Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
80-05-20
CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota AGENDA CM 80-177 CM 80-184 CM 80-178 CM 80-179 CM 80-151 CM 80-1~0 CM 80-182 CM 80-183 MOUND CITY COUNCIL May 20, 1980 City Hall 7:30 P.M. BOARD OF REVIEW Pg. 1185-1188 Council Meeting 1. Minutes 2. Planning Commission Recommendation Pg. 1176-1184 3. Street Construction A. Retaining Wall Request - Reconsideration Pg, 1174-1175 B. Partial Payment - Thomas & Sons Pg.. 1170-1173 C. Other 4. Comments and Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit) 5. Appointment - Housing & Redevelopment Authority Pg. 1169 6. Request for Additional C.S.O. Pg. 1162-1168 7. License Renewals A. Wine License Renewal - A1 & Alma's .Pg. 1161 B. Liquor License Renewal - Donnie's on the Lake pg. 1160 8. Payment of Bills 9. Information Memorandums/Misc. Pg. 1139-1139 10. Committee Reports Page 1189 REGULAR MEETING OF T.HE 'CITY COUNCIL Hay 13, 19BO Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341Maywood Roaa in said City on May 13, 1980 at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Tim Lovaasen, CoUncilmembers Gordon Swenson, Donala Ulrick and Benjamin Withhart. Also present were City Mqnager Leonard L. Kopp, City Attorney Curtis A. Pearson, Assistant City Engineer Lyle Swanson, City Planner Charles Riesenberg and Acting City Clerk Marjorie Stutsman. Councilmember Polston was absent, out of town on business. MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of' May 6, 1980 were presented for consideration. Swenson moved and Withhart seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the meet- ing of May 6, 1980 with the following additional under Citizens Requests .... area. "The Police Chief is to make a report of the outcome of the meeting to the City Council" The vote was unanimo'usly in favor. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Sign Permit - Lot 4, Block 6, Sylvan Heights Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-184 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COHHISSION AND GRANT SIGN PERM'IT The vote was three in favor with Withhart voting nay. Non-Conforming Use/Side Yard Variance - Lot 15 & Si. ½ of 16, Block 4, Shirley Hills Unit B Swenson moved and Lovaasen seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-185 RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND GRANT 1.5 FOOT SIDE YARD VARIANCE AND RECOGNIZING EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE The vote was three in favor with Lovaasen voting nay. Street Front Variance - E. ½ of Lots 18, 19 & 20, Block 1, Pembroke ¥1ithhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-186 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND GRANT 6 FOOT STREET FRONT VARIANCE The vote was unanimously in favor. Side Yard Variance - Lot 16 & S. 65 Ft. of Lots 14 & 15, Block 17, Devon Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-187 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND GRANT 4 FOOT SIBE YARD VARIANCE The vote was unanimously in favor. Street Front & Side Variance - Part of Lot 17, I ,let's'Second 'Addition to Mound ~" Swenson moved and. Lovaase~ seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-188 . REsOLuTION TO CONCUR WITH PLAN~ING COMMISSION AND GRANT 3 FOOT STREET FRONT VARIANCE AND RECOGNIZE EXISTING' 1 FOOT NON-CONFORMING SIDE YARD. The vote was unanimously in favor. §u6dlv[slon oF Land - Lots 2g, 27, 28 & Swly 35 Ft. oF Lots h, 5 & 6,.. Block 5 Shadywood Point Withhart moved and Swens~n seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-189 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND GRANT SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITH STIPULATION ALL SIDEYARDS & SETBACKS BE MET The vote was unanimously in favor. Sign Permit - Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision 170 Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-190 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND GRANT SIGN PERMIT The vote was three in favor with Withhart voting nay. The Council requested that the Planning Commission look at the sign ordinances of Hopkins and Eden Prairie. STREET CONSTRUCTION - DRUMMOND ROAD Laurie Nelson presented a petition requesting limiting extension of Drummond Road to not beyond 150 ft. east of Dexter/or a point to give access to Lots 16, 17 and 18, Block 16, Devon. Hearing motion shows "Drummond Road - Roxbury Lane to 150 ft. east of Dexter Lane". Also presented was a letter from Walter Linden, owner of Lots 16, 17 and 18, Block 16, Devon, requesting street be extended to serve his lots. Discussed. City Attorney advised that no public hearing was required if owner agrees to pay 1OO% of costs. The Mayor r~ferred the matter to the Staff. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM C~TIZENS PRESENT Tim Torgrimson, 3091 Tuxedo Blvd. - asked when dirt along asphalt sidewalks would be moved and graded - why not with street project? ANSWER - different contractors did jobs and have to be kept separate. Gii Schrupp, 1661 Gull Lane - questioned why Eagle Lane access closed? Dave Fenner, 1623 Gull Lane - asked who put up chain barrier - considered chain a hazard. Mike Koehnen of Watertown representing Walter Kellner asked if another car wash proposal was coming before the Council tonight? LICENSE RENEWAL Restaurant - Health House Lovaasen moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-191 RESOLUTION APPROVING tSS E OF RESTAURANT. LICENSE TO HEAbTH HOUSE The vote was unanimously in favor. DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Ulrick moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-192 RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A PUBLIC ~EARING TO BE HELD JUNE 3, 1980 AT 7:30 P.M.' ON THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS The vote was unanimousl~ in favor. WELL #6 Public Works Director reported on status of repaiffs on Well #6. -. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Council determined to consider appointment on May 20th. TRASH PICKUP BIDS Withhart moved and Ulrick seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-193 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND ACCEPT THE BID OF WESTONKA SANITATION FOR THE SPRING CLEANUP The vote was unanimously in favor. ASSESSMENTS 1979 Street Assessment Swenson moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-194 RESOLUTION PROVIDING EOR A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO ASSESSING PID #13-'117-24 13 0035 FOR $2,592.74 TO BE HEARD JUNE 10, 1980 AT 7:30 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Deferred Assessment Withhart ~oved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-195 RESOLUTION DEFERRING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,268.90 The vote was unanimously in favor. AMENDMENT - METROPOLITAN COUNCIL GRANT AGREEMENT Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-196 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND MANAGER TO SIGN THE AME~DMENT TO THE AGREEMENT The vote was unanimously in favor. PAYMENT OF BILLS Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve payment of bills as sub- mitted on the prelist in the amount of $55,242.66 where funds ~re available. Roll call vote was unanimously in favor. /~13 .OTHER MATTERS Police Committee Meeting The Council requested alternatlve~ [or ~f~erent issues on 'police contracts and asked to have next committee meeting called for May 21st at 7:30 at Mound City Hall. City Attorney Reported: 1. Thomas & Sons have filed a demand for arbitration with American Arbitration Assn. 2. On status of Continental Telephone Company. City Manager reported on Cable T.V. - application being put toget'her to include Mound, Spring Park, Minnetrista and possibly St. Bonifacius. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The City Planner explained the Comprehensive Planning Program with the goal of completing this program this summer. ADJOURNMENT ' Swenson moved and Withhart seconded a motion, to adjourn to the next regular meeting on May 20, 1980 at 7:30 p.m. The vote was unanimously in favor, so adjourned. Marjorie Stutsman, Acting'l~ity Clerk Leonard L. Kopp, City Manager 5-2o-8o' CITY OF MOUND .Mound, Minnesota May 19, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-185 SUBJECT: Division of Property - Block 15, Arden Attached is a copy of a letter from H. E. Bischke relative to Lots 11, 25 and 26, Block 15, Arden. They are on the tax rolls as follows: 1. PID # 24-]17-24 43 00]2 Lot ll and the N. ½ of Lot 26, Block 15, Arden = 6,000 Sq. Ft. 2. PID # 24-117-24 43 0023 Lot 25 and S. ½ of Lot 26, Block 15, Arden = 6,000 Sq. Ft. Mr. Bischke sold the letsas follows: 1. Lot ll as one site 4,000 Sq. Ft. 2. Lots 25 and 26 as one site 8,000 Sq. Ft. Background - Last summer or fall, Mr. Bischke came'to the City to advise us how he had sold the lots. I told him that no division could be made without approval of the Planning Commission and the Council. He said that he could do it through the County and left. In November, we re- ceived a Division Sheet from the County asking to divide this property. On November 28, 1979, I signed the sheet denying the Division since it had not cleared the Planning Commission and Council. A few weeks ag°, someone called asking how this could be straightened out and we suggested they contact Mr. Bischke. Inasmuch as this division leaves an undersized lot, the division is not recommended. I will write Mr. Bischke giving him the answer the Council decides on. Leonaro L. r, opp / ~ May 15th 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp City of Mound Mo mud, ~iinnesota Dear Mr. Kopp, Re: LOt 11 Block 15 Arden sold to Flavin Lots 25& 26 Blk 15 Arden sold to Hegre Lot E of RLS # 1149 sold to Hegre We have received letters from the Flavins and Hegre's regarding an apparent misunders.tanding in regards to the above mentioned property. Lots 11,2~ & 26 plus the Lot E of RLS 1149 among other adjoining properties were owned by Miss Annie Irvine. Apparent!yMiss Irvine sold lot ll to her brother Donald Irvine and then later gave hL~ a ½ interest in lot 26 for a walkway to the commons and also shared with him and his wife a ½ interest in Lot E. I have enclosed surveys..some quite old, but~ere the properties involved and owned by Miss Irvine. I purchased the properties from ~s. Don Irvine and Annie Irvine, now deceased, intending to Live at 3046 Brighton Commons and either sell 3041 Brighton Blvd or rent or have my son Richard and family live there. My wife was stricken with Polio in January of 1978 and we had hoped to be able to get out of ~nnesota for the winters and live and work ih the Mound area the most of the year° However, her condition worsened and so we moved to Honolulu where the climate is less variable thru out the year..., th~mefore necessitating selling all property in Minnesota in order to buy a Condo in Honolulu. Being we owned all the lots as mentioned, it made common sense to sell Lot ll with the house on it as one unit: Also to sell Lots 25 & 26 along with Lot E as a Unit: We called the Hennepin County Director of Finances Dept and explained the situation to them and they assured us that this was fine being we owned all the