Loading...
79-02-27CM 79-67 CM 79-66 CM 79-60 CM 79-61 CM 79-62 CM 79-64 CM 79-74 CM 79-63 CM 79-72 CM 79-73 CM 79-68 CM 79-71 CM 79-70 CM 79-69 CM 79-65 CITY 0F MOUN! Moun~, Minnesota Meun~ City Council FeBruary 27, 1979 City Hall 7:30 P.M. 1. Minutes Pg. 517-523 2. Public Hearing Continued - Rezoning Cty. Roads 44 & 110 ProPerties Pg. 516 3. Residential Mortgage Revenue Bonds Pg. 515 4. Park Commission Minutes Pg. 498-514 5. Chestnut Road Pg. 496-497 6. Tax Forfeit Land A. Lot 5, Block 28, Wychwood Pg. 493-495 B. Part of Lot 1~ Block 4, Pembroke Pg. 491-492 C. Lot 11, Block~, Pembroke Pg. 489-490 7. Sanitary. Sewer Television Bids (Bid Opening Monday)~ 8. Watermain Replacement - Belmont Lane Pg. 484-488 9. Comments and Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit) 10. License Renewals A. Cigarette Licenses Pg. 4~3 B. Garbage & Refuse Collection Licenses Pg. 482 11o Ordinance Changes A. Taxicab Ordinance Pg. 480r481 B. License & Permit Fees Pg. 476-479 12. Sale of Property Pg. 475 13. Consulting Service Pg? 474 14. HUD Funds Year V Pg~ 471-473 15. Payment of Bills 16. Information Memorandums/Misc. Page 455-470. 17. Committee Reports Pg. 524 CITY OF MOUND Mound~ Minnesota February 26~ 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANUM NO, 79-75 SUBJECT: Addendum to Council Memorandum 79-67 Continued Hearing - Rezoning Attached is a copy of a letter from the Attorney recommending the two corners be rezoned from Commercial to Residential B. The Administration concurs with the Attorney's recommendation because this is consistent with the zoning of the other two corners of County Roads 44 and 110 and does not create too great a density. ~L~nard L ~ Kopp LAW OFFICES CURTIS A. PEARSON DAVID J. KENNEDY JOHN El. DEAN JAMES D.LARSON JEFFREY J. STRAND JAMES P.O'HEARA L~'FEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON,O'IBRIEN & DRAWZ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 February 23, 1979 TELEPHONE (612) 333-0543 Mayor and City Council City of Mound., Minnesota Re: Proposed Rezoning, County Road 44 and 110 Gentlemen: On February 27, the Council will have on its agenda the continued, hearing regarding the proposed rezoning of the southeast and. southwest corners of the intersection of County Road 44 and County Road 110. Over the last six weeks, I have been working with a Mr. Bruce Pomeroy, who is the son-in-law of Mr. Kamman who owns the property in the southwest quadrant, and with Mr. Mark Ohnstad, who is the attorney representing the owners of the property in the southeast' quadrant. The Council will recall that the hearing was called, on a proposal to change this from commercial to single family residential. Mr. Pomeroy and Mr. Ohnstad have now both informed me that they would be willing to accept the residential use district B zoning for their parcels. This is complicated to some extent in that under Section 23. 34, Subd. c of. the zoning ordinance, Residential B requires 12,000 square feet for duplexes unless the parcel has been specially assessed for two full sanitary sewer units, in which case the lot area requirement is reduced to 9600 square feet. I have indicated to the owners and their attorneys that I would reComMend to the Council a change in this property to Residential B instead of Residential A-l, and this is consistent with the preliminary reconu~._endation. I have also indicated to them that I would, recommend the utilization of the property in 9600 square foot building units with the agreement that they will pick up any deficient sewer units necessary to ac- complish that purpose. This appears to be crucial in the southeast corner because our preliminary calculations would indicate that it is doubtful that they can get more than six units on those lots, making three buildinc, sites, and they already have an application for a 12 unit apartment building.. LAW OFFICES LEFE~E, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN DRAWZ Page 2 Mayor and '~ Co ~ C1 ~y unci 1 City of Mound, k~innesota February 23, 1979 It is my recomn~endation that the Council give serious consideration to this p.roposal as I believe it is a good way of settling the zoning by making a substantial down zoning and at the same time avoidin~ litigation over ·your right to reduce the zoning. If any of you have any questions concerning this, please give me a call and I shall be happy to go over any of the details and answer any specific questions. CAP: lh cc: M'r. Leonard L. Kopp Mr. Charles Riesenberg Very truly yours, Curtis A. Pearson 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 26, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-76 SUBJECT: Addendum to Council Memorandum 79-69 Park Commission Minutes - Item 2 Attached is a copy of a letter and commercial dock application received from the new owner of Martin's Resort. ~--/ L?onard L. KoD~ %' "EXPECT THE BEST GOD SAID IT I BELIEVE IT THAT SETTLES IT" DICK THOMPSON - OMPSO REAL ESTATE CU. RTIS ~4OTEL~ DOWNTOWN MINNEAPOUS 338-3641 _ I. February la,1979 ~1 ~/~' Mr. Don Rather Dock Inspector Mound, Minn. Dear Mr. Ra~her. received your ltr. today enclosed with the - ~'~CLOS~D EOCK APPLICATION. February 7th - my wife and I appeared at the Spring Park Oit, y Hall for hearing on a NA~tl D0.b~K LICENSE, and Framk Mixa of I~OD was there, and he had copy of the drawing of the dock, etc. Tom Eockvam of Nound will be putting in this dock (if approved of course), and he has a copy I'm sure of the draw- ing of this dock. Wh&~h i.s taken from the drawing I made (also enclosed here). So we've cut the usage - from 22 spaces to ll~. I was do,~ by the Lake there the other day, and the snow was too high to even walk around there, but to give you some idea of the parking space there, - you could easily park 30-vehicle~ there - at least, as from the L.~ake to the bottom of the hill - it's at least 200 ft..%ud we plan to clean it all ~p around that area - but alss, - there zhould never be over I'd scF, $ or 9 cars at the most, as some of the people renting dockage lives in my Mobile Home Park on the top of the hill and will be walking to the Lake. I hope to be at that maeting Mr. Rather & certainly will be ~blo-to fill you in On enyfZ~ing I m~V~ h~ve left out. ~[' ;.,~ ~/~¢~.~ Dick Tnomp~ = 00;I0 × ~ pueI uo s~[oop .lo .z~clmmM 'Uosdzoq,T, eT..veN :~ HOIJ,¥DI~IH~V 2{00~ q[.¥!O~MI~rl(O0 fl~OH ~0 ~J, IO · N¥OI~d~V iO ~-IVH 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364. (612) 4.72-1155 February 2, 1979 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: All Concerned Dock Inspector Commercial Dock Dick and Marie Thompson of h32 S. E. 6th Street, Mpls., Mn. have made application to the LMCD for a multiple dock and mooring license for lh boats. They have purchased the former Margins Resort on Hslsteds Bay from W. C. Russell. Permit is for this operation. Several of the people in this area have called me and asked about a boat launch bain9 put in. They are concerned about erosion if this were put in. They are al§o concerned 8bout the traffic in this area if Thompson rents out some of his docks to people other then those residin§ in the mobile home park. I have talked to Mr. Thompson and he told me he was' not plannin9 any changes from what Mr. Russell had. Because of the nature of the land it is possible to launch boats here without constructin§ a n~t launch area. Mr. Thompson does plan on cleanin9 up the area. He has applied for a oermit for lh slims. Mr. Russell applied for 22 slips in 1977 & 1978, R~spectfully, _ Don Rotter Dock Inspector DR/ich 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 26, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-77 SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Television Bid Tabulations Attached is a copy of the bid tabulations for Sanitary Sewer Inspection. The Engineer will have a report and recommendation at the Council meeting February 27, 1979. Sanitary Sewer Inspection City of Mound, ~innesota February 26, 1979 Bid Tabulation Bid Planholders Bond Amount Comments Clear Water Research P.O. Box 44 Yes $10,175, Lake Elmo, Mn 55042 .25¢ a foot Mid-West Underground Yes 11,575. .. ~ Route 4, Box 140 Isanti, Mn 55040 ~ P.S.C. Professional i~,~ Services Group Yes 11,950, 835 North County Rd. 18 Minneapolis, Mn 55427 · Viking Pipe Services Yes 11,662.50 ~?~ 3908 Sible? Memorial Hwy. / ' ~ St. Paul, Mn 55122 ~ McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS! LAND SURVEYORS· SITE PLANNERS February 27, 1979 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Subject: City of Mound T. V. Sewers - 1979 Streets Gentlemen: Bids for televising the sewers on the 1979 street project were opened Monday, February 26, 1979. Four bids were received. The low bid in the amount of $10,175.00 was from Clear Water Research, Lake Elmo, Minnesota. A tabulation of all bids is attached. The low bidders price per foot is $0.25. Last years work went for $0.20 per foot. We have contacted other Engineer's who have worked with Clear Water and they report that they have adequate equip- ment and do satisfactory work. We recommend that the project be awarded to Clear Water Research. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. T,yle Swanson, P.E. LS:sh Enclosure 12805 OLSON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441 TELEPHONE (612) 559-3700 22 NORTH MAIN STREET, HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 TELEPHONE (612) 897-8029 SOUTHWEST ENGINEERING DIVISION, MARSHALL, MINNESOTA 56258 TELEPHONE (507) 532-5820 ¥ ~ 0 ~ E'~ 0 ','~ I 0 0 I'.,. cO .rD- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 C TY of MOUND February 26, 1979 5341 MAYW00O ROAD MOU~':D, NIli'~;',;_:so'rA 553~34 (012) 472-1155 Mr. Larry M. Bastian Minnesota Teamsters Union Local No. 320 3001 University Avenue S..E. Minneapolis, FkN. 55414 Dear Mr. Bastian: Attached is a copy of a letter we received today showing the Minneapolis/St~ Paul index on July 1, 1978 to be 201.2. -As I calculate the index, the 1977 July figure was 184.5, thus: 201.2 - 184.5 = 16.7 16.7 e 184.5 = .09051 or 9% We will ask the Treasurer t0 start paying on that basis pick up the back pay. · Also, we should amend the contract to take care of the balance ..of the Contract.' We suggest it be amended to read June to June so we can intelligently do the budget. Sincerely, LLK/ms Encl. cc: L. Swanson R. Tharalson J. Henke City Council U.S~ DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BUREAU OF LABOR 5~rATI~rlcs WASHINGTON, D.C. 20212 Mr. Leonard L. Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Kopp: I am writing in response to your letter of January 4, addressed to Mr. l~atrick Jackman of my staff, requesting the Bureau of Labor statistics (]BLS)to provide an estimated July 1978 Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) (1967=100), for the Minneapolis, Minnesota, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). Please excuse the delay in our response. The estimated Minneapolis, Minnesota, SMSA All Items. CPI-W (1967=100) for the month of July 1978 was 201.2. This estimate is based on price changes specific to the Minneapolis area and price changes for similar population-size areas in the North Central Region. Monthly priced items, including food at home, fuels, rent, and a few other items, are based on prices collected for the Minneapolis area. Taken together, these items account for over half of the weight of the market basket. 'l~or those items priced on a bimonthly schedule in Minneapolis, monthly estimaies of price change were based upon data for those areas in the North Central Region with populations' greater than 1.25 million. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know. Sincerely yours, ET L. NORWOOD Acting Commissioner Lake Minne~onk~- Seinin~ P~o~am - Ed Feile~, MDNR Fishe=ies B.' T,~ke Use Comm~,t%ee 1979 County Buoy P~og~am 1979 CountyT,akeMaintenance P~og~am '"~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z~~ ~ ~ ~ i m~ ~1~ ~ ~ ~ m~ 1979 Fish House Cleanup .~,:. ..... ,,~ : -- Lake Access Review :--, ' : . .. : .. Othe~ . - ' '~ '"' '" O. Code Amendment - 50' FT~ctions (ThS~d Reading) :' Othe~ Business : 2-23-79 L~_~R. ~[NNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR M~R. TING GRAY FRESHWATER BIOLOGICAL INSTITUTE, NAVARRE, MINNESOTA ,,Tanu~y 24-, 1979 The regula~ meeting of the Lske Minnetonk~ Conservation District was called to orde= by Chairman Maple at 8:00 p.m., Wednesday, January 24, 1979 at the G~ay F~eshwate~~ Biological Institute, Navarre; Maple relin- quished the chai~ to Secretary Bauman. CALL TO ORDER Members p~esent: Thomas Maple (Deephaven), Jerry Johnson (Excelsior), Robert B~own (G~eenwood), David Nixon (Laketown Township), Robert Pillsbury (Minnetonka), David Boies (Minnetonk~. Beach), Walton Clevenger (Minnetris- %a), Robert polston (~°und), F~ank Hunt (Sp~ing Pa~k), Ed Baumau (Tonka Bay), Riced Soderbers (Victoria), Robert Mac,=a* (Wayzata), Robert Slocum (Woodland). ~Communities represented: Thirteen (13). *A~rived late. AT~mVDANCE Johnson Moved, Soderberg Seconded, that the minutes of the December 13, 197s meeti , be ap oved. Motion, Ayes (12), ays (0). MINUTES Hunt Moved, Johnson Seconded, that the Treasurer's report be approved · and the bills paid-. Motion, Ayes .(12), Nays. (0).. .~ TREASTE~ER ' ~ REPORT STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: B~own repo~ted that the comm,.tree ~eviewed 1979 dock license applications and made recommendations for app~ oval. Brown Moved, Pillsbumy Seconded, that the following 1979 dock license applications, be apD~oved: Al&Alma's Bayshore Condominiums Boat & Motor M~vt of Excelsior Boulder ~id~e Farm Cedarhu~st Association Chimo Association Clay Cliffe Curly' s Minnetonka Fm~ina Dennis Boats Grandview Point Association Grays' Bay Resort Greenwood Marina Grewe, Deiner H~.