cc: Vern Viet, Developer HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opporlunih/employer ¢/¥