property and that it had been originally th~s way. They said they would change the Tax records accordingly and it would be effective for 1980o The sales were made accordingly. The ½ lot of 26 which Miss Irvine had given to her brother, now decease~, was restored to its original status making Lots 25 & 26 one parcel of ~nership and Leaviug Lot 11 Block 15 as one parcel as it originallywaso Each bought knowingly and each was priced accordingly. Both are happy and satisfied and apparently we now need your Blessing. After the information from the Tax Dept as I mentioned we understood that there was nothing further to do. Apparently we have not complied with your procedures and for this I Humbly apolagize. What can we do to be granted your forgiveness and to grant to the Flavins a Homestead Credit on their taxes to which they are entitled ~nd to give to each their proper tax statements? Your kindness and understanding will be greatly appreciated in this most awkward sit~ation. We sincerely tried to do the right thing for all concerned and apparently have failed even with our good intentions. For this error we h~mbly apolagize and seek your forgiveness and your helpo We have enclosed the copies which we have in our file w~ch we felt would be helpful to you in looking at the situation and suggesting what to doo We'd appreciate your response at your earliest convenience. Cop~es to: Flavins Hegre File /l~'-?/~Sinc erely Herbert E Bisc'~e 311 Ohda Ave Apt 1203 Honol~u 968~ 5 Hawaii ! NOA~Ci .O<:j~f 'ON, .,- % CITY' OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota 5-20-80. May 16, 1980 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 80-45 SUBJECT: Cable Television Mr. Sarrazin of Michelson Media, Inc. is preparing an appli- cation for the City to request a territory including Spring Park, Minnetrista and St. Bonifacius. This should be for- warded to the State this week. It takes the State at least 90 days to process the application. During this 90 day interval we can write specifications and prepare for bidding. It would probab]y be well to form a committee made of a Councilman and the Administrator to meet with the other communities so we can have like ordinances, etc. 5-20~80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota May 19, 1980 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 80-46 SUBJECT: Police Contract The Council requested a report on possible action to be taken on a new police contract. Attached is a list of alternatives for different sections of a police contract. Also attached is a copy of a report written by the Police Chief in December. The Council shou!d give the Committee direction on which alter- natives they favor. I za7 SUBJECT Type of Contract Name Board Composition Budget Division of Costs Personnel Police Policy ALTERNATIVES 1. Joint Powers llke South Lake 2. Joint with one community operating Police Department 2. 1. 2. RECOMMEHDATION Recommended Present - Mound, Minnetrista, Spring Park-St. Bonifacius Police Westonka Police Stay the same (1) Present - 2 Members each Council to discuss things with or without weighted voting 2 Members each Council with vote based on 1 man 1 vote Board made up of 1 man for each 2,000 residents or part thereof Mound 9,659 - 5 members Minnetrista 3,500 - 2 members Spring Park 1,500 - 1 member St. Bonifacius 800 - 1 member Budget be rev.iewed by Committee prior to presenting to Communities Committee establish budget Recommended Be done or set formula agreed to by all parties Be based on manpower requested as suggested by the Police Chief in his memorandum of December 26 Established each year at budget time. Recommended 1. Be directly under the Committee 2. Be responsible to one City with Police Chief being hired by that City. 3. Be responsible to one City with Police Chief being hired by the Committee Recommended 1. Be established by the Committee 2. Be established by each City for work within that City; 3. Be established by contracting City Recommended TO: Leonard Kopp - City btanager DATE_, Decembg.r. 26:... - 19.?~ FROM: SUBJECT: Charles Johnson - Chief of Police Police Contracts Over the past several months ~ have been advised by our contract police communities that they are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the currant con~racts for police service. It seems to be unanimous among our contract cities that they bellave they are receiving hi§h q~ality professional police service, therefore their complaints do not relate to the department itself, but rather they relate to the input each city h,~s in the budgetary and administrative policy decisions that are made. The only comment or complaint that has arisen concerning the department itself that regularly comes up deals with the lack of man- power to deal with individual community problems or the desire for increased routine patrol. All of the cities have expressed the opinion that they should be receiving more routine preventative patrol services. However, each community' seems to recognize the current manpower limitations. One of the cities, Spring Park, has asked for cost information for additional personnel dedicated solely to Spring Park as a possible solution to this problem. 