~ts Cafe Johnson, Adeline D. Kelly Avenue Holding Co. Kuechle, H. B. Lafayette Club Libbs Bay Boat Club Lord Fletcher Apsztments Mai Tai Restaurants, Inc. Martin & Son Boat Rental Meadowbrook Boat Club Methodist L~keside Assembly Grounds Minnetonka Boat Works (0~ono) Minnetonka Power Squadron Park Hill Ap~tments Park Island Apartments Pivec, E~nest F. Rockv~n Boat Yards Seahorse Condominiums Smithtown Bay Association T. Butcherblock of Minnesota Uppe~ Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club Wayzata Bay Tenancy 9?9 LICENSES Motion, Ayes (13), Nays (0). Nixon Moved, Johnson Seconded, that the 1979 conforming dock license application for Lake Place (new license), be approved, a~d that the 1978 license application fee be refunded. Motion, Ayes (13), N~ys (0). LMCD Board Minutes Jan~¢~y 24, 1979 Page 2 B~own Moved, Johnson Seconded, that deicing permits fo~ W. G~ady and for Su~fside, be apl~oved with the stipulations that (1) no permit be issued until the installation passes inspection, (2) the state sign notice be included with the permit, ~nd (3) all permits stipulate that all deicing be contained, with~n~ the dock use area. Motion, Ayes (15), (o). B~own reported that the committee reviewed the m~p which shows the eight publicly-owned, no fee, launching ramps that are available fo~ general public use on the Lake; the come, tree ordered that the location of marina. fee ramps (which are also available for general public use) be included on the map. Additional information concerning ramp capacity and avail- able parking facilities, is to be developed. The .c~mm~ttee had reviewed the amounts of dock license and variance fees currently being requi~ed by the LMCD, and reco~mended that .the Board increase the variance fee f~om $15 to $50. B~own Moved, Hunt Seconded, that the amount of the variance appl, ication fee be increased to $50. Motion, Ayes (15), Nays (0). The committee had reviewed the use of the commercial DUA within the 100'- 200' zone, and discussed a proposal which would transfer the proceeding fora use of the area, from the variance section of the Code, to the regular licensing process. After numerous alternatives were proposed, the committee continued the discussion to the next meeting. In reviewd~g the method of defining the dock use ~reas, the committee discussed the use of side site lines extending into the Lake (present method) vs. the use of lines d~awn perpendicularly to the shoreline, and requested a w~itten history of the development of the concept of the DUA, as adopted in the original ordinance. B~own reported that after the public he~ing for G~yle's Marina new dock license, the panel recommended (1) ?pp~oval in concept of the plan presented, inco~poratinE the land survey, (2) that the proposed struc- tures in the Lake be incorporated in the survey so that the plan complies with District regulations, including the meeting of length and setback requirements from the 929.4 N.G.V.D. shoreline; (5) that the plan contain 134 rental slips, 9 service slips, and a gas dock; and (4) that the ap- plicant submit requi~ed parking information and the balance of the fee. Browo Moved, Pillsbury Seconded, that the 1979 dock license application for Gayle's Msmin~, be approved as recommended. Motion, ~yes (13), N ys (0). Nixon Moved, Johnson Seconded,. that the I~,~CD attorney be directed to hold Oayle's pending lawsuit in abeyance. Motion, Ayes (15), Nays (0). ~EICING PERMITS VARIANCE DUA VARIANCES DEFINING DUA GAYLE ' S DOCK LICENSE SUIT GAYLE ' S LMCD Bo~d Minutes January 24, 1979 LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the comm'_tree reviewed the DNR's 1978~79 rough fish seining tmogram for Lake Minnetonka, and ported that the seining manager will make a slide presentation to the Board at the February meeting. The committee reviewed the proposed Code ~nendment regarding noise abate- merit, and recommended its th_trd reading. Bauman Moved, Nixon Seconded, to (1) omit the ~eferences to "vehicle" in proposed Sec. 4.22, Subd. 1; (2) exclude aircraft in both subdivisions; and (5) replace the word "motor" with "engine" in Subd. 2. Motion, Ayes (15), (o). The third reading, as emended, of the proposed Code smendment dealing with hoise abatement, was given. Pillsbury Moved,. Johnson Seconded, that Ordinance No. 20 relating to noise abatement (emending LMCD Code Section 4.22), be adopted. Motion, Ayes (15), N~Ys (0). The committee reviewed the proposed COde amendment 'regarding special '- events permits, and, with modifications, recommended its third reading. Brown Moved, Pillsbury Seconded, that (1) the phrase "on the Lake" be ~ided to proposed Sec. 4.151, Subd. 2 (Definition); and (2) in the last sentence of proposed Sec. 3.09, Subd. 1, the word "racing" be ~eplaced with the words "sailing craft." Motion, ~yes (13), Nays (0). The thLrd ~eading, ss amended, of the proposed Code amendment dealing with special events and temporary structures on the Lake, was given. Brown Moved, Pillsbury Seconded, that Ordinance No. 21 relating to special events and temporary structures on the Lake (amending LMCD Code by adding Section 4.151, repealing Sections 4.15, and amending Sections 4.40 and 3.09), be adopted. Motion, Ayes. (13), Nays (0). Pillsbury ~eported that the committee had reviewed its position regarding the status of launching ramps, and supported the development of additional information on private facilities, together with those publicly owned, to determine effects of these types of accesses on boating density. The committee was advised that the 1979 Water Patrol contract for services with the county was approved January 9m by the county board. The committee accepted the preliminary ~eport of the 1978 Lake Use Study, and requested that a comparative review be made with ~ecent pest studies. Pillsbury reported that, with the cooperation of the Water Patrol, letters will be sent to all fish house operators on the Lake this year, encouraging cleanup. It h~s not been possible to contact individuals for several seasons, but this has been one of the most effective tools to encourage cleanup at the end of an ice fishing season. SEINING NOISE ABATEMENT CODE SPECIAL EVENTS & TEMP. STHUCTE~ES CODE AMENIMENT LAUNCHING RAMPS: PUBLIC & PRIVATE CONTRACT w/W.P. 1978 FISH HOUSE C~.WJ~CUP LMCD Boszd Meeting January 24, 1979 Page 4 The secon& re~ng of the proposed Code ~mendment dealing with 50' f~ctions of shoreline requirements fo~ watemc~ft storage, was heszd. Brown Moved, MacN~mara Seconded, that the co~.ttee report, be accepted. Motion, Ayes (15), N~ys (0). OTN~R BUSINESS: B~uce Thompson, attorney, appeared on behalf Of John C~oss and the Shorewood Yacht Club. It w~s suggested that ~- 1979 dock license application be submitted. Hunt Moved, MacN~mara Seconded, that Resolution No. 52, reaffirming the W~yzata Bank and Trust Company as the official depository, be adopted. Motion, Ayes (13), Nays (0). Maple announced that for health reasons, he is required to step down as Chairman of the LMCD. Baumzn Moved, Maple Seconded, that the previous Nominating Committee (Chakrman Hunt, MacN~m~ra and Nixon) make a recommendation at the next meeting, to fill the office. Motion, Ayes (15), Nays (0). ADJOURNMENT: Pillsbury Moved, Johnson Seconded, at 10 p.m., that the meeting, 'be adjourned. Motion, Ayes (15), Nays (0). 50' FRACTIONS CODE DEPOSITORY OFFICERS ADJOURNED Submitted by: Edward G. B~uman, Secre-t~ry Approved by: Norman W. Paurus, Vice Chs~trman .5".3 3 ~February 21, 1979 TO THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL: The collection of garbage and refuse is one public service in which the munici- palities of the Twin Cities area have the opportunity now to begin to respond to the public's urgent pressure for a more cost-effective government. ~. The Citizens League has recently done an updating -- from its original 197§ study -- about the problems and opportUnities for lOcal government, in the solid waste system. This has produced a clear and simple list of "dos" and "don'ts". I think you will find it helpful in the look we hope you will take at the way the system is working -- and ~h~ way it might be improved -- in your munici- pality. We say again what we said in 1975: That the Twin Cities metropolitan area now has, by and large, an effective and low-cost system for collecting garbage and refuse. (See the memo attached.) But it should be, and can be, made more efficient, with some changes that could be introduced fairly easily. And -- to our surprise, and concern -- we found a need for municipalities to guard against the danger of losing'the positive ele- ments of the system that exist at present. Let me take the latter part of the problem first. In any changes in the waste cgl!eFtion system, the ~o.s.t important thin.9 by far is to avoid any more of the' Citywide, non-competitive, arraqgements introduced several ~ears ago, for example, in the city of Minneapolis. This is an especi- ally important Considerat'ion, ~'u~ently, in St. Paul, where the concept of a citywide master contract is frequently proposed as one element of an ordinance. providing for and requiring the mandatory pickup of garbage and refuse in the city. The assumption seems to be that these two features ~of a refuse collection system are necessarily tied together. They are not; and they must not be. Municipalities -- as policy, decisions and operating experience in a number of well-managed suburbs have demonstrated -- can have, and do have, simultaneously, all three of the important desirable elements of an effective and efficient refuse collection system. ' These are: 1. The mandatory collection of refuse and garbage combined' Officers Directors President Raymond D. Black Wayne G. Popham W. Andrew Boss Vice Presidents Fred C. Cady Alla~ R. Boyce Pet Davies Eleanor Coiborn Joseph L. Easley A. Kent Sbambtin Leo Foley Francis M Boddy Joan Forester Dean Lund Imogene TFeichel Peter A. Heegaard Harry Neimeyer Robert W. WallaceJames L. Ha,land. Jr. Mar,ha Norton William O. White Verne C. Johnson Rob~r*~ E. Owens Stuart W. Lack, S~. RoGe¢ Palmer Past Presidents Greer E. Lockhar! Medora Perlman Charles S. Bellows John W. Mooty Daniel K. Pelerson Francis M. Boddv Arthur Naftalin James R. Pratt Charles H. Clay No,man L. Newhall, Jr. Solveig Premack Eleanor Colborn Wayne H. Otson Rosemary RockenbachRD,lin H. Crawford 'Leslie C. Pa~k Mary Rollwagen Waite D. Durfee Malcolm G. Ptunde~ Allen I. Seeks John F. Finn James R. Pratt Jam~s P. Shannon Richard J. FilzGerald Leonard F. Ramberg Archibald SpencerStaff Frank Waiters *John W. Windhorst Executive Director Ted Kolder ia. 'Deceased Associate Director Pa,~l A, Gille -2- 2. The efficiencies of a single truck moving down a particular street, or alley. 3. Open bidding for the work, with vendors competing on both price and service differentials. Outside the central cities, the pr.~.ncipal o. pportunitS for additional economies in refuse ~ollection lies in reducing.the number of miles driven by the refuse trucks. The basic effort, here, should be to arrange for a single operator to cover an entire area. If the service areas are kept small, and the contracts are let for no longer than the five-year period needed to recover an operator's original investment in his trucks, the overriding objective of price competition can be preserved in the process. Again: The experience in several suburbs demonstrates that this can in fact be done.. Again, St. Paul presents a special case, requiring particularly careful handling by that city's elected officials. In order for St. Paul to avoid the risk of some significant increase in the price of refuse collection to homeowners, the city government should approach its decision by building off of the existing system -- in which homeowners buy refdse collection services, based on price and service, from a large and d~verse group of refuse haulers. Specifically: The city should first encourage, and make it possible for, homeowners to get together to buy this service jointly, within the city's planning districts and through the district planning councils. This would achieve the one- truck-per-alley objective, while retaining the competitive bid system. 2. A second choice would be for the city to run an open bidding system, on behalf of the residents of the various individual planning districts. The city would act as the agent; bidding would be by individual district. The city would become exclusively a buyer: St. Paul government would eliminate the small refuse collection operation now run by the Public Works Department, which is high-priced and used generally only by persons (in most cases, the elderly) who do not pay their own bills but have the city pay the charges for them. Employees would be transferred to other city work. In the memo attached to this, you will be interested, I think, to .look at the numbers that reflect the differences in homeowner cost which presently exist in the Twin Cities area, from municipa~lity to municipality, and from one kind of refuse collection arrangement to another. It is important to be wary of the normal practice of quoting the cost for refuse collection service in dollars per homeowner per month. This obviously produces a modest figure. We are all aware, however, of how rapidly the dollars mount up when that figure is multiplied first by the 12 months of the year . and then by the 450,000 houses in the Twin Cities area . and then multiplied again, say, by l0 or 20 years. Very few citizens of the Twin Cities area would not be delighted to have 50¢ per house, on that basis. -3- In closing, let me come back to what I said at the beginning about what is at stake for local government in its response to the public's pressures for expendi- ture reduction. The Citizens League in 1978 looked at this larger question -- raised especially, of course, by Proposition 13. It was the view of that study committee, endorsed by the Citizens League board of directors, that sweeping restrictions on local government's spending and revenue-raising would not be appropriate in Minnesota. But this conclusion assumes, clearly, that discrete and effective action would be taken by local officials and administrators on their own initiative, to deal with 'the problems of cost control in the service delivery system. It was an assumption, in other words, that local officials would use the scalpel, if the public or the state would refrain from swinging the meat axe. The Citizens League has expressed its view that local officials will respond to that challenge. The service of garbage and refuse collection ~s one of the most desirable, and one of the most feasible places to begin . . particularly because it is so much more an opportunity than a problem. We hope you will give the following statement prepared by our Community Informa- tion Committee your early attention. We stand ready to help in any way we can. Wayne G. Popham President Citizens League 84 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 338-0791 Fcbruapff2i,1979 REFUSE COLLECTION: GETTING BETTER SERVICE FOR LOWER COST Refuse collection is one of the basic services neces. sary for the functioning of modem society. The service provided is important to individual house- holds and to the entire community. Regular, depend- able service is so important that few individuals and local government officials in this region appear to pay much attention to what it costs, as long as the job gets done. Neglect is costly. Currently, the cost. per household for refuse collection in the region varies threefold, or as much as $5.00 per month, with much of the vari- ation in price being unrelated to the service pro- vided. Additionally, serious problems with uncol. letted garbage have been reported in some neighbor- hoods, and many-streets and alleys are subjected to extra wear and tear when several different refuse collection trucks each serve only part of the house- holds in a given neighborhood, Organization is key cost faetor..In the 1975 Citizens League report, Taking the Waste out of Minnesota's Refuse, the League found that refuse collection costs vary widely, depending on how refuse collection is organized within a community. The League found that contracting with private haulers for service to a community tended to get the best rates. A phone survey done in January, 1979, provided data showing that this relationship remains true today. Robbinsdale cost low . . . St. Paul city crews and some individual arrangements high; Currently, rates mn from $2.51 per month for weekly service under a citywide contract in Robbinsdale, to $6.04 per. month for 50 pickups per year by city crews in 20% of St. Paul... up to $7.50 per month for some indi- vidual arrangements in some suburban communities. In Robbinsdale, the net cost to the average resident is particularly favorable, since it is financed out of property taxes, which are deductible on one's income tax return. However, the Robbinsdale figure does not cover the administrative cost the city incurs in set- ting up and administering the program. Both in St. Paul municipal collection, and in Robbinsdale, there are extra charges for large, bulky items, such as fur- niture and household appliances. This is generally true for most arrangements between a private hauler and individual households. Cost disparity by competition and service. As one might guess, the cost of refuse collection varies in part by the amount of service provided. For exam- ple, some haulers charge their customers up to $2.00 per month extra if they must carry the refuse from a location within the yard, rather than picking it up at the curb or in the alley. However, the price appears to be more a factor of the organization of the collection service than the service provided. Take municipal collection in st. Paul, and Robbins- dale's contracted service, again as examples. In St. Paul, city crews provide curb and alley pickup service, while in Robbinsdale much of the normal household waste is carried out from within the residents' yards. If the-carry-out service-is in fact worth substanfialiy- more than curb Or alley service, then the Robbinsdale cost of $2.51 per month is particularly advantageous vis-a-vis the St. Paul charge of $6.04 per month. Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, and Edina 0elorningside) provide extra sen4ces. In the cities of Minneapolis and St. Louis Park, the 'haulers regularly pick up large bulky items and yard wastes as part of their weekly collection service. This contrasts with the general practice of assessing an extracharge for large items. In Minneapolis the total service expense was about $4.69 in 1978. In 1979 the cost will increase, since the city's negotiated contract with the private haulers provides for an escalator equal to the increase in the local consumers price index from November to November, or about 10.2%. St. Louis Park has a'contract that runs through 1982 at $3.62 per month, with the city charging residents an extra 18 cents per month for administration and billings. The City of Edina just let a contract for the Morning- side area residents for 1979. Under the contract twice-weekly service will be provided for $4.50 per month, with extra charges for large, bulky items. The contractor bills each household directly for the service. The city requires that all refuse be kept in enclosed areas om of sight from the public. Accord- ingly, most residential stops in Edina require carrying the rubbish out from within garages. -2- Savings substantial. While the Edina (Morningside) resi- dents get twice-weekly service for $4.50 per month, prices we received over the phone from private haulers serving the balance of Edina with once-a.week service ran from $5.00 to $6.00 per month. The median price among 26 haulers serving St. Paul and first-ring suburbs was $4.50 per month for curb and alley service and $5.00 per month for in-yard carry-out of house wastes. RECENT STUDIES FIND LACK OF COMPETITION COSTLY The Minneapolis/St. Paul Study done by the State Planning Agency for the Legislature found that: Minneapolis could have saved approximately one million dollars a year if all work had been done by private haulers, and a competitive rate had been negotiated or obtained through bids... St. Paul is considering alternatives to its present open hauling system, and is facing the same kinds of pressures that led Minneapolis to deal exclusively on a non-bM basis with a consortium of private haulers (Summary Report, p. 70). The Report of the Municipal Finance Commission to Mayor Albert A. Hofstede and the Minneapolis City Coun- cil just completed in January recommended that: Before the current collection contract expires, the City should devise a less costly, more competitive alternative contract- ing system such as bidding out individual routes to private contractors and city crews. OBJECTIVES OF A GOOD SYSTEM The League finds that it is useful to examine some of the characteristics of a good refuse collection system. A regular, complete and dependable pick-up of refuse should be provided all households. * The provision of the service should be mandatory. · Refuse collection should be organized officially with only one truck collecting along any given sec- tion of street or alley. The system should be responsive to the concerns of individual households and neighborhoods served. The system should be designed to promote price competition among alternative vendors and keep down the cost to the community. Current experience shows the way. Several local munici- palities now largely meet the above objectives. The experi- ence in Blaine, Columbia Heights, Deephaven, Edina 0Vlor- ningside), Excelsior, Farmington, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Robbinsdale, St. Louis Park, Shakopee, Stillwater and White Bear Lake shows that a community's refuse collec- tion needs can be met in an efficient and effective way by organizing the system on a community-wide basis. Those communities letting competitive bid contracts with private haulers have shown that considerable savings to indi- vidual households can be achieved through this process. Indirect savings are achieved when the system is financed out of general municipal funds, and the resulting property tax is deductible on one's income tax return. Public billing for refuse collection is cost-effective vis-aMs having the users pay the contractor directly, since it can be incorporated into regular water and sewer billings, and there is less likelihood of non-payment. However, the same advantage could also be achieved through some other form of centralized billing . .. perhaps through a contract with the electric or gas utility. -3- RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Those suburban communities not now contracting for citywide regular and complete residential refuse collec- tion should do a feasibility study of the relative advan- tages of such an arrangement. The larger communities may find it desirable to divide the community into seve- ral neighborhoods or community refuse collection dis- triers, each with its own separate refuse collection con- tract. Multiple contracts could allow more. vendors to compete for the business and allow community input into the monitoring and evaluation of the service provided. Some portions of a municipality might like or require a differ- ent type of service. For example, residents in areas with alleys are likely to find carry-out service relatively less attractive than those without alleys. Specific areas a feasibility study should explore are: ·. What service is to be provided; .. How the service would be monitored and complaints handled; .. How the system would be financed; The length of the contract; The provision for any cost adjustments on a term contract; and Provisions covering the assurance of the contractors' performance 2. St. Paul should move to a mandatory residential refuse collection system with competitive bid contracting within the i7 community planning districts. If there is adequate interest within a Community Planning Council, the City should give the Planning Council authority to be the contracting agency within guidelines established 'citywide as to the. funds available per household and minimum stan- dards. If there is not a d~sire on the part of a Community Planning Council to assume this responsibility, the City should let refuse contracts directly for the dis- trict on a competitive bid basis. Provide Flexibility. In the first case, the Planning Council would have some flexibility over what ser- vices are provided and how they are organized. For example, the refuse collection might be merged with a program to recycle materials separated out at the individual household level. Eliminate City Crews. St. Paul would no longer need, and should no longer retain, its municipal refus~ col- lection crews under the new mandatory collection system proposed. Funding Options. The new system could be financed by special property tax assessments, charges added to the water billings, the general fund (property tax), or a property tax levy restricted to duplexes, triplexes, and single-family dwellings. Either general fund financing or a levy restricted to the types of property serviced would allow the expense to be deducted on the homeowner's income tax return. Minneapolis should now take a portion of the city served by municipal refuse collection crews and let it out on a competitive bid contract to a private Finn. The results of this effort should be used to determine the relative merits of dividing the entire city into compe- titive bid districts for the conversion to that process at the time the city's current contract with Minneapolis Refuse, Inc., expires. Background. Minneapolis now has a mandatory system of residential collection, u'~ng both public and private haulers. Municipal crews collect 45 per Cent of the refuse, and an organization of private haulers called Minneapolis Refuse, Inc., 0VIRI) collect 55 per cent of the refuse. The Minneapolis system was set up in 1970 when the City went to combined wet garbage and refuse collec- tion. A group of 49 private haulers formed MRI to nego- tiate a single contract with the City. Each hauler was given his same market share within MRI as he had in the refuse collection market in Minneapolis in 1968. As part of the current five-year contract, the city crews increased their share of the collection 1,500 households each of the first two years and are increasing their share 1,000 households per year the last three years. sz7 The Minneapolis system assures the private haulers com- pact, well-organized collection routes. Since it is paid for by property taxes, reimbursement for service is assured. As noted previously, the standard refuse collection in Minneapolis does provide for the regular pick-up of bulky items for which there would be an extra charge in most communities. However, 81 per cent of the stops provided by the private contractors are at the curb or alley, and only 19 per cent involve a carry-out from within the yard.. One would expect that the expense of collection would be fairly comparable with first-ring suburban conununi- ties that have organized a citywide mandatory collection system. This assumes that the pick-up of large bulky items is at least offset by the lower costs of servicing the 81 per cent with pick-up at curb or alley. As shown in the following table, the cost in fact is much higher. -5- REFUSE COLLECTION ARRANGEMENTS IN TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA C ,ommunity Total Type of Service Monthly Nature of Contract Curb or Alley Carry-Out Costs Agreement Period Financing ANOKA BLAINE X $3.75 Extra Items (Ad. Included) at Curb 100% COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 50% 50% 30 ft. .100% Limit 100% DEEPHAVEN EXCELSIOR MINNEAPOLIS 81% 19% ROBBINSDALE Some Mostly ST. LOUIS PARK 1 O0% SHAKOPEE Mostly Some STI LLWATER · WHITE BEAR LAKE EDINA-MORNINGSIDE FARMINGTON HOPKINS MINNEAPOLIS {City Crews) 100% 70% 100% 100% ST, PAUL (City Crews) INDIVIDUAL HOUSEHOLDS* INDIVIDUAL HOUSEHOLDS 100% 3O% 74% 26% 100% Negotiated N.A. $3.33 (.42 Competitive 1977 through Ad. Included)' Bidding 1979 $3.30 (.40 Competitive October 1977 Ad. Included) Bidding to Oct. 1980 $3.54 Competitive May 1977 to Bidding May 1979 $3.17 Competitive March 1978 to Bidding March 1979 $4.69 (.09 Negotiated 5-year to Ad. Included Contract July 1980 10.3% Escalator $2.51 {No ComPetitiye January 1979 to Ad. Included) 'Bidding ' January 1980 $4.00 (.38 Negotiated 1978 through Ad. Included) Contract 1982 $3.1~ (.10 · Competitive To March 1980 Ad. Included) $4,30 {No Negotiated Yearly price- Ad. Included) 6 yr. $4.28 {.45 Competitive July 1, 1978 to Ad. Included) Bidding 1981 $4,50 2/week (No Ad. Inc.) $4.50 $5.50 {est. $203,000/3,000 Dwellings) $4.69 {.09 Ad. Included) City Billing City Billing City Billing City Billing City Billing Property Tax Property Tax Special Annual Assessment City Billing City Billing City Billing Competitive 1-1 through Hauler Bills Bidding 12-31 yearly Quarterly City Crews -- City Billing City Crews N.A. Property Tax N.A. N.A. $6.04 N.A. N.A. Set Price N.A. $3.75-5.00 ($4.50/mo.) $4.50-7.50 ($5.00/mo.) Set Price N.A. Property Tax City Billing Hauler Bills · Sample of 25 haulers ~EGULAR HEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL February 6, 1979 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meetin9 of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341 ~aywogd Road in said City on February 6, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. T~ose present were ~ayor Pro-Tem Benjamin ~;t~ar~, CbuncJlm~mbers RoBert Polston and DOnald Ulrick. Absent and excused were Mayor Tim Lovaasen and Councilmember Gordon Swenson. Also present were City Manager Leonard L. Kopp and City Clerk Mary H. Marske. COMMENDATION - RICHARD L. JOHNSON Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-56 RESOLUTION COMMENDING OFFICER RICHARD L. JOHNSON The vote was unanimously in favor. MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of January 23, 1979 were presented for consideration. 'Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 23, 1979 with a correction on page five noting the arrival of Council- member Ulrick at 9:45 p.m. The vote Was unanimously in favor. PUBLIC HEARING - DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS The City Clerk presented an affidavit of publication in the official newspaper of the notice of public hearing on s~id delinquent utility bills. Said affi- davit was then examined, approved and ordered filed in the office of the City Clerk. The Mayor Pro-Tem then opened the public hearing for input on said delinquent utility bills and persons present to do so were afforded an opportunity to express their views thereon. No persons presented objections and the Mayor P~o-Tem then closed the public hearing. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-57 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY STAFF TO TURN OFF THE WATER SERVICE TO DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS The vpte was unanimously in favor. BEACHSIDE DEVELOPERS Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion- RESOLUTION 79-58 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE RETAINING OF THE CITY PLANNER TO PREPARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WITH CERTAIN STIPULATIONS. The vote was unanimously in favor. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESEHT No comments or suggestions were presented at this time. February 6, 1979 '21 WATER FOR SPRING PARK Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion naming Mayor Tim Lovaasen and Council- member Ulrick to meet with Spring Park regarding water service between Mound and Spring. Park.' The vote was unanimously tn favor. LOITERING IN C. B. D. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to request, the. City Attorney prepare an ordinance regarding the loitering l'n. the Central Business District as suggested by the Chief of Police. The vote was unanimously in favor. WATER AND SEWER RATES '~ Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-59 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP SPECIFICATIO~IS FOR A RATE STUDY AND REQUEST FIRMS OFFERING QUOTES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COUNCIL The vote was unanlmouslylin favor,. LICENSE AND PERMIT'FEES Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion to table this item. The vote was unanimously in favor. SPACE STUDY Polston.moved and Withhart seconded a motion to direct the City Manager to enter into negotiations with the School District regardihg the possibility of using their facilities for the police department. The vote was two in favor with Ulrick abstaining. TRANSFER OF FUNDS Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-60. RESOEUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF CERTAIN CITY FUNDS The vote was unanimously in favor. PAYMEN:T OF BILLS Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to approve the payment of the bills as submitted on'the prelist in the amount of $72,304.54 where funds are available. Roll call vote was unanimOusly in favor. .. STREET LIGHTS - CIVIL DEFENSE SIREN - L.M.C.D; MEETING Councilmember Ulrick asked for a report on the street light problem. The Public Works Director reported on the status.of the street lights in question. The ~ Chief of Police advised the Council of the'status of the repairs being made to the Civil Defense Siren. Councilmember Polston reported on the L.M.C.D. meeting he attended. ADJOURNME~T Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to adjourn to the next regular meeting on February 13, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. The vote was unanimously in favor, so adjourned. Mary H. Marske, City Clerk/Treasurer REGULAR MEETING OF THE CI.TY.COUNCIL February 13, 1979 Pursuant to the due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of 'the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341 May- wood Road in said City on February.13, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. Those present were Mayor Tim Lovaasen, Councilmembers Gordon Swenson, Benjamin Withhart and Robert Polston. Also present were City Attorney Curtis A. Pearson, City Manager Leonard'L. Kopp, Assistant City Engineer Lyle Swanson, City Inspec- tor Henry Truelsen and Acting City Clerk Marjorie Stutsman. REHEARING - STREET VACATION OF HANOVER AND DRUMMOND ROADS The Acting city Clerk presented an affidavit of publication in the official news- paper of the notice of public hearing on said street vaCation and also an affida- vit of posting of said notice. Said affidavits were then examined, approved and ordered filed in the office of the City Clerk. The Mayor then opened the rehearing for public imput on said vacation and persons present to do so were afforded the opportunity to express their views thereon. No one responded. The City Attorney explained that at the. earlier hearing, only three members were present and the statute requires a 4/5th vote on a 'vacation. The Mayor then closed the public hearing. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-61 RESOLUTION TO RATIFY THE VACATION OF HANOVER AND DRUM- MOND ROADS FROM THE WEST SIDE OF ROXBURY LANE TO THE EAST SIDE OF MIDDLESEX LANE The vote was four in favor with Ulrick absent. Motion passed with a 4/5 vote. Councilmember Ulrick arrived at 7:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED - COMMERCE BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENT ' The' Mayor opened the hearing for public on said improvement and persons present to do so were afforded the opportunity to express.their views thereon. Joel Essig of Surfside questioned the cost of $51,290. Assistant City Engineer Lyle Swanson reviewed the project and answered the question on the total cost. Estimated costs - construction $44,990., englne~ring, legal and administrative - $6,300. The Mayor then closed the public hearing. Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-62 RESOLOTION TO WAIVE THE READING AND ADOPT THE RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND' SPECIFICATIONS - COMMERCE BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENT FROM BARTLETT TO LAKE MINNETONKA (Of the estimated cost, applicant to pay $44,990.; City to pay $6,300.) February 13, 1979 The vote was unanimously in favor. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Subdivision of Land - Lots 42 and 43, Mound Shores Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-63 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE SUBDIVISION AS REQUES- TED WITH STIPULATION ON PROVIDING REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING ON LOT 42 The-vote was unanimously in favor. Side Yard Variance - Lots 4 and 5 and West 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 18, Devon 23 Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-64 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO GRANT 1.7 FOOT SIDE YARD VARIANCE The vote was unanimously in favor. Street Front Variance - Lots 22 and 1/2 of 21, Block 3, Shadywo°d Point Withhart moved and Polston seconded a motion to reaffirm the resolution concurring with the recommendation of the Planning Commission approving the 5.3 foot street front variance. The vote was unanimously in favor. Subdivision of Land - Part of Lot 47, Auditor's Subdivision 168 Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-65 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND GRANT SUBDIVISION AS REQUESTED (Plat 61270 Parcel 5120) The vote was unanimously in favor. Registered Land Survey - Part of Lot 26, Auditor's Subdivision 170 Swenson moved and Polston seconded a ~otion RESOLUTION 79-66 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF ' ' THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVE THE REGIS- TERED LAND SURVEY FOR TWO LOTS. The vote was unanimously in favor. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Timothy Piepkorn, City Prosecuting Attorney, was present and answered questions from the Council regarding his. experience, workload and costs charged, etc. February 13, 1979 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT Gary Cable, 4921 Drummond Road, requested that Windsor Road from Roxbury Lane to Dexter Lane be opened. The Mayor referred this to the Staff to check out and bring back at a later date. Paul Melchert., Attor. ney for Dick Thompson'~ new owner of Martin~ Resort ~ues- tioned the City about L.M.C.D, dock permit, Discussed commercial dock in an area zoned for single family residences. Mobile Home Park and dock are existi.ng non-conformi.ng .use,.. Also discussed s, igns, Lovaasen moved and Withhart seconded a motion to refeF back to Staff for informa- tion. Th~ vote was unanimously in favor. TAX FORFEIT LAND Easement - Lot 25, Block 6, Woodland Point Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-67 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THAT THE MAYOR AND MANAGER MAKE APPLICATION TO THE STATE FOR A PORTION OF TAX FORFEIT LOT FOR EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES -'LOT 25, BLOCK 6, WOODLAND POINT The vote was unanimously in favor. Tax Forfeit Lots for Park Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-68 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING MAYOR AND MANAGER TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR CONVEYANCE FROM THE STATE FOR PARK PURPOSES ~ Lot 5 and South 10 Feet of Lots 4 and 22 and'Lot 21, Block 28, Seton (Plat 37950 Parcels 4750 and 4905) The vo{e was unanimously in favor. LICENSES AND PERMITS Taxicab License Renewal Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-69 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RENEt,IAL OF TAXICAB LICENSES FOR TOWN TAXI COMPANY (THREE CABS) The vote was unanimously in favor. Note: Refer to Staff for ordinance change recommendation increasing insurance requirements for taxi licenses. License and Permit Fees February 13, 1979 Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion to bring license and permit fees off the table. The vote was unanimously ih favor. Council made a collective recommendation as to where levels for the fees should be and directed Staff to bring back in ordinance form. The proposed fees are as follows: Juke Box Billiard/Pool Tables Game of Skill Bowling Lanes Dance Permit (Yr.) Dance Permit (Per Dance) Dinner Dance 3.2 Beer Off'Sale 3.2 Beer On Sale Entertainment Set Up RestaUrant $10.00 Each 10.00 + $2. for each additional table 25.OO 15.00 200.00 25.OO No change 25.OO 175.00 5O.OO 200.00 5.00 GAMBLING ORDINANCE Withhart moved and .Lovaasen seconded a motion to ordain that the following sections, as amended, be added to the City Code as Ordinance 394. ORDINANCE 394 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND CORRECTING SECTION 43.10 SUBDIVISION 7, SUBSECTION (a) AND SECTION 43.25 SUBDIVISION 2, OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO GAMBLING The City of Mound does ordain: Section 43.10. Subdivision 7, Subsection (a) of the City Code is amended to read as follows: 43.10 Subd. 7 (a) Any gambling device which'is activated by the insertion of a coin, currency or token; or Section 43.25 Subdivision 2 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: 43.25 Subd. 2. Application Procedure~ Application for a license shall be made upon a form prescribed by the City Manager so as to"provide the information necessary to permit the Council to determine whether to .grant or deny a license application. No person shall make a false representation in an application. The City Council shall act upon any such application within 180 days from the date of application, but it shall not issue a license until at least 30 days after the application has been made. The vote was unanimously in favor, so ordained. CONSULTING SERVICES Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion that we contract with Consulting firm for a maximum of $3,000 to have an in-depth look at our Police Department. Roll call vote: Two in favor, two nay and one abstained. Motion failed. February. 13, 1979 Withhart moved and Polston seconded a notion that the matter be referred to the Police Committee; date set for February 20th at 7 p,m. The vote was unani- mously in favor. PAYMENT OF BILLS Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to flpproye the payment of bills as submitted on the prelist in-the a~o'unt of $67,936~25 where funds are ayajlable, Roll call vote was unanimously in favor, WATER & SEWER RATE STUDY The Council set the date of March 20th (Third Tuesday) be§inhing at 7 p,m, to talk to the engineering companies which have submitted quotations for the sewer and water rate study. City Manager to schedule the interviews.' Discussed: Proposed use of school space Mound water system HUD Committee Planning Commission workshop progress METRO liRA SUBCOMMITTEE Polston moved and L°vaasen seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-70 RESOLUTION APPOINTING BEN WITHHART AS A NOMINEE TO THE METRO HRA SUBCOMMITTEE The vote was unanimously in favor. ADJOURNMENT Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to adjourn to the next regular meeting on February 27, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. The vote was unanimously, in favor, so adjourned, Marjorie Stutsman, Acting City Clerk Leonard L. Kopp, City Manager 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NOo 79-67 SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing - Rezoning The Public Hearing on the Rezoning of two corners at County Roads 110 and 44 was continued until February 27th. The Attorney has been discussing this problem with representatives of the two property owners. The Council has information regarding this in previous memorandums: Council Memorandum 79-31 dated January 17, 1979 Council Memorandum 78-381 dated November 9, 1978 Council Memorandum 78-311 dated September 12, 1978 Leohar~L. Kopp J C~T¥ OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-66 SUBJECT: Residential Mortgage Revenue Bonds Previously the Council was sent information on Mortgage Revenue Bonds - See Council Memorandum 79-41 (Page 358). E. Clark will be at the February 27th meeting to discuss the bonds and answer any questions the Council may have. LeOnard L. Kopp 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 16, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-60 SUBJECT: Park Commission Minutes Attached is a copy of the Park Commission minutes. Council consideration: Item 1. The foll'owing are for Dock Variance - Type A Commons J. Dzik, 2530 Black Lake Lane had applied for a Commons Maintenance Permit on Kenmare Commons along with a dock permit. The Park Commis- sion concluded that the stairway requested could be built on Mr. Dzik's own property and that at the place the dock was requested, the Commons had been improperly classified. The Park Commission recommended a variance for the dock construction on Type A Shoreline for 1979 and that this shoreline would be brought up for reclassification in November or December. Suggested Resolution RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A DOCK VARIANCE ON CLASS A SHORELINE ON KENMARE Martin's Resort- Lots 1, 2 and 3, Halsted"H~ights, on Halsted's ~ay, has applied for a commercial dock permit from L.M.C.D. At this time, their application for a Mound Commercial Dock Permit has not been received, but it is expected prior to the February 27 meeting. Martin's Resort is in an A-1 residential area and stands as a non- conforming use and has been so since this area was annexed to Mound in 1960. Martin's Resort has applied for and has been granted a dock by Mound each year since the commercial dock ordinance was adopted. Copies of the 1971 and 1975 resolutions are attached. The neighbors to this operation will be at the February 27th meeting. They are concerned over the operation and they have expressed feelings that indicate the non-conforming use is being expanded. At this point, the City has been requested to advise the L.M.C.D. whether or not the docks meet the zoning. The action would be to adopt a resolution stating that it is or is not a~ non-conforming use and is allowable or not allowable. Le6nard L. Kopp M~nutes o[ the. MOUND ADVISORY PARK COMMISSION February 8, 1979 Present: Hal tarson, Lorraine Jackson, Pat Shay, Cathy Bailey, Larry'Peterson, Toni Case, Jon Lynott, Ed Hasek and Doug Anderson, with Frank Ahrens being 'ex- cused. Staff members, Leonard t. Kopp, Ben Withhart and Don Rother. The meeting was'called to order by Chairman tarson and the minutes of 1-11-79 were submitted for'approval. Corrections were made. i'n the spelling of Dzik's name and in Frank Ahrens term of office to expire on 12-3]-80 (rather than 1978). Motion by Jackson seconded by tynott to approve the minutes of 1-11-79 as correct- ed, unanimously approved. Mr. Dzik of 253~ Black L~ke Lane, on Kenmare Commons appeared before the Commission to appeal the decision that his request for a maintenance permit for the construc- tion of a stairway on the Commons be reviewed. Photographs were distributed show- ing an old stairway on the property. He will be well within his own property on the stairWay request. It was the concensus that a maintenance permit would not be necessary, if the stairway was erected on his own property and did not encroadh on the Commons; that the shoreline might possibly be improperly classified as Type I'A" and that a variance would have to be issued for a dock for the 1979 season. DesCription of property in question is Lots 2, 3, 7 & 8, Block 11, Seton. A motion was made by Hasek seconded by Jackson, "Park Commission request Council grant a variance for a dock permit for the 1979 season. Stipulation that a Building Permit be obtained for the construction of the stairway. Said stairway be confined to the private property of Dzik and not more than 35 feet from the' South line". Unanimously approved. Recreational Committee Report - Cathy Bailey Questioned the cost involved in the Cohtract with the School District 277 and the benefits Mound receives. Winter phase of program involves a roving supervisor for the skating rin~s-; time these rinks are open, snow removal from rinks, is roving supervisor supervising unusable rinks before they are cleared for skating? Summer phase of program, requested supervision and training of lifeguards. Teachers in the 'summer swimming program are not supervisory while teaching swimming at the beaches. These questions will be brought up at the School Community Service Meet- ing to be held at the City Hall on February 21, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. with'Larson and Bailey attending. Bailey informed Commission there is supposed to be a Sum~er School program that will provide free busing and tuition and questioned the impact' this would have on the re- creational program that is