14ithout exception, the contract cities have indicated the desire for more inp0t to the overall budgetary and administrative policy decisions. They feel they are totally at the mercy of the Mound city council in these matters and like it or not they must go alo. ng with all decisions. It has become apparent that they would prefer a contract that would allow for more input, either through the use of a joint power agreement or by amend- ing the current contract to allow for bindi.ng input into the administrative process. The cost of service in and ~)f itself does not seem to be .t~]c key issue, but the issue is that it is their opinion that for the amount they pay they deserve a voice in management. On December 17, 1979 the Minnetrista city council voted unanimously td cancel the police contract in 1981. I have learned, that the St. Bonifacius city council intends to do ~he same within the next few weeks, it is my understanding that they would prefer not to utilize their other options for obtaini.ng police service, but would prefer to negotiate an agreement for police service with the city of Mound. Their other options for police service include formi.ng their own police department and secondly to contract with the West Hennepin Department of Public Safety which currently patrols Maple Plain and Independence. It is my opinion that the primary reason they would prefer to keep the present police jurisdiction in tact is because the Mound police department provides an excellent quality of' total police service. However, it is my opinion, they most assuredly will withdraw from the contract if the city of Mound is not responsive to their request. The four cities within the police jurisdiction are both geographically and demographically comparable and from a public safety viewpoint the city boundaries are virtually non-existant as they relate to the suppression of crime. To split the jurisdiction into two or more parts would have a negative effect in the delivery of police service to the citizens of each of the communities, It is my opinion that the citizens of each of the communities would be the victim of a disservice if the contractual differences were not worked out and the jurisdiction were to split. It is my recommendation that every reasonable effort be made to keep the present police service district intact. I understand the concerns of the contract cities and firmly believe that a solution can be reached by either entering into a joint powers agreemment br modifying the police contract to allow for meaningful input from each of the contract cities. Whichever of .these solutions is reached, it is my recommendation that certain basic changes be made in the contract for the delivery of police sefivice and. that the formula used for allocating the cost of servic~ be modified to reflect as close as possible the actual cost directly related to the delivery of police service in each community. The following are the changes that I recommend.. These cha.nges are not meant to be the only solutions or necessarily the best solutions, however ! believe.they are fair and equitable and in the best interests of each city. Each city should decide for itself the minimum level of basic police patrol service it finds acceptable.. That is the number of hours per day'and per week that a uniformed police patrol Officer should be specifically assigned within their city. For example, if City A should determine that their basic level of police patrol service should be one p~trol officer on duty every day, 24 hours per day, then they should receive this service and in turn pay the direct costs for this service. Exhibit #1 is a guide to determining the number of personnel necessary to provide 24 ho6r police patrol service. Exhibit #2 reflects the direct personnel costs for one patrol officer as based on the 1980 costs directly attributable to personnel. Exhibit #1 Basic Work Year: 40 hours X 52 weeks = 2080 hours Unavailable Hours Purpose: Hours Vacation .................................................... 107 * Sick Leave .................................................. 120 ** Holidays ..................................................... 80 Training ..................................................... 15 *** Total 312 Basic Work Unavailable Year Hours 2,080 - 312 = 1,768 One year is 8760 hours (365'x 24). If the aver.age officer is available 1768 per year, approximately 5 officers would be required to man one 24 hour patrol (8,760/1768=4.95 officers). * This is the average vacation of all sworn personnel. Depending on length of service~ vacations range from 2 weeks/year to 4 weeks/year. ** Sick leave is earned at a rate of 1 day/month. Sick leave and leave due to injury exceeded 2100 hours in 1979. **'~ This is the minimum number of hours .required to meet POST board licensing requirements. Exhibit #2 · Estimated direct persongel cost for average patrol officer in 1980 Personnel Costs Salary PFRA Retirement Health Insurance Workmans Comp. ins. Life lns./LTD Liability Ins. Uniform allowance 21,552 2,586 !, 080 i,153 143 593 220 TOTAL 27,327 Basic Work Year 2,080 - Hours Unavailable 312 Hours Available 1768 Total Personnel Costs 27,327 Hours Available 1,768 Direct Hourly Personnel Cost 15, 6 The payment formula for the delivery of police service should be r~vised as follows: A. The direct cost.for basic police patrol for each city should be on a straight cost basis determined by service actually delivered. B. The direct cost of patrol supervisory personnel should be billed on a pro-rated basis determined by the number of personnel assigned to provide basic'patrol service. For example if there were one super- visor for every six patrolmen and if a city had the equivalent of five patrol officers, then the cost for the supervisor would be 5/6 of the cost of one supervisor. C. Investigative and juvenile services should be billed on a pro-rated basis determined by the percent of Part I and Part II (index) crimes reported within each city. (See exhibit #3). For example if the index crimes reported in city A accounted for 25% of the total of all cities, then city A would pay 25% of the cost attributable to investiga- tive services. D. Other administrative costs should be billed on a formula that could include many different factors, but a formula 'that would be acceptable to all cities. The formula could be based on. such factors as the number of square miles within the city, population, road miles, calls for service, assessed evaluation, density, amount of industry, number of business estaBlishments~ number of liquor or recreational establishments, etc., etc. Exhibit #3 Part. ! and Part II Crimes Part I Homicide Rape Robbery Assault Burglary Larceny Auto Theft Part II Other assaults Arson Forgery & Counterfeiting Fraud, Embezzlement Stolen Property Damage to Property Weapon offenses Prostitution and Commercialized Vice Other Sex Offenses Narcotics Gambling Offenses against family & children Traffic offenses (DWi) Liquor offenses Public Peace Vagrancy ~ All other Misc. offenses It should be kept in mind that approximately 85% of the departmental budget is attributable directly to personnel costs, and these co'ts would be direct costs to each city as computed by the amount of actual service each has received. The remain~ lng 15% of the total bud.get would be divided according to a mutually acceptable formula. By dividing costs in this manner, the chance that ~ny city may be subsidizing for the service of another is vastly reduced. Further, each city has the opportunity to set the policy for its l'evel of service and thereby has a direct input into the budgetary process. An exhibit of, the direct hourly cost of. patrol officers is listed. A similar formula would be utilized in determining the actual personnel costs for supervisory personnel and investigator/juvenile officers. (exhibit #4). Exhibit #4 Estimated Direct Personnel Cost for Supervisory and Investigators in 1980 Personnel Costs - Supervisory Salary 25,056 PFRA Retirement 3,007 Health Insurance 1,O80 ¥1orkmans Compensation Ins. 1,340 Life Insurance/LTD 163 Liability Insurance 689 Uniform Allowance 247 Personnel Costs - Investigator Salary 21,552 Differential 1,200 PFRA Retirement 2,586 Health Insurance 1,O80 Workmans Comp. Ins. 1,153 Life Ins./L~D 143 Liability Ins. 593 Uniform Allowance 220 TOTAL ~8,527 TOTAL 31,582 /o~O~ All other administrative, patrol.support, and investigative support services should be included in a mutually agreeable formula.as opposed to a direct cost formula. Since nearly all of these functions are inter-related with all cities, it would be nearly impossible to figure direct cost, and if possible, it would be a bookkeeping nightmare. These other costs include such things as Chief's salary, training, vehicles, vehicle upkeep, secretarial services, records management, administrative staff salary, equipment purchased, equipment repairs, building rent, heat, light, telephone, etc. Included in the current police contract is the furnishing of animal control services. The direct cost for this service should be divided in direct proportion to the actual services received. In this manner each city would have the option of including or deleting this service from the contract. Further, each city would have the option of adjusting license and impound fees proportionately to the actual cost for the service. Finally, it is my opinion that Mound would suffer the most if one or more of the contract cities were to withdraw from the jurisdiction. This is best shown by looking at the calls for service the first eleven months of 1979. The department responded to or handled 17,285 calls for service/police-citizen contacts. Of these, 10,877 (63%) were from Mound; 3,616 (21%).were from Spring Park; 2,205 (12.7%) were Minnetrista; and 587 (3.3%) were for St. Bonifacius. Therefore, 84% of the total calls were between Mound and Spring Park. In determining the level of enforcement or manpower needs for a community, a key factor to donsider is the calls for service. Except for a community deciding on the minimum or basic level of preventative patrol services, calls for service is probably the most important factor in determining manpower needs. Based on the level of service, needed in Mound or Mound and Spring Park, the current department's strength could not reasonably be reduced if Minnetrista and St. Bonifacius were to withdraw from the contract. That being the case, Mound would be forced to absorb the additional cost or forced.to decide which police services will be cut or reduced. At this time the department is short handed and the withdrawal of Minnetrista and St. Bonifacius would not substantially effect this situation. We would continue to require at a minimum the present allocation of manpower. It is hoped that these figures and recommendations are helpful in reaching a success- ful resolution to the contractual differences that now exist.with the contract cities. Respectfully, Chief of Police CJ: 1 ao 5-20-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota May 19, 1980 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 80-47 SUBJECT: Police Towing On Saturday, one of the Councilmen called and said that Gustafson had called him to ask why he wasn't getting the Police tows. I said that I would check into it on Monday. Later in the afternoon, Gustafson called and asked how he should go about getting the tow jobs. I told him that the Council had set no policy on towing, but that the Department rules were that the car owner could name the towin§ company. In checking with the Police Chief, he said the policy