instituted by Mound. Calendar Committee Report - Pat Shay~ Emphasized that the first meeting of the month is the general business meeting. Second meeting is the discussion and committee meeting night, with no official action bein§ taken. Month of July, Parks are People nights, Commission members will tour parks at 6:30 p.m. and will meet at 8:00 p.m. Will have slide presentation on Mound Parks, giving overview of parks, the before and after slides on park development and how far we have progressed in our goals of upgrading and finishing various.parks. November 29, 1979 Dock Location Committee, refer to Dzik's dock on Kenmare Commons, will fall in the 31,000 area of permit numbers issued for that. area. Minutes of Mound Advisory Park Commission 2;8-79 page two Long Range Planning Commission - Hal Larson Black Lake Fishing Area, believes the program is adequate as previously submitted to the Council with regards to the fishing pier, dockage and plantings and should maintain the long range plan for that area. Pembroke B~ach, Avalon Park and Doone Park are all neighborhood parks. Avalon Park is confined to picnicing and swimming. Pembroke Beach is for swimminq and recreational use with equipment being upgraded and mainta!'n~d across the road from the beach. Doone Park, carry out the upgrading of this park by blacktopping etc. Set definite time frame for installation of park identification signs, to be accom- plished'within three years with Island Park Park and Three Points Pa~k to have sign ident'ificati-on installed upon completion of.work. Island Park Park should have three identification signs, one on Donald, at the top of the hill, and one on each of the East'and West ends of the park. Stated that Doone Park equipment is holding up good. Adhere-to "old" plan on the long range plan for parks,'will try to retrieve 2 or 3 copies from past members for reference to new members of Park Commission. Members have the scheduling of progress of work to be done on the three parks. Case brought out that citizens had stated that they cannot get their ice fishing houses out through Avalon Park and that it is not accessible to them. Larson clar- ified that this park is strictly for use for picnicing and swimming and as such there is no roadway for the removing of house from the ice through this park, and citizens can walk this park, but not drive through it. City Manager: Council has approved the Bike Hike Path on County Road 125 from Essex to Tuxedo, .Bartlett on Commerce towards Wilshire, County Road 110 will have paths on each side of the road and should be finished by 1980. The new Wychwood Bridge will have 5 ft. walkways on either side of bridge. · Lorrie Thonaner will be available as director of the Summer Recreational Program again this year. Park & Tree Coordinator - Boll is (absent) Rother briefly clarified the Marina request ofnewowners of the Marina Trailer Court. This is zoned A-1 Residential but has been grand'fathered for present use. They'are applying for dock permits for 14 dock spaces, downgrading this from previous 22 jspaces required before they purchased property. They ha~e no intention of expanding ~/~,~ business by selling food,.beer, bait etc. ' Larson stated that the Park Commission has never been involved in Commercial Docks and/or permits and feels they should'not focus on an-individual permit. If and when it is requested that the Park Comm. in.volve themselves in Commercial Dock Permits, then all requests will be reviewed and considered not just an individual request. Council Report - Withhart Beachside Development, Council has ordered and Environmental Statement but the de- veloper has not posted money for this statement, they are at a stalemate on this Report is necessary before any more work can be done on this project but who will will pay for report is the question. Minutes o£ Mound Advisory Park Commission 2-8-79 page three Council went one step further in the Park Comm. recommendation on maintenance permits for picnic tables and fireplaces on the Commons. Want this equipment identified with some type of plate or decal,and color painted so they will be identifyirigthis equipment ~.s for use by general public rather than just the per' mit holder. ?ermit'holders will be notified of this action by Rother. A motion was.made by Bailey and seconded by Cas~ that Mound renew membership, in Minnesota Recreation and Park Association. Unanimously approved. February 17, 1979 the Human Rights Commission will have a breakfast at Our Lady of the Lake School Cafeteria at 8:30 a.m. with various speakers dealing with "Ageism". Tickets are $2.00 Planning Commission Report - Jackson ~othing, covered by-Withhart in the Beachside Development resume. A motion was made by Hasek and seconded by Shay that meeting adjourn. approved. Unanimously Next meeting,-February 22, 1979 Discussion Meeting: 'Trails Committee - 7:30 p.m. and Long Range Planning - 8:30 p.m. League of Women's Voters will have presentation by M. Watson and M. Smith on Chester Park and parks on the Island. djd -~ <~ '! zo~oedsuI goo(1 zeq~o~I uocI ¢£IInJqoadfaH '916I ~ i7~6I u! sdrls gg ao~ pa!i~da iiassnH 'apl 'sd!Is qI ao$ q!ma~d e zo$ pe!IdOa seq ~H -eeaa eqq da 6u!ueeio uo ueid ~Iq!ssod s! q! puaI eqq jo eanqeu eqq $o esneo~ 'peq II~ssnH -aH qe~ moas seSueqo £ue 6u!uueid qou sea aq am pIo% ~q puc uosdmoq£ 'mi oq P~Mleq eAeq I 'Mzed emoq aI!qom erg u!.Su!p!s~ esoqg ueq~ aeqqo eldo~d oq sMoop sIR ~o ~mos qno squez uosdmoq£ $! eeze s!q~ u! o!~ezq eqg, qnoqe peuzaouoo o~Ie eze ~eq£ 'uI qnd agea s!qq ~! uo!soza qnoqe peuaaouoo aze £eq% -u! qnd 6u!eq RouneI qeoq e qnoqe pe~se pue ~m PelIeO aAaq aege s!Rgu! eidoed eqq ~o IeZaAeS 'uo!qaaado s!qg ao$ s! q!maad 'II~s£nH '0 '~ ~oa~ fea ~p~qsieH uo qaos~ su!q~e~ a'emzo~ ~q~ p~saqoand ~Aeq f~q% 'sqeoq ~I ao$ esu~o!I 6u!zoom pue {~oop ~id!qinm e ao$ ~OI-~ uo~q~o~Idda zpem ~^~q 'uM ¢-std~ cq~aqS qq9 °~''S g~ ~o uosdmoq£ ~Ia~M pus Moo~ Ie!ozemzo0 zoqo~dsuI Pengeouoo LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 402 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 TELEPHONE 6121473-7033 FRANK MI~A. EXECUT~V~ DI~F=CTOR ..Janumry 10, 1979 'l'homes S, Maple. Jr.. Chairman No'man 1,¥. Paurus. Vice Chairman~ Edward G. 8a~man. Secretary-Treas~ David ~0'~ Rob~r~ T. R. Jori .Frank R. H~t. Jr. Myron (Je~ry) Johns~ Mot~d Robert ~. MacNamara Robert O. N~eCel~. Jr. David F N,XO~ Lake!~n Township Robert ~. R~chard J. Soderberg Victona City 'of ~loun& c/o Leonard Ko_~p, Manager ....... '5351 Ma~ood Rca& Mound MN 55365 '...'" . 'Dea~ ~. Kopp: The Lake ],H~net'onka Conse~-ation District has ~eceived an ~pplication for ~ ~Iultiple Dock mud Mooring Area License as described on the attached certificate. LMCD or&in~nces ~eq~ve that before ~ license can be issued, the affected property meet municipal zoning ~equirements. Therefore, it is the policy of the I2~CD that .~ll dock_liceuse_.zpplic~tions be referred_.to_the village for review,, and that ~ zoning certificate be mequired f~om the village before final action of the District on the ~pplic~tion. If a Zoning certificate or ~ request for delay for ' ~eason is not received from the village within 45 days of the mailed notice, the District will continue its consideration of the application. Please execute the enclosed certificate and meturn it to this office so that prompt action can be t~ken on %he application. · Sincerely, . . LAKE. PH2E~ETO~U~A CON~VATION DISTRICT Executive Director FM: jm Enc. Lake' ~iinnetonka Marina and Mobil~ Home Pa~k MUNICIPAL CERTIFICATION FOR DOCK~ LIC~SE ZONING APPROVAL FOR 1Q7~ ' Under the .terms of Lake ]finnetonk~ 'Conservation District Ordinance #1, the following lX~ovisions apply: Sec'rich 1.0~ The pmovisions 'of this ordinance shall not s~e~sek$'any- municipal ordinance .'(e) which establishes zoning provisions regulating land use adjacent to the Lake which.are not in conflict with this . ordinance. Section 1.06 Nothing in this ordinance is intended to authorize the 'use, rent, sale, lease or conveyance-of dock space or mooring facilities in the L~ke contrary to m~n%cipal zoning laws. Lake Minnetonka Marina & Mobile Home Park c/o Dick & Marie Thompson, 432 S.E. Sixth St., Mpls ~ 55414 (Name and address of dock applicant) 6639 Bartlett Blvd., Mound (Title, description, and loc~tion of docks) i certify that the above dock license applicant has met the zoning ordinmnce requirements of Mound for the (Municip~-lity) property described~for _1979_ and is entitled to a Lake ~finnetonka (Year) Oonservation Dis%rolo% dock mhd/or mooring'~ea license ~here~der. (Authorized Signature') '~ ~EC "~ ]~?~AKE MINNETONKA' L ," ~ n. 402 E~st L~ke Street Wayzata, ~Linoesota 55391 CONSERVATION DISTRICT ~o~ ~n.i~ z~e=' ~~. Ca~ be reached at Dh~ne ~: ~ .~.~---.,~ ~//,~ .... APPLICATION FOR NEW OR REMrIM~.B MULTIPLE DOCK Ah~D/0R M00RI/~G LICENSE ~l~int or type o~ner's p. ame) _ . . ~vey (or'.pl~t) Dock cons~uction det~l sheet Pe~it or licenses'm~ ~so be meq~ed fr'~ the m~icip~i~ .~d from the ~nnesota Deponent of Nm~ Resources (for ~rm~ent docks). Datm: 2. ~e m~ n~Ber of boats stored ~ the water at docks is _~~ / ." 6. ~1 ~eq~ed ~zmits, licenses ~d ap~ov~s have been ob%~ned ~om %he Ci~ in which the m~tiple 'dock is located, ~d %he M.D.N.R. Yes ~ No (C on tinued) :Page 2 LAKE MINNI ONKA CONSERVA' N DISTRICT Commercial and others, where spplicable,' l~ovide %he following additional information: Check %he nature of services and, pa~kimg p~ovided.: a) Boat storag~ b) LCunch~ ~g c) Sales d) Service e) Boat 2entals f) Restaurant Reason: .... No. of pa~ug spzces I! I! Sanit~y facilities are p~ovided: Tes u'~ No Total 9. ~o~.t' toilet pumping service is l~ovi&ed; Yes (number of No L--~. 10. ~Lll applications: Base fee .............. $ 10.00 _ ~¢ availability units @ $5.00 + ~Z {' Total fee enclosed $ ~-~ ~ I certify that the information l~ovided herein and the attachments hereto a~e %~ue and correct statements and I understand that' any license issued may be re- voked by the District for violmtion of the I~{CD C~&ef. I consent to permittimg officers and ~ents of the Dis~ict to enter the premises at all reasonable times to i~vestigate and to determine whether the Code of the District is being complied with. .. : .... /~_ Relationship to O~,mer I I I ! ; 1 _1 DOCK CONSTRUCTION D~2~LS CREPEAU DOCKS FOR: · · · Dock bracket is one-pSece, fabricated 1-112 inch ~nd 2 inch steel. · ~ · ° -iiI The dimensiOns-o£ the ma%erial used in ~he construe ~zon of the Crepeau Dock is a~ follows. A method for installing and removin~ that doesn't cause breakage and wear, m~king it necessary to repiac'e parts each year. Section joints or connections can't be wood 1o metal or they will wear, rot or break out. · Set screws can be no smaller than one-hal! inch in diameter or they will rust ~nd snap. Posts h~e ~o be driven into the bottom so that ~he dock cannot move or ~ip over. {This is'c~u~ed by pl~tes or discs which set 'on the The ~ctuat dock bracket has ~o be a single fabricated piece from' post h°le ~ pOSt hole or you will get side ~y which will cause bending and breaking. . . . why put up with these ~roblems when you ~an buy a Crepeau Dock and eliminate BELOW IS A DISEGTED'SEGTION OF OUR DOGK FOR YOUR ~OMPARISON . . . ~ of 2 inc~ l,iFe; i~h ~ screws. on top of steel framework 'to 'provide a walking sbrface. Section connections are 1-1/2 inch pipe inside of 2 inch pipe and connected with big Cedar boards l"xd"x42" long with £ir 2z2' s Separating the cedar deck boards from the stee~ structure and a fir 2x4 8' long in the center, as per dray:inc. Yours. %:m~ly, _mom Rock-vain lSV / F ISHIhIGISWIrvirvIING BOAT SLIPS CO,~aMERCIAL DOCKS Once a C~epeau Dock is inslalled you actually have "one piece" of steel driven solidly into the bottom. Any on any part of the dock is absorbed by the whole dock and not by one section or at the section joint. ".' LAKE 'MINNF~ONKA ~., .,.f..,.'. 402 East T,~=_l~.e'~' '~'S'~ee-~ 4Y3-~033 CONSERVAT~N DISTRICT No. o£ boats -~ . ~ " Boat Density Index Ca~ be re~hed at ~On'~?: Application for Multiple Dock and/or ~ooring ]~rea License ~AL ~ITEOUT 'r, t4/ ¢- /Y v~¢ (~ of o~ oe~$if~ $~ ~o a~g~s ~e .$o 'boats s~orea for Lake use, off 2he .('~ . d~ing $he . se~on; ~hat the m~r~mm n~ber of boats $o be stored at docks is -~ . , at moorings is ~ _, ~d ~ystored for L~e use is ; that the locator map, s~vey (or plat), site pl~, ~d dock cons~uction detail on file with %he Dis~ict for %he license being applied for; ~d that I will obt~ a new license from the L~e'Miunetooka Conservation ~is~ict before, m~<iog ~ny ch~ges.. I further certify -%hat- %he 'i~formation provided herein and-all attachments hereto are ~rue and correct statements, a~d I understand that any license issued may be' revoked by %he District for violation o£ the LMCD Code. I consent' %o permitting officers and agents o£ the DistriCt Go enter the premises at all reasonable times to investigate and to determine whether the Code of %he District is being complied with. : Base fee . ........ ; ..... $ 10.00 ~ availability .units @ $3.00 +_=~. ~otai fee e~olosed s_.,~,~ ~ '. Relationship to O~mer: 6750 Halstead Avenue Mound, MN 55364 January 29, 1979 City of Mound 5341'Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Mayor, Councilmen, City ;~nager: I would like to express my concerns in regard to the proposed marina on the north side of Halstead Bay. I am very much opposed to any marina at this site. As you are aware, this operation has in effective been out of busi- ness for some 7-10 years. There has been only a minimum number of boats (4-5) docked here during that time period. There should not be any in- crease in that past use--in fact it should be eliminated altogether. The lot that is to be used is very small and there is a steep bank to the east. The property is steeply sloped to the lake and will cause runoff problems.' ' Probably the greatest factor is the commercial activity would be located in an area that is totally residential. Commercial activity should not be allowed in any residential area. There is no justification for it and it is not fair to those who have invested in their homes in this area and the bay area in total. The people have come to live here knowing that there is no commercial operation going on. It would be ex- tremely detrimental and unfair to the residents of this area and to the entire bay area to allow this to happen. If you have driven in the area you will have noticed that the road is only one lane and it is impossible to handle any increased traffic. Any commercial activity would obviously increase traffic or why would they want to go into business. It would not be a prudent decision to allow the creation of a dangerous-hazardous situation to be created. You should also consider the environmental impact created by any additional hardcover and the increased boating density. Please take a look at the negative impact this would have on adjacent and neighboring homes. I ~;ould ask that you take these concerns and the wishes of the area residents into consideration and deny the development of any co~ercial activity in this area. Thank you~ ~. . . Alan Fasching . ~ RESOLUTION NO. 75-175, RESOLUTION ISSUING A CO,-=-~RCL':L DOCK PE~"iIT TO FL~RTIN'S RESO"IT !&HEREAS, an application for a co~.~ercial dock has been received from ~'~artzu s Resort, and Kartin' s Resort meets the requirements of the Mound Dock Ordinance #333~ " NO:.~. THERFW~'ORE, BE IT PgSOLVED BY ~{E CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, ~ N ~S OTA: : - That a dock permit ~e issued to Martin's Resor't for 15 docks on water. Provided they meet all the requirements of Ordinance #333 and Resolution 7~-168. Adopted by the Couucil this 29th day of April,~ ]LESOLUTION DI RECTi]']G LAK~] MD~NET~,!KA CONSE'~UfATiO~',! DISTP~CT TO ISSUE CERTAIN CQ~,U,~RCIAL DOCK PEP~TS the I~nke Minnetonka Conse~ation District Will not issue con%raercial dock per.