is that the car owner's choice is first. If there is no choice, the patrolman makes the decision based on location and factors that he might con- sider. He also said he thought that Gustafson was getting over 50% of the calls. Also, Gustafson gets many calls from the City of Mound. It might be. pointed out that Martin in Navarre tows for the AAA and, since many people get their towing with their AAA dues, they probably ask for them. Inasmuch as the towing question comes up from time to time, it seems the Council should establish a policy. It is suggested that the towing be put out to bid--the bidders pro- viding a bond representative of the responsibility involved. The bid should also establish prices that would not fluctuate and the bid should require towing truck operators to have a certain degree of competency. As reported previously, the bid would end up costing the City money since we would probably have to pay the unpaid tows. Leon~ard L. Kopp cc: Police Chief Public Works Director PHONE: _ STATE OF DE PA R?'i A E NT Metro Region Waters~ P3_6-7523 Hennepin County Municipality Attention: City Council OF NATURAL ESOURCES 1200 Warner Road St.Paul 55106 May 16, 1980 File No. __ RE: ~NNEPIN COUNT PUBLIC WA~RS IN~NTORY Gentlemen: ~is letter is t° in~ you of the pro~ to classi~ ~d identi~ public waters within Hennepin County. Legislation passed in 1979 set up.~.inventory procedure to identi~ all of ~e public waters in the state. ~e ~bIic waters invento~ materials were submitted to the co~ty only 12, 1980 and the county now has 90 days to review these ~terials,.conduct at least one ~blic in~rmation meeting, and to pre~. sent their reco~endations to the Department of Natural Resources {~R). ~e reco~endations shall state with particularity the waters involved ~d the reasons ~r dis~reement. ~e reasons ~r disagreement may in- clude size .dete~ination, l~ation, or wetland type. Also, if co~on or l~al n~es are ~o~ ~r u~ed public waters, they should be pro- vided.. Basically, the 1979 law identifies public waters as type 3, 5wetl~d.s la~er than 2½ aCres in.incorporated areas~d larger than. 10 acres ~ unincorporated areas, and watercourses ~at have a drainage area of more th~ 2 square miles. Hennepin County'is unique because it is virtually all incorpor~ted;'~nd due to ~at ~ct, I ~el it is.necessary to directly involve the munici- p~ities in the review pr~ess. Sandy Fecht of my staff will be available to meet with.city staff at their convenience to ~r~er ~plain the.inven- tory process. Please contact Sandy at 296-7523 to set up a meeting. The map enclosed has the public waters ide~ified by n~ber. At the meeti~ we will provide you wi~ a numerical listi~ of the p~lic waters that includes the .public waters n~e and legal description {section, to%mship, range). DNR personnel will be meeting with. He~mepin Co~ty in the near ~ture %o discuss .the ~at to be ~llowed. If you have ~y questions, feel ~eeto contact San~ or ~self. KL/ch enclosure Sincerely, Kent ~okkesmoe Regional Hydrologist AN EQUAl_ OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER we tonkc · c reo chomL er commerc / ~' May 15, 1980 . ~ONKA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCEIMEMBERS AND GUESTS / The next general meeting of the~hamber of Co~erce will / ~e held on May 21, 1980 at t~ Minnetonka Mist (lower level) a~Our gues~°s~k~~{r. Loren Simer of Simer Pump Co. The title of his speech is "Are You A Good Neighbor?" Mr. Scott Rasmuson of Telecheck Co. will also speak. He will talk about bad checks. See YOU at 12:00, Noon on May 21st. Sincerely, WESTONKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE POST OFFICE BOX 426 m MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 CHANHASSEN CHASKA EDEN PRAIRIE WAFTA wESI~RN AREA FIRE TRAINING , EXCELSIOR MAYER LONG LAKE MOUND ~'~" ~ ' WATERTOWN MAPLE PLAIN SI. BONIFACIUS The April 16, 1980, meeting of :4AFTA was called to order by Chairman Jerry Schlenk at 7:45 The minutes of the ~rch meeting were read and approved as read. Treasurer's reoort: Checking :$113.18 Savings :~10,~470.19 ' Money ~r.~et 10,000,00 Bills: Centential Telephone $45.34 ;.4AFTA women 25. O0 Job_n McCoy 10.00 A motion was made by Long Lake' and seconded by Eden Prairie to p.qy the bills. motion carried. The A motion was made by Eden Prairie and seconded by i~ple Plain to pursue the purchase of 100 chairs with a maximum price per chair of $1~3.00. Ray i.~tchell gave a report on the four drainage tanks that are used to separate the petroleum from the water before it is dp~ained away. He presented suggestions from the Eden Prairie City Engineer on possible improvem,nts. A m~tion was made by Excelsior and seconded by Monnd to have Lyle Day install a horizontal drainage sy. stem, this to be acconp/dshed the nest econo~Zcal and feasible w,ay that he can obtain. Motion carried. ,'.ot_c., by l.:ound and seconded by Long l~,ke to have Lyle Day install a septic system includ-~ug one large drain field. Lcwell L~nd reported on the schools pier, ned for this summer. Four schools have been planned. " Jerry 5chlenk ~e'~o~+-~::2 on o:'.):~oso:2 "-~-~'*-' , +h,~t the :,.~l~ons G~s Co. :ou!,d like to make, Some of these are another open pit, fire p~mp, open spill, and ~ndergro,mud water mine '~th hydrant. Bi~s for the 1920 mo*,~ng season wore accepted. The lowest bid was from }~ke Farrell at $3.89/hr. Ho will be doing the mo~lng at the site this s~mer. Member city not represented was Victoria. icuyone wishing to purchase one of the used mowers from ~gA~A should make an offer. Respectfully submitted, McCoy Socret~ry-treasuror May I ~,, 1980 COMMUNITY'HEALTH DEPARTMENT 4fh Floor, McGill Building $0 1 Park Avenue Minneapolis, Minnesofa 554'15 Leonard L. Kopp City of Mound 53Ztl Maywood Road Mound, MN Dear Mr. Kopp: The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners in March of 1980, adopted four environmental health ordinances regulating the health practices of food establishments and food preparation~ lodging and boarding facilities, children's camps and public swimming pools. In addition, an administrative procedures ordinance for Hennepin County Government was adopted. This action by the Hennepin County Board represents the culmination of six years of efforts to ensure the availability of local environmental health services on a County-wide basis. The ordinances which were adopted are very similar to .the draft copies distributed and discussed with you over the past 12 months. Copies of the approved ordinances are being printed at this time and will be distributed to you in several weeks for your records. in addition to cop[es of the ordinances we will be distributing several other informational items to you, including a comprehensive guide to services offered by our depai'tment, and several informational brochures on common environmental health problems with general guidelines for their solution. We hope that these materials will be of value to you and your residents. I am also pleased to announce that arrangements have been completed to office the environmental health personnel. Mr. Roger Carlson and his staff will be located in Hopkins at 3:2 10th Avenue South~ Rooms :20:2-:206. The new phone number for the program will be 935-15ztzt. Mr. Carlson will be at the new offices on a part-time basis during the month of May as the transition is made from Minneapolis to Hopkins. Mr. Carlson will be contacting you over the coming weeks to further explain our program and how it will be working. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer Mr. Leonard L. J~opp May 14, 1~80 Page 2 We anticipate initiating routine direct services in food protection, lodging facilities, children's camps and public swimming pools in mid-May. We will be keeping you advised of our progress and initial findings as soon as they are completed. If you have any questions concerning our program please feel free to contact Mr. Carlson or myself at 348-3~25. Sincerely, ~o~hn Wm. Urbach Community Health Department JWU:sy WlLLIAMS/O'BRIEN ASSOCIATES, INC. 45 S. 9th ST. MINNEAPOLIS,MN. 5540:~ ~3 ,8;~}981 ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS 16 May 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp Mound Village Manager 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Leonard: We are continuing the search for a solution for the roof problem and I don't think that we will have anything by the May 20th meeting. The last item we were looking into seems most promising, but the manufacturer wants to conduct a test to see if the material will bond adequately to the plexiglas. The prOduct is G.E. Silicone roofing. Someone from G.E., or the Sanders Company, will install a small strip of the material in an inconspicuous place on the skylight as 'a test. If judged successful, they will warrantee it and give a price for the work.. I wish I had more information about this but I'll have to wait for the test. I'll let you know as soon as I find out. S~rely, James W. O'Brien, AIA Vice President JWO/lme LORENZO D. WILLIAMS, FAIA JAMES W. O'BRIEN, AIA STEPHEN M. DECOSTER, AIA PAUL B. STROTHER, AIA · May 15, 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota McCOMBS-KNUTSO. N ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS III LAND SURVEY, ORS I~1 SITE PLANNERS · \ ~ ~j;~ Reply To: .~ . ~.} , ~¢ 12~0 Industrial Park Boulevard ~ ~ Plymouth, Minne,ota 55441 ~', ~ j (612) 559-37~ Subject: City of Hound 1979 Street Construction Dear Mr. Kopp: Enclosed is an invoice from Mr. and Mrs. Fegers of 5001 Sparrow Road in the amount of $400.00. The invoice is for moving a hedge on their property prior to the 1979 Street Construction. If they had not moved the hedge, it would have had to be moved by the Street Contractor at a substantially higher cost. The Feger's have said that they were told by someone from the City that they would be feimbursed for the expense of moving the hedge. We recommend that the invoice be paid from the 1979 Street construction fund. Yours very truly, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. Lyle Swanson, P.E. LS:jl Enclosure Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls //73 e~ ~ ouo~f/SO F~ ° 4k/-¢00, oo 'C SOHNS &' SON P~O:-Box 484 Sprin~ Park, ~,tinne~ota 5~384 ~ DEPARTMENT' OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 May 15, 1980 935-3381 Leonard L. Kopp Manager City of Mound 5341Ma3a~ood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Kopp: The below listed surface maintenance projects are tentatively planned for con- struction during July and August. Should this work conflict in any way with city projects or other known developments, would you please notify us so adjust- ments may be made. CSAH 15 - West Mound Limits to CSAH 110- Bituminous Overlay CSAH 110 - West Mound Limits to CSAH 125- Sealcoat Very truly y.o~.s, J. M. K~rtland Chief, Maintenance JMK/sjb HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunify employer 5-20-80 CITY OF ~OUND Mound? Minnesota May 12, 1980 COUNC, IL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-177 SUBJECT: Board of Review The Board of ReView is scheduled for May 2Oth at 7:30 p.m. Attached is a copy of a Department of Revenue Bulletin outlining t'he duties of the Board of Review. Also attached are copies of the sales of property during the past year. ~'--Leonard L. Kopp M I N N E S O T A .D E ~],,U E BUL L E TI }.; ARTMENT OF RE : PROPF/fI%' .F~LI ZA'£ ION DM$IO~I Section 27/,.01 Drc,':i¢/ef; t3~afi the._ to,~n board, the.. council, or other, qoverr~T.e_nt kody of each city shall 1>~ a be'etd of r~vic~.