~.ts until they have the ~Titten approval of the municipality within which the dock is to be located, and W]{ERF~S:'. th9y have received requests for dock permits from the follov~ng, THEP~FORE BE IT RESOLVED That the follo,~ing dock permits be approved and r~ferred to the Lake Minnetonka Conser~ati6n District: 1.' The 'Babler dock be authorized for 1971 ~ith the stipulation that prior to the application for the 1~72 dock permit Babler's Boat Club prepare a plan that will move their dock onto the co~nercially zoned property, and that such plan meet with the approval of the Planning or Park Go~mission and be approved by the Mound Village Council before requesting the 1~72 permit from Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. · lo T~e Martin's~ P~sort is a non-conforming use and the .' / p~rmit be approved subject to I~rtiu's Resort receiving / . written approval of the neighboring properties for set- ~ back.variauc~ and that copies of ~uitten approval of each/ ~ neighbor be supplied to the Village. Council and Lake etonka Conservation District. - Adopted by the Council this 9th day of February, 1971. 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 15, 1979 COUNCIL.MEMORANDUM NO. 79-61 SUBJECT: Chestnut Road The person purchasing Lot 24, Koehler's Second Addition, wishes to develop Lot 24 and give the City a street easement. He also would like to see the street opened and the City acquire a street ease- ment over Lots 25 and 26. The CitY has the Northerly 30 feet of Lots 27 through 31, as well as land in Lot' 32 which can be used for the extension of Chestnut Road. Before the purchaser finalizes his purchase of Lot 24, he has asked for the Council to approve the right of way acquisition. The Engineer has suggested it would be helpful if we could get 17 feet from the South part of Lot 23 also. This will be listed on February 27th. Action suggested: Resolution authorizing the acceptance of the Southerly 25 feet of Lot 24, Koehler's Second Addition, for right- of-way for Chestnut Road and directing that additional right-of-way' be acquired from Lots 23, 25 and 26, Koehler's Second Addition to Mound. ......... Leonard L. Kopp--/~-- NOQgN .% .i. 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 16, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-62 SUBJECT: Tax Forfeit Land - Lot 5, Block 28, Wychwood Attached is a copy of a letter requesting the City to acquire and resell Lot 5, Block 28, Wychwood, so it can be combined with Lot 6 to make a building site. It should be noted that a part of Lot 7 would have to be combined With Lots 5 and 6 to make 6,000 square feet. In the map attached, the lots under consideration are marked. The map also shows the land on the other side of the street which has been acquired for street right-of-way. Action needed to grant request: Resolution directing the Mayor and Manager to purchase Lot 5, Block 28, Wychwood from the State by private sale and authorize the resale to the owner of Lot 6 in o~der to create a buildable lot. d L. Kopp February 15, 1979 City Council City of Mound Dear Honorable Mayor: Please consider this letter a request to release for sale a tax forfeited lot legally described as Lot 5, BloOM' 28,"Wyc~.KQ~d. This is an undersize building site (40'x80') but it would be my intention to combine it with~the adjacent lots 6 and ? which I presently own. Lot 7 would then be split off and deeded to the owner of Lots 8,9, and 10, Mr. Charles Grim. This would be a more workable situation as Mr. 'Grim has a driveway across Lot Y, which he would like to retain, therefore, I think this is a reasonable request and in the best interests of the people involved. Lots 6 and 7 make a long, narrow building site and Lots 5 & 6 would make a more desirable building site. Also, it will put Lot 5 back on the tax roll. In view of the upcoming street improvement projects in this area, I am perfectly willing to give the City of Mound any easements necessary for temporary construction and slope purposes. If the City of Mound could purchase this lot from the State for a direct sale to me, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanking you for your consideration on this matter, I remain Yours truly, Ronald Gehring 3215 Charles Lane Mound, MN 55364 / ~AFTON RD.~ 6 ,5 4 3 B,! 9 · to.! ti i' ,~4 -3:2 :6' 5 4' 3' 31 This block iS all marsh ...,~, :' 6 ;6 --, ,:E 13.j t4i 15 lG.. :i20" block is ~, marsh lO block ,s all marsh J? ,/ ?_7 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 20, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-64 SUBJECT: Tax Forfeit Land In 1965, the City took the West 36 feet of Lot 12, Block 4, Pembroke, for street purposes for the widening of Tuxedo Boulevard which was done in 1966-1967. Last year when the owner of the remainder of Lot 12 began to build, his surveyor found the street on Lot 12 and no easement filed. As a consequence, the Engineer drew up a description of the land needed for Tuxedo which was less than the 36 feet the City requested. About the same time, the deed for the 36 feet was filed. The owner of Lot 12 is now requesting to obtain that strip of land not needed for street purposes which is shown on the attached drawing. In order to be sure the owner of Lot 12 acquires this strip, it is necessary to: -~.~he City return the strip to the State. . The City request the State to sell it to the City by private sale. ~/~-3. The City resell the strip to the owner of Lot 12. Action required: A resolution authorizing the return to the State of the following: All that part of the westerly 36.00 feet of Lot 12, Block 4, Pembroke, which lies easterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the northerly line of said Lot 12 distant 24.0 feet easterly of the northwest corner of said Lot 12; thence southwesterly to a point on the southerly line of said Lot 12 distant 29.0 feet easterly of the southwest corner of said Lot 12 and said line there ter- minating. 2. A resolution requesting the State to sell this to the City at a private sale. 3. A resolution authorizing the resale of the land to the owner of Lot 12, Block 4, Pembroke. Lebnard L. Kop~ ' ~! / / / / ! I All that part of the westerly 36.00 feet of Lot 12, Block 4, PEMBROKE, Hennepin County, Minnesota according to the recorded plat thereof, which lies easterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the northerly line of said Lot 12 distant 24.0 feet easterly of the northwest corner of said Lot 12; thence southwesterly to a point on the southerly line of said Lot 12 distant 29.0 feet easterly of the southwest corner of said Lot 12 and said line there terminating. McCOMBS,KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CON~,UL~II~G [N~t~E(RS · LA,iD SURYE~'0RS · $1T~ PLANN;R~ MINNEAPOLIS ar~l HUTCHINSON.MINNESOTA SCALE I "-- 40' FILE NO Z/l~ C/ T Y OF U/VL 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-74 SUBJECT: Tax Forfeit Land - Lot 11, Block J~, Pembroke When Tuxedo Road was widened, the City took Lots 12, 13, 14 and part of Lot 11, Block~¥, Pembroke for street purposes. Recently someone asked about buying the remainder of Lot 11 and we checked with the Engineer about releasing Lot 14. The Engineer felt we should try to get the remainder of Lot 11 and keep Lot 14. It is recommended that the Council authorize the Mayor and Manager to request the County for "that part of Lot 11, Blockier, Pembroke lying Southeasterly of the road". ~ ~-L~eon~rd L. Kopp ~ .O3 LA~E m PRIVATE S'f REE'T CITY OF MOUND Mound~ Minnesota February 16~ 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-63 SUBJECT: Watermain Replacement - Belmont Lane The Council requested a report on the cost of replacing the Water- main on Belmont Lane from Lynwood to Church Lane. Attached is a .copy of a report from the Engineer estimating the cost to be $18,500.00. There is enough money in the water fund to cover the cost. Action suggested - Accept the report and order plans and specifications. Suggested Resolution RESOLUTION ACCEPTING REPORT AND ORDERING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE WATERMAIN BETWEEN LYNWOOD BOULEVARD AND CHURCH WAY AND BEL- MONT LANE AND REPLACING THE GATE VALVE ON BELMONT AT LYNWOOD AND INSTALLING A NEW GATE VALVE ON BELMONT LANE AT CHURCH WAY. COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ia LAND SURVEYORS ~ SITE PLANNERS February 9, 1979 Reply To: 12805 Olson Memorial Highway Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Subject: City of Mound Belmont Lane Watermain Replacement Dear Mr. Kopp: -. As requested, we have prePared a cost estimate for re- placing the watermain on Belmont, between Lynwood Blvd. and Church Road. The attached memo from the Public Works Director describes the condition of this pipe. The attached drawing show the watermain to be replaced. One existing gate valve does not work properly and will be replaced. Another valve will be added at the north end of the project. Five 3/4 inch copper services will be connected to the new watermain. Temporary water will have to be provided for these homes during construction. This may be done by hose from a fire hydrant or a nearby home. The pipe which is to be replaced has obviously deteriorated due to corrosion caused by interaction between the cast iron pipe and the corrosive soil environment. We propose to prevent this occuring in the new pipe by enclosing the new pipe in a polyethylene encase- ment, which is simply a plastic wrap around the pipe. The cost of this' is estimated at $400. This method of protection has been used for many years and has proved very effective. Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria- Granite Falls pri~,*,ed o~ recycled paper Mr. Leonard Kopp February 9, 1979 Page Two The estimated cost of the proposed work is $18,500. cost breakdown is attached. A Since the estimated cost is over $10,000 plans and specifi- cations for the work will be required and the project must be advertised for bids. If you have any questions on this, please call. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ' LS:sh Enclosure #4742 Cost Estimate Watermain Replacement Belmont Land - Lynwood to Church Estimated Quantity Item 6" Watermain 440 L.F. 6" Gate Valve 2 EACH 3/4" Corporation cock and service tie-in Poly Wrap Pipe Class 2 Gravel Bituminous Surfacing Pit run gravel Contingency Estimated Unit Price '$1S.00/LF 475.00/EA 5 EACH 400.00/EA 440 L.F. 1.00/LF 200 TONS 5.00/TN 75 TONS 25.00/TN 300 CYD 4.00/CYD Total Estimated Construction Cost Engineering and Administration Cost Total Estimated Cost Total $ 7,920.00 950.00 2,000.00 440.00 1,000.00 1,875.00 1,200.00 1,515.00 $ 16,900.00 1,600.00 $ 18,500.00 I ~$'V',~ FGATE 9,~.L~E I ~'WATERMAIN -m I CHI IRCH LYNWOOD WAY BLVD. OMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. MINNEAPOLIS ~nd HUTCHINSON,MINNESOTA I III SC^LE I"= IOO' ~ooK IPAGE FILE NO. 474~ PROPOSED REPLACEMENT Of BELMONT DRIVE WATERMAIN : CITY OF MOUND 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-72 ~SUBJECT: Cigarette Licenses' Cigarette licenses expire February 28, 1979. The following renewals have been received: Gas Hut, Inc. Grimm's Grocery Martin & Son Metro "500", Inc. Mound Lanes Superamerica Store Thrifty Snyder Drug Jude Candy & Tobacco Company, Inc. for: 'Karl's K.O. Station Municipal Liquor Store V.F.W. Club ARA Service, Inc. for: Tonka Toys - 4 Machines Also, Burger Chef recently installed a machine. Application has been received for the current license to February 28th as well as a renewal for the year March 1, 1979 to February 28, 1980, 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-73 SUBJECT: Garbage & Refuse Collection Licenses Garbage & Refuse'Collection Licenses expire February 28th. The following renewals have been received: Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. 1 Truck Mike's Sanitation 3 Trucks Leonard L. Kopp / z~ 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-68 SUBJECT: Taxicab Ordinance The attorney has prepared an amendment to the Taxicab Ordinance increasing the insurance requirements. A motion adopting the ordinance is required. '-~Le6nard L. Kopp ? ~ ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 38.41 OF THE .CITY CODE, INCREASING INSURA/~CE REQUIREMENTS FOR TAXICABS The City of Mound does ordain: Section 38.41. Insurance Policies. Before a license shall be delivered to any operator he shall deposit with the V~age City Clerk a policy or policies of an insurance company or companies duly licensed to transact business in this state, insuring the operator of any taxicab to be licensed' against loss from the liability imposed by law for damages on account of bodily injuries or death, or for damages to property resulting from the ownership, maintenance or use of any taxicab to be owned or operated under such license, and agreeing to pay to any judgment creditor, to the extent of the amounts specified by reason of such liability. The policy or policies shall be approved by the V~age City Attorney as to form and compliance with this ordinance. The limit in any such insurance policy of such liability of the insurer on account of the ownership, maintenance and. use of such taxicab shall not be less than ~5~=~ $100,000 for bodily injuries to death of one person and. ~$~7,~8~=8~ $300,000 on account of any one accident resulting in injuries to and/or death of more than one person, and a total of ~r888=88 $50,000 liability for damage to property of others, arising out of one accident. Said policy or policies may provide for a deductible not to exceed. $100 for bodily injuries or death arising out of any one accident and $100 for damao, e to property arising out of any one accident. The insurance policy shall contain a provision that the insurance company shall give the V~.ge City Clerk 30 days notice of cancel- lation by registered mail. The form of and sufficiency of such policy and. the surety thereon shall be subject to the approval of the V~ag~ City Council. Attes t: Mayor City Clerk Adopted by City Council Published in Official Newspaper 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-71 SUBJECT: Ordinance Change - License and Permit Fees The Attorney has prepared an ordinance amending fees for certain licenses and permits. The Council's attention is drawn to Sections 36.11 and 38.07. Section 36.11. The Council decided that a license for the first billiard table for $10.00 and $2.00 for each additional table. Presently the cost is $5.00 per table; if a business has two table's now, he pays $10.00. Under the new fees, he will pay $12.00. If he has three tables now, he pays $15.00. Under the new schedule, he would pay $14.00. The Attorney did not provide for the $2.00 per additional table because of the above, but rather left it at $10.00 per table. We have one establishment that has two tables and one that has three tables. Section 38.07. When going over license fees, we only investigated those we have been selling. In entertainment licenses, we were only selling annual licenses, so never thought of investigating the others. The Attorney made only the change recommended in the annual fee. We have penciled in suggested changes in the daily and weekly permits, if the Council would like to act on them. A motion adopting the ordinance change is recommended. ORDINAI'~CE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 31.04, 32.04, 36.02, 36.11, 36.22, 37.10, 38.07 and 38.29A OF THE CITY CODE, INCREASING FEES FOR THE FOLLOWING TYPES OF LICENSES: SET UPS, NON-INTOXICATING BEVERAGES, Old AND OFF SALE, GAMES OF SKILL, BILLIARD DdqD POOL TABLES AND BOWLING ALLEYS, JUKE BOXES, RESTAURANTS, CAFES AND PUBLIC EATING HOUSES, ET~TERTAINMENT SHOWS AND PUBLIC DANCE PERMITS AND REPEALING SECTION 38.29 SUBDIVISIONS (C) AND (D) The City of Mound does ordain: Section 31.04 of the City Code is amend~ed to read as follows: Section 31.04. Annual Fee. Every private club or public place desiring to allow the consumption or display of intoxicatino liquor, or to serve any liquid for the purpose of mixing with intoxi- cating liquor, shall on or before July 1 of each year pay to the V~age City Treasurer a fee of ~aq6r96 $200.00 and. shall be issued a written receipt therefor. If a portion of the year has elapsed. when payment is mad_e, a pro-rata fee shsll be paid; but no such pro- rata fee shall be accepted from any private cl%~ or public place which has violated Section 1 of this ordinance. In computing such fee, any unexpired fraction of a month shall be counted, as one month. The written receipt shall be posted in some conspicuous place upon the premises alongside the permit issued 'by the Liquor Control Com- missioner and shall be posted, at all times. Section 32.0¢ of the City Code is amended to read as follows: SectiOn 32.04. License Fees. Ail applications for licenses shall be accompanied by a receipt from the City Treasurer of the required, annual fee for the respective license. All such fees shall be paid into the general fund of the City. Upon rejection of any application for a license the treasurer shall refund the amount paid. The annual fee for an "on-sale" license shall be $~58=8~ $175.00 The annuai fee for an "off-sale" license shall be ~½8~8 $ 25.00 Ail licenses shall expire on the 30th day of April in each year; pro- vided that if eight months of any licensing year have elapsed when the application is made the fee shall be reduced to one-half of the regular amount thereof. Section 36.02 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: Section 36.02. License required. No person, firm or corpora~ tion shall operate or keep for operation any game, or games, of skill without having applied for and received a license for each game from the V~Ra~e City_ Council as herein provided. Application. Application for such licenses shall be made to the .v~age Cit~ Clerk upon a form to be supplied, by the municipality, and shall give the name and address of the owner and. applicant, the place where each such game is to be operated, what business is con- ducted at that place, the name, number and description of the ~ame and. particular piece of equipment to be licensed, the fee for playing the game and prize, if any, and such other information as the council may require. Every such application shall be accompanied by an annual license fee of ~5r8.~ $25.00 which shall be paid. into the aeneral fund of the municipality. S'uch application shall be considered by the council at its next regular meeting and granted or rejected. Licenses shall be for the term of one year for each such game, and shall expire on April 30th of each year. No such license shall be transferred to any other game, device, or location than that for which originally issued. Section 36.11. of the City Code is amended to read as follows: Section 36.11. Application for License. That any such owner or owners or keepers of billiard tables, pool tables, pigeon hole tables, bagatelle tables, ten pin or bowling alleys of any kind, may procure a license to run and. operate the same by payment of a license fee of ~5r8~ $10.00 for each ten pin or bowling alley or bagatelle table, per year and any person or persons or keeper of the aforesaid articles desirous of obtaining such license shall apply to the V~age City Council therefor in writing,' in which application such applicant shall specify the place where the same is to be operated. If ~a~ t~he V~age Council shall see fit to grant such license, the V~½~age ,City Clerk shall issue the same to such applicant upon the payment of the license fee hereinbefore provided. Section 36.22 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: Section 36.22. ~pplication for License. Each person, firm or corporation desirin~ to maintain, keep or operate such a mechanical device upon such premises shall make application at the office of the ~a~e City Clerk upon forms D~r~ha~e~ provided by the V~age Cit. y for such license. Each such application shall be accompanied by an annual license fee of ~5r88 $10.'00 per machine. If a license is granted to such applicant a license will be issued, which license shall be displayed upon the machine in a prominent place. The license shall be transferable from one machine to another if operated upon the same premises. The license shall d. escribe the premises where such machine is operated and shall not be transferable to any other premises. Section 37.10 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: Section 37.10. License Required. That all Restaurants, Cafes and Put~lic Eating Houses shall secure a license to operate, from the ¥77 V~age City, which license shall run for one year, and be signed by the V~ge City Clerk. The license fee ~ shall be ~e~.-&~ ~.~88 $5.00and said license shall expire annually on April 30. Section 38.07 of the City Code is amended ~to read as follows: Section 38.07. Issuance Fees. The Council shall authorize the issuance of such license if in its opinion the public morals and welfare will not suffer therefrom. The clerk shall thereupon issue such license on payment of the proper fee according to the following schedule: One show (indoor) .......... $1.00 Several shows (indoor) on one day. 2 00 One week ............... 8.00 One month ............. 25.00 One year ........ ...... ~.6=~ $50.00 Tent shows, per day ......... 5.00 Section 38.29A, Subdivisions (a) and (b) of the City Code is amended to read as follows: Section 38.29A. Permits. (a) Any person, firm or organization desiring a license or permit shall make application on a monthly basis on official forms provided, by the ~-lage City Clerk and filed no later than five d_ays prior to the first scheduled Council Meeting of each month. Each application for a public dance or the playing of live music shall be accompanied with a fee of ~8~8 $25.00 per day. The Council may issue an annual license; the fee will be .~½88=86 $209.00. (b) ObliGations Due the V~a~e C.itY. No license shall be granted for a dance or musical concert to be conducted in any building within the V~age _Ci.ty~ for which taxes, special assessments or other financial claims of the V~a~e City are delinquent and unpaid. Section 38.29A, Subdivisions (c) and (d) of the City Code are repealed. ~. e-~{eeq-{~m-a~-a{{er-~{s-passage-an~-p~aq~-~-qhe-~~a~-~ews- Attest: Mayor City Clerk Adopted by City Council Published Official Newspaper 2-27-79 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-70 SUBJECT: Sale of Property The Council authorized the City to acquire and resell the South 55 feet.of Lot 6, Block 28, Whipple. The resale price is to be $1,285.00. We have collected the $1,285.00 and now ask t~e Council to authorize the Mayor and Manager to sign a quit claim deed selling the property to Paul A. Henry and Cindy A. Henry. - Le6nard L. Kopp~- ~-- CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 22, 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-69 SUBJECT: Consulting Service Under Council Memorandum 79-30, the Council considered hiring a Consultant to study the Police Department. The Council voted against this on February 13. The Councilmen on the Police Committee have requested that this be put back on the agenda for reconsideration. Action would be a resolution authorizing the Mayor and Manager to enter into an agreement for a price not to exceed $3,000. Le6nard L. Kopp CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 20~ 1979 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO, 79-65 SUBJECT: HUD Funds Year V The three year HUD Fund Application submitted to the County has been reviewed by the Citizens~ Advisory Committee. A copy of their letter regarding their review is attached. Two things are now needed from the City Council: 1. A written reply to the Advisory Commission's letter, and 2. A resolution making the application the official application from the City. A proposed resolution is attached, ~.J ~e~nard L. Kopp vt ~ cc: C. Riesenberg citizen advmory committee 2353 government center, minneapolis, mn 55487 February 9, 1979 Mr. Tom Lovaasen, Mayor City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mount, MN 55364 Re: City of Mound Proposed Community Development Block Grant Program/Year V - VI - VII Dear Mayor Lovaasen: Pursuant to the approved Urban Hennepin County Citizen Participation Plan the Planning Area 5 Citizen Advisory Committee at its Public Hearing on February 6, 1979 reviewed Mound's proposed community development program for Year V - VI - VII. Following their review of the proposed program the Planning Area 5 Citizen Advisory Committee endorsed the following recommendations to be considered by the Mound City Council prior to approval of the final program: -The continuation of the housing rehabilitation grant program is supported by the Committee as an activity which directly assists a broad range of Mound's homeowners, 'in terms of age and family size and income levels. -The Committee recognizes the community's need for and the value of a comprehensive plan, but is concerned over the amount of money being committed to the activity. -The provision of special assessment grants is supported by the Committee as an activity which directly benefits the Mound's low and moderate income homeowners. -The acquisition of land to facilitate the construction of additional assisted housing units is encouraged by the Committee as an activity which is directly addressing the Urban County's housing need. -The allocation of funds to aid low and moderate income homeowners in complying with the state statutes which requires the removal of diseased elm trees is seen as being consistent with the Urban County's Comprehensive Strategy. In summary the Committee finds Mound's proposed three year Community Development Droqram to be in accordance with th~ Urban £ountv £omm,nitv Development strategy and encourages C~ty Council to officially adopt the program. As provided for in the Citizen Participation Plan the Committee requests that the City of Mound provide a written response to the review con~nentso The Committee wishes to express its appreciation to the City for their submittal of the proposed program. · Ch'ri-s~ duhl, Chai(cma_~J~ ' Planning Area 5 Citizen Advisory Con~nittee cje ~'cc' Leonard Kopp e72, Resolution authorizing submission of the City of Community Development Program to Hennepin County for consid~'ration as part of the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Application, in accord with the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. WHEREAS, the City of has executed a Cooperation Agreement with. Hennepin County agreeing to p~rticipate in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program, and WHEREAS, a three year Community Development Program and Housing Assistance Plan has been prepared consistent with the Comprehensive Urban Hennepin County Community Development strategy and the Community Development Program Regulations, and ~' WHEREAS, the three year Community Development Program and Housing Assistance Plan has been subject to citizen review pursuant to the Urban Hennepin County Citizen Participation Plan. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of approved the proposed three year Community Development Program and Housing Assistance Plan and authorizes the appropriate ekecutidn of the appli- Cation material and transmit it to Hennepin' County for consideration as part of the Year V Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Application. DATE: February 12~ 1979 TO: Cooperating communities FROM: Hennepin Coun~ ~~/ SUBJEOT: Year V Application Procedure As of this date the five Planning Area Citizen Advisory Committees (PACAC) are completing their reviews of the proposed programs and transmitting their letters of recommendation. After consideration of these recommendations, each applicant will authorize their formal application for submittal to the Urban County, Each application should be passed by resolution (see attached sample) and should include completed application forms, housing assistance plan (HAP) goals and the response to the PACAC letter of recommendation. This latter item should address those conditions affecting project acceptance. This application package (resolution~ application forms, HAP~ response letter) should be submitted to this office no later than March 2, 1979. If you require assistance on any of the above please contact your area staff representative as soon as possible. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota February 21, 1979 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-18 SUBJECT: Dock Permit 02750 Attached is a copy of a letter received on the back of the subject dock application. Ms. Petersen's and Ms. Brunner's generosity is very gratifying. qTc POLICe'/CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT Cities 0:5 MOUND, SPRING [PARK, Month MINNE'TRISTA & ST. BONIFACIUS Jan .__ Yea r _! 97'9_ I. GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY . THIS YEA R LAST YEAR ACTIVITY MONTH TO DATE TO DATE Traffic control (citations & warnings) 452 452 389 DV;t 8 8 '5 Property damage accident 41 4] 22 Personal injury accident '6 6 10 Fatal acc[dent 0 ~ 0 0 -%dult felony & misdemeanor arrests 9 9 11 3uvenile felony & misdemeanor arrests 19 19 9 ~4edicals 16 . 1'6 24 ' ~t ni~nal complaints 119 119 134' Part I & Part II offenses 58 58 69 Other general investigations 841 841 599 TOTA I, 1,569 ! ,569 ! ,272 w7 PROI°ERTY LOSS/ROOVERY SUMMARY CITIES COtIB [ t'IED ~,'"/] Bikes ITEM Boats Slothing Currcnc¥, notes~ etc. Tewelry & precious metals Guns -ton-~e Fur rd.sl~ings Radio & Electronic equipment Vehicle's & vehicle equipment Miscellaneous TOTAL STOLEN 100 5 285 1,115 500 2,825 10,628 2,363 17,821 'RECOVERED 8,ooo $ 8,003 '~' :' ALL CITIES COMBINED ~I. 'OFF.',~NSE A~$UMMAR'Y 0 D A~ult Hon~icide .Rape Assault . .. 1 ........ 1 , . Burglary ' , . 8 1 7 2 Veh[cte Theft 7' ' ~' .' 5 ' '.~ ' TOTAL ' 30 3 27 0 0 5 :PART II CRIMES S ~1 m P~ ~ ~ [ ~ ~ [~ [ I ' t 2 I II 2 I i I, I I~ ?'.or.~ery' ~' Counterfeiting , I . Fraud 1, 1.. En~-bezzlenaent ,,. ...... Stolen Prpp.~rt~ ...... V~nd~lism . . 5~eapgns. . . Prostitution & Commercialized Mice Sex Offenses .. 1- 1 . , Narcotic drug laws . .2 2 Gambling .... 1 , 1 ' - 1 ~ffe~s';s against family & children I . I ' Dri~,}ng under the inf~uenc.e .. 8 8 7 ~[ quo r .~aws ., P~ol lc Peace' .... 5 [ I I 1 ~ll other offense~ ~ I 2 1 1 TOTAL TOT£..L lb\liT I & ]PART I1 CRItv[E~S 63 5. 58 0 City of Year I_D_7J POLIq~CRIME ACTIVITY REi~OR MOUND Month January. I. Gt~NI~RAL ACTIVITY SUiMMARY THIS YEA R LAST YEAi~ ACTIVITY MON TH TO DA TE TO DATE Traffic control (citations & warnings} 334 334 285 D\Vt 4 4' 3 Property damage a~cclclent · 20 . 20 12 Personal injury ·accident 1 1 .. -. '7 -- Fatal accident 0 ., 0 0 Adult felony & misdemeanor arJcests 5 $ 6 Juvenile felony & misdemeanor arrests 12 12 8 Medicals Animal con-tpla [nts , 87 87. 11,3 Part I & ]Part II offenses 40 ' 40 45 " Other gener, al investigations 478 478 382 I70 TA L, 992 992 879 .~OPERTY LOSS/RECOVERY SUMMARY HOUND Boats Clothing gurrency, notes, etc. rewelry & precious metals ~un$ Home Furnishings Radio & Electronic equipment rehlcles & vehicle equipment Miscellaneous TOTAL (for individual city) GRAND TOTAL (all cities combined) S TO LtgN 285 1,115 500 2,825 10,533 2,077 _ .$!7,335 $ 17,821 1RECOVIgRtgD 8,000 3 $8,003 $ 8,003 OFFENSE AGTIVI iSUMMARY .~ ~t0U~!D v o° nj {om o PAIl' '' ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ T I CRI~.4ES ~' ~ O O ~ ,. Adult Jnv. Homicide . . .... Rape .. . Bobbery As sault 1 1 .. 8' ~ 7 -, ~urgla ry ... .. L.arg~nY 7 ~ 7 . Yehicle Theft .' 5 i 1 .4 TOTAL 21 2 '19 0 0 :PART II CRIMES .. ~or_ge ry. &' C0unterfe~ing 1 . .. ] ...... Fraud " ~to!en Pr0.pertY .._ ' ........., · >geapons ...... Pr0stltution k commercialized Vi~e . · Sex Offenses , Offenses against familE. ~< children ____ Driving U3)er the influence Public Peace - 4 . 4 . . . . All other offenses __3 1 2 1 1--'_ TOTAL I, *h~' ~ 'I'OTA i, I~AI.,,T I & I~ART II CKI2;.tES lt3 .............................. --_iZZZ'--'Z ............. i ......... _.-y___~._-_-_ 7i._Z-i: Z_-7.z £.TTiL'i~'~TZZZ /-/6,2. -I- ££Z-~Z-B9 / LO~ d 'oN ~a~,3oo b~aBo I~V'i .~0 gEOZSg93~03 'I~JVJ JO '~3oseuu~H ~to ~r'4r4S aq3 u~. ~aa~sn3 1 l. e3aa ao:t s6*3~j auoqda [aL s3~ .~o u[~3.~a3 ~u~q3 03 ~,t. aoq3n¥ .tog. £uedu~o3 auoqda iaI t~_~'3ueut, p, uo3 jo uo~3~:~Od ~q:~ ~o a~"~3eW aq3 uI Jsuo~ss~,,,,,o3 aauo~ss~u~uo3 aauo~ss~u.tuo3 aat~=3~g 'B ~3~u~n~ qs~a~d 'r p~eq3~B uosu~H '9 ~Boa atLt^~sses '3 The position of the PDS confirms that the Petitioner experienced a. lar~e amount of complaints from its customers, andin addition, there were requests to the Con~nission to reopen the proceedings, court appeals, and scrdttn¥ by the State Legislature. However, PBS contends it has not been shown what ~ortion o~f this adver~a reaction is due to the rates ordered or 'due to the gene~lly p'oor service offered by the Petitioner. PDS urges that the Petition in the instant proceedings be denied and ~at the request for a change in rate design be coupled with the Petitioner's next rate increase filing. PDS argues further that the customer complaints can also be attributed to the fact that the Petitioner had not developed an adequate internal mrocedur~_ to deal with customer complaints and to exolai'n the results of PR 121-1. The president of the Petitioner testified that it had m~de many t,r..~rovem..,ents in customer relations since the last rate case, but that there were still bad feelings existing toward the Petitioner. Directly in response to adverse reaction and institution of further l eoal proceedings by some of Peti~oner's customers, especially those of metropolitan area exchanges, Petitioner seeks to design rates which would reduce the increases to those customers in I975 and hopefully soothe some of the bad customer relations and result in dismissal of ~he legal proceedinq~ acainst it. The Examiner suggested that this is a primary motivation for separ~tin~ the realic~ent of the rate design from an increase in rate proceedings. The PDS argued this is not an appropriate reason for separaMng the ewo types of rate· proceedings. The Examiner suggested that it is perfectly proper for the Petitioner, in direct responsa to customer reaction, to realign its rates in an effort to soothe that customer reaction. The Commission concludes that it was a::romriate for the company to file the proceeding and will proc~ to readjust its ~ates, The purposes of the instant Petition are stated to be (a} the elin~natton of disparities for like grades of service between urban and.rural rates; {b) adjust disparities in existing EAS r~tes beb~een small exchanges and lar~..e exchanges; {c) reduce tqe larger increases which occur in the comaany's last rate adjustment; and (d) propose a beo-~arty rate to be applicable ~h.roughout the aporopriat~ exchange area for the ~urpose of complyina with the PSC policy regarding rep-party service. -5- - an otherwise meritorious loan. The Commfssion Is ccnvinced that the R-~A will p~oceed with disbursement of loan proceeds on the basis of this order, t~e Company's apolicaticn, and the Con~any's intention to file for any revenue Increases n~essa~ to p~tect its financial ~t~grtt~. Although tNe Co~tssion has announced certain ortnctoles here, it ~cognizes that this ts tn a senseonly an inteMm decision and that these princtp)e~ cannot be fully c~fde~ an~ their ramifications t~sted except within the context of a gene~l r~te filtn~ whe~ tt can scru~nt~e and evaluat~ all issues and their intard~pendent effect. ~e question of app~prtat~ costs and c~sttng methodologies has been raised. ~e Ce~tsston ho~es in futu~ r~t~ c~ses ~ be ~ble app~p~ate metho~olo~ywhich can be conststenbly applied ~q~u~hout the s~te, and for all c~m~antes. Until suc~ a fair an~ rational costin~ ap~ac~ been established r~t~akin~ will continue to r~utre the exercise of seasoned jud~ent by a Cc~ssion which acc~ the impo~ance of ~ui~ble considemtions. Me question of whether various grades of service sho61d be offered in any exchange is an in~ortant one. However, the C~rmission does not consider the record sufficiently developed to r~_ach a conclusion here-. In view of the fact that the Ccmoany is about to file for a r~te increase, the ~uestion can be defe~r~_d to the rate increase or~ceedinos. The Con~nission has concluded that it will not adoot the C¢~oany's extended area sar/ice prooosal at this time. L'he rates for t, he Ccmpany's non~et.,'o exchanges should be subst~n~allv like those on tqe illustTattve schedules which are attached h'e~eto.. - 9 - IS/ 6Z6[ '~1 £~en~qa~ :3±¥0 h~O~SIN~,~UO 3P~ ~0 ~30~0 ,~B o "...4 CD -'-' 0 C~ C~ c) 0 CD 0 CO' CD 0 ~ 0 0 0 L~ LO LO LO LO 0 O0 ~0 0 'J~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 O~ 0 0 ~ 'J~ LO I.~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'J~' 0 LO .~ 0 0 ~O 0 CO ~0 O~ .~0 ~ O~ ~ ~ O0 0 0 0 LO . LO 0 0 0 L¢~ O~ ~ 0'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O~ ~ ~:~C~ U EXCHN~GES WITH ACCESS TO THE METROPOLITAN CALLING AREA The current residential rates for the exchan§es of Maple Plain, Wyoming, St. Bonifacius, Scandia Marine, and Mound shall be reduced by the amount of $1.40 per BUDGET REPORT i~'~"'~'~ JANUARY 1979 ' )EPAR'FHENT 3UDGETED CURRENT EXP. Y-T-D EXP .O833 % ' '-J )2Oll COUNCIL $ 10,450.O0 867.69 867.69 870.49 .o83o ~3012 ttU~-IAN RIGHTS 360.OO O0 OO 29.99 O0 ~4013 HANAGER 85,180.00 8,903.59 8,903.59 7,O95.49 .1045 ~6014 ELECTIONS 1~O80.O0 O0 OO 89.96 O0 ~7015 ASSESSING 33,055.00 30.00 30.00 2,753.48 .0009 )9016 FINANCE 98,640.00 "91784.77 9,754.77 8,216.71 .0992 1018 LEGAL 12,800.OO 1,O00.00 1,000.OO 1,.O66.24 .O781 1118 PROSECUTING 11',055,00 O0 O0 920.88 .~-' O0 4031 POLICE ~57,211.00' 35,918.63 35,918.63 38,085.68 .0786 70~2 FIRE 94,375.00 ~,345';92 3,345.92 7,861.44 . .0355 ~9033 'INSPECTIONS 26,960,00 4,104.80 4,104,80 2,245.77 .1523 i99~3 PLANNING 20,'550.O0 '213.51 213.51 1,711.82 .0104 ~1034 CIVIL O~FENSE' 15,140,00 35.40 3~401 1,261.16 .0023 18042 sTrEET 227,955.00 23,937.65 23,937.65 18,988.65 .1050 !9743 SHOP & STORE 35,485,00 2,O07.69 2,007.69 '2,955.90 .0566- " [5847 DISEASED TREES 22,440,00 179.53 179.53 ' i,8~'9.25 .00~O. ~4069 PARKS 63,936.00 '4,175.95 4,175.95 5,325.87 .0653 ~1081C.E.T.A. 1,952~63 1,052.63 ,0082 TEHPORAR¥ LABOR 11,O50,00 237.80 237.'8'6 920.4~ .0215 ,5091 LIQUOR 165,905.00 9,042.38 9,042.38 13,819.89 .O545 ;0078 SEWER 379,676,O0 ~,7'56.49 8,756.49 31',627.01 .0231 ,O173 WATER 226,191.00 li,648.08 11,648'08 18,841.71 .0515 :5 REVENUE 'SHARING 42,314.O0 25.00 25.00 3,524.76 .0006 8 IMP EQUIP 0U!LAY 108,941.O0 O0 OO 9,074.79 O0 .0 CEMETERY 5,335.00 182.57 182.57 444.41 .0342 ;2 RETIREMENT 83,O16.OO 5,609.80 5,609.~O 6,9i5.23 .0676 5 FIRE RELIEF 40,750,OO 1,285.83 1,285.83 3,394.48 .0316 ~IATER REVENUE 38,306,00 23,180.25 23,1B.0.25 ... ' 3,'190.89. .6051 COHT I tlGENCY 20, O00. O0 O0 O0 1 , 666. O0 gO ~scription J....' Budgeted Current Receipts .... Rec6iv6d.Y?T~.D Percent.o8 .~al Estate Tax 347,531.OO ........................... ~-dL~ral Grants(CETA) .OO . .5,026.6'7 .'~'..'.'.'. ."..'.' 5,'0'26~'67'... -- ivil Defense Grant 24,000.00 ........... '~..'.":.. '."~.'.'~..'~.'.' ..... .. -- tare Shared Tax 2,551'.00 ............................... rate Grant - Poi ice 2,050.00 52'7..60'....':..': .':..': .'. '~7..001 ..... 2571 ~cal Government Aid 233,437,00 .... 3,933'.01/~.' ............... .3.,'~33.:'0.4' ......... 0168 .S.A. 9,800,00 . .'14',6.57'.5b'. i'i..'.':..i .'~'..-..4,'6'57..50 ..... 4753 ... iXed lachinery Aid 1,493.OO .............. I .... ' ............... ire Contract 43,544.00. .7,556..'9.'8. '[ [. '['[.'.". '."...'."[ .7.;556..98. . .1735 ~lifie Contract 185,750,OO .. 46,437'..5~O. .......... ' ..... .46,'.43.7..50. ' .25OO- ~..~.er Sales 194,291,OO . .1.6,.24'5'.2'1~ ............ .1.6,'2.45.~2~ ..... 0836" ~wer Service 31 i ,OOO,00 -I 25,.O701.9.6"..'~'.. '.'.[.. .". 25.,.O.70..96. .0806 ' i qu0r Licenses 9,325,00 "..'['[.'[..'['[.':.:,'['..'.'..':..'[[ ......... .. ~er Licenses 1 ~200,00 .......... ['.'..'['.' .'.' .' .'[. '[..'.'.' .'[..'.i .... -- ~rbage Licenses 170,-00 ....................... .............. -- " ~xi Licenses 35.00 . ~wl lng Al ley licenses 80,00 ........................... -- [sc. BUsiness Permits .1~134.OO: ..... i. O52~OQ':'.."."..'~. '.'. '...'~.105..00 ....... .O925 [garette Licenses 348,00 ....... :.... ........................... )g Licenses 9,000:00.. .437..00.. ~.. '.". .... '.'.. '.' 14.3.7...0.0 .......... .0485. ' ~i lding Permi ts 20,000,OO ...1. ,065..qq . ':':.'.'.. '[ . '.'.. '~ .1.;0.6.~:.'.O.Oi .... ,~533 ~wage Tapping .. , O0 . . !95 :0q.. '."~ .'".'.. '.'. '~.. ':..1.9.5...00... -- [umbing Permits 250.00 41.4.5o' [..'['.'-:"[ .'[ .' .'.'..'.4.1.4.'.'.5.0 ...... !.658 ~ter Connection Permits 9,000.00 39.0.'00 ..... ['.'....'.". ..3.90.-.0.0. ,0433 ccaVation Permits 50,00 '2.00-. . ......... 2.00 ..O400 )ck Permits 9,000.00 3,494..60..-~'.'.-:.'..- .-...3,.4.9.4..6.O' ,3883 ~n~age Deposi ts .00 '1 ............................. ,'18~'.~0 ...,' '..: ~ ..' '.. 1','.!85..00" __ ~urt Fines 24,500.00 3,084.00 3,0~4.00 .1'258 ' 0 REVENUE REPORT (CONT.) 0 JANUARY 1979 3escription Budgeted Current Receipts Received Y-T-D Percent .0833 ~ayment From Other Gov't 240.00 -- ]lanning Commission Appl 3,0~0.00 75.00 75.00- .0250. Sale qf Maps Etc. 2,000.00 40.25 40.25 .0201 deed Cutting Charges 200.00 ~ssess Searches .O0 233,50 233.50 ,lood Chipping 2,500.00 65.00 65.00 .0260 ~ccident Reports .. .O0 11.00 11.00 -- ;u ~cha rges 2,400. OO 122.20 122.20 .0509 ;ales Tax 32,000.00 1,893.98 1,893.98 .0591 .iquor & l~ine Sales 570~O00.00 35,760.85 35,760.85 -- .. ;igarette Revenue .00 15.20 15.20 · -_ Iater Sales 200.00 -- Iater Meters 10,000.00- 20.00 20.00 .0020 evenue Sharing 42,314.00 .10,766.00 16,76~00 .2544 'enalty Charges 2,400.00 -- :onn~ct'Charge - ~ewer 9,OOO.00 1,275.OO 1,275.00 ' '.i416 ~iscOnnect - Sewer 200.00 -- nterest .00 · 1 .... ' ssessments Collected .O0 12,237.36 i2,237'.36 -- omp For Prop Loss 2,000.00 1,430.93 t,[~30.93 .7154 emetery Lot Sale 2,500.00 -- ther Fund Transfers' .O0 2,084.46 2,084.46 -- nations & Contributions .O0 220.00 220.00 -- lefunds - Reimbursements .O0 508.98 508.98 -- I TOTAL $ 2~120~493,00 18~,475.39 188,475.39 .08~8 -~ DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY 320 Washington Av, South HEINE'_~935-3381Hopkins' Minnesota 55343 14 February 1979 HENNEPIN COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES Enclosed is a copy of the letter we received from the Argonne National LaboratOry which is fairly self- explanatory. Argonne said the community selected for this grant w~ll be 100% reimbursed for the project costs and Argonne is expecting to award a grant of $100,000 to $125,o0o. If you are interested in applying for this grant, call this office and we will send you the additional packet of materials and application procedures we have. Sincerely, Sr. P1 anner DGW/1 p k Enclosure HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer IdS Dt p.x~tm~nt d Ener~ ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY 9700 South Cass Aven~e, Argonne, Illinois 60439 4 Telel:d--c~ 312/972-? ]. 3 7 FEB 2. Subject: Request for Proposal NO. 79-20-0003-Decentralized Solar Energy Community Technology Assessment Gentlemen~ Argonne National Laboratory, operated by the University of Chicago, in fulfillment of responsibilities to the Department of Energy, in- vites you to submit a proposal and participate in the subject program. The objection of the program requires that a community-level technology assessment for solar technologies be carried out in a community in the Midwest. The process by which this task is to be carried out should include the development of a solar future scenario for the community, communication of that scenario to the general Population, and an assess- ment by community members of the community social, economic, political, institutional, and life-style impacts of the solar future set forth in the scenario. The objective is to provide an assessment of impacts of solar technologies upon communities, and to develop a process by which communities can do their own assessments assuring the widest possible citizen involvement. Only proposals submitted by community governments will be considered for the award and, due to the importance of citizen involvement, this solicitation is limited to communities of 75,000 or less. There are no restrictions on the solar technologies to be considered, nor are there any restrictions on the minimum amount of energy use which must be re- placed by solar technologies. The solar future scenario should be con- sistent with community goals, values, and choices, and should employ sound planning and design procedures. A task team comprised of local government officials, planning officials, and local citizen and interest groups is to be formed to assist in the development of reasonable options for the solar future scenario. Community Governments of 75,000 or less located in .the following states are eligible to submit proposals: (A) Illinois (E) Minnesota (B) Indiana (F) Missouri (C) Iowa (G) Ohio (D) Michigan (H) Wisconsin The University oj' ChicAgOArgonn~ Universities AssociaTion -2- Your attention is directed to the enclosed documents which constitute requirements for this Request for Proposal and should be fully complied with as indicated. - Proposal package includes: Item Content. Enclosure No. 1 Enclosure No. 2 Enclosure No. 3 Enclosure No. 4 Enclosure No. 5 Enclosure No. 6 Enclosure No. 7 Introduction and General Requirements Scopes of Work Deliverables Evaluation Criteria Sample Contract Intellectual Property Provisions Appendix D-1 and D-2 Optional Form 60 - Contract Pricing Proposal It is requested that proposals be prepared in accordance with the instruc- tions contained in the enclosures listed above. Proposals will be submitted in original and five copies, to the following address (please use pre- addressedmailer): Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439 Attention: Mr. Robert P. Houghton Subcontracts Department Proposals will identify the individual(s) - name, title, and telephone number - who will represent the offeror in any ensuing negotiations. Your proposal should be properly identified and should be mailed or hand carried sufficiently in advance to assure arrival at the address specified above no later than 1600 hours (4:00 P.M.), March 15, 1979. Proposals received after that date will be considered only to the extent that it is in the LaboKatory's best interest to do so. Your proposal should be valid for a minimum period of 120 days and should include all t~e information request- ed as well as any additional information which you feel would be helpful -in the Laboratory's evaluation. It is anticipated that contract awards .will be made no later than May 15, 1979. Respectfully, Chief Subcontract Administrator R?H/Jw