~. ~.~--~ .,:.. charter, of ce.r+~in for tP~_ es[~blis]~.me.-nt of a board of e~ualization. '£h~_ pr¢;/isions of f~_ction 274,01 . and thin reff. d!ation mpp!y to all l~ards of revi~.~ or )~rds of oqu-a!ization. Sec~ic~] 27d.01 states the.. co~m[y ~ssessor s~al! fi~: a data for each board of ~.evi~:; or ]~_2~rd o'f e/~u. '-~lization ~o m~t for the DUUDO.=~ Of revic,;ing .'the asses.qment of proper[l; in it~ respective, tc:.?n or pity.. The c~unt¥ assessor is recuired to se/ye %.~it~en notio.~ ~o t;:a clerk of each of such boclies on or [~fore April 1 of each year. The_se mectL-.gs are recnzfrc~d to be ]~ld betv,'~.~.n ?.~y. 1 a~d June 30 and ~ clerk .of th_~ }~'d o[ revi~.~ or [.:,~ }~%rd of cc~ma]izatlon is rccmir, c~d tA qive-published and · .' no,.~c~, at le,.~..~ ton clays before the date set for th.e first m~etin:~. ~]s b~.~rd of revi-c.-,.; and t~.%~, bonrc] of e~,~alization of any cit~;, unless a lon,7er De. fluff -. is approva~l by thp cc.-.~.r/ssioner of revenue, must cc/roi.erie its v,~)rk and adjottr]] with/n 20 days. fro'.~ the tiq~e of convening .%.~cific~d J~% the noticka of t.he~ clerk. ,~b action .tz~kcn s~x~/.-~F,~.ent to sugh da~ shall be valid. A request for additional t]3ne in' ord~- to cc_~olete the v.ork of t)~_ bcord 'of revic_..; ~:lst ])~ adcLres~eJ to tJ'~e cc~missione_r of reve~nue in v.nfitin~. 9~ne ccJr, nissioner's apprc;mal is na~.essary. [o !~...jali;:e gray proc~.~lure s~sc~uent to ~ ~coiration of tbie. t,-.~nty day ~riod. %]%n cc=~.~ssione~ of reve3'~ue will not, bu..,,ever,-e~:tend tb.~_ time' for loc~nl ~.om:ds of review to ]~aefi ..Dash Jtu]e 30 because county b~lrds of 'ex]u. eliza- .. tion .convc~e on July 1. /.DU. TEF~S O? ~0C~L ~'~DS OF. autborit?~/ [o consid~-cr all asses._~.ents for that ye,mr of both real and .po_rsonal prcpo._rtv. asaes?,aant_q of each desca:iption of real 'pro~)er~-v consisti, nu of land, buildin~fs, structures mid improvo~ents m.,a~., ).x~ revicwo~] ).r/ the.. b~ard. ~h~ sonal prq~rty are likewise within tl.~ ].m~ard's juri.~]ict.ion. The t~ard may qive consideration to }.~t.]% v;, lua [:ion ,~ld classification of ]:o[:h real ,nn~.l..personal In the even n,,%~J.~r¢.~l vnar tg]e loc~al }x~.~rd ~,k-~,z revi~.; all pr~y in the s~'~ manno_r as in ~e ~]d nuwJ~r~ veer. The t~ard ~as l~miEofl juc- ir<liction, h~..:evcr, ove~ fJ~e ar:sa~;mrmntf; of real pr~hy and ~uv revicf~ only such asses~ants tb~at ~ye v~J. thin t}~ au~rJ.ty of t-~ assess;or in t~ even yo~. .~>~se year, the additim or ro;mval of s~xlctur~ value w~re pt'lVSJ.~]l cIn~qes have c~nurr~ an~] tb~ (:h~ulqes .in ]~n~;te,~:d c]af,~ific~t.icn. klth0ugh .the lccnl )xkard of revic~ or ~lizati0n t~s tbt auth0 ity to in Ze or r~u~ ~ivld'~l -a~so~r~, ~e to~l of ~uch ac]jus~ts n~ust not r~lu~ th~ a. Ig,.~'-u,~e assesmr~nt '~ndo }~ t~ ~,~ty. assessor }~ ~ore %h2n one. F~rc~t of said a~a~ assessment. If the total of such ad%us~n~, d~n ].o.¢e~ the aqua, ate asses~w,~t ~Oe }'g the county assessor ~ mgre ~u~ one ~trcen~, none of t~ juz~zn~q %-:ill ~ allo,-~]. ~.is liable.on d~sn't aDp]v, )~..zcvcr, to ~ ~~on of cl~ical ~-rors or to the re~Val of. d~licate, ao-~'..e=,'~'.,n~n~'~ · ~cvzc,~ or o~lization do~sn'[ have ~%e au~ritV in-~nv ye~ to reo~n foim~- assess, ants on w}dch ~:es are du~ ~ payable. T)%~ ~rd c~siders on].v ~2 assesmm~=nts t~t ~e h% process in ~e ~-rent year. . . In re~c,~q the in'dividual assess~ts, ~]e~.~'d m~v find instances of unde~,alu- 'a~on. ~fore ~e ~d raises ~e ]~ket value of pro~ty, it ~a~st notify o~-.~er. ~ne law d~sn't prescribe. ~y ?~ti~i~ fo~, of notice ~ceph ~3t tko parson %-~})ose priory is to ]~ increas~ in asses~2nt' ~.,st .h~ notified of th~ tent of ~2 ~rd to ~unke the in--'ease. The logal kog~.'d of revi~ ],~etin~s ass~e 'a prof. ~..~n~ ~ o~%~)l%llnitv to. ~ntest the valuation that }~ns l>2e~, p]acee] on-.~s pr~/ or to contest or to protest ~]y o~]er ~ntter relating to ~e ~m:obi].i~ of. }~u'pr~-t~;. &~ ~zk-I is r~ir~] to revicx.; ~e Eu~hter and m~e ~y ~rre~ions that it de~ just. ]~%~: If the five per~:nt lh~t is s~ll ~ e~fec~~ ' , it is anulied, to t~-'-' .autbmrit%, of th~ loc~!,.'~:'",]_.~ ...... of ..... ;~.~,'~.~. thc ~unC~ )xo3rd of ~aliza']zicn g, nd .s~...~..~' '~d of ~mlization so t. he ct~u].at(ve effect of intreat;es by authorities in e.~r-tss of five ,>~o2nt ]~(ta~on is invalid. I~al }~ds of revic..~ ],u~y, ~x.;evcr; ~crease '- or decrease ~ ]m~-ket value of. individual I~nen a ].o~al ')xkxrd of revlev or' cxqualization convenes, it is o ~ n..~s.,.u.7 t~h a ~jori.~, of tb~ r,-~ rs ]~ in att~dan~ in' ord~ t~t ~%, ~lic] action amy ~ 1- q~ ' . _ , ?'b2 lcd! assessor is ~?~ired ]~f law to h~ p .e.. =at wi~ his asses~ent ~ks ~d ;xn.o~-s. He is re~ir~ also to ~ke part in tb~ p~edi~%qs but kns no vole. ad~'~on to the 1~1ao.,co.; ,", .... o~.-, th~ co'~' assessor or one of ~.s assist~nnts is re- Qu~rcd to att(md. Th~ ]~m3d should orcce~ J~r~]iatelv to revi~ ~e ~,,~= ~ of p_~_~. '~ ~-u.'d should ask ~a loral ass.essor and county ~-'-~'s - ~nv. ~-bles' ~nt have )~en prefixal, m~h~ c~k%risons of ~.e c~'ent assess=~ents in '~ dis~ict. ~a county assessor is r~uir~l to hzva m~%ps and ~les relatinq ~- . ~larly to ]~d values for ~e (~ida~n~ of ~r~ls of revi~. C~,D~-i~ns b2 prcsent~] of as~..,u ~.r,~ of t%q>~s of pr~, with previous ye~s ~d wi~ ot~r a~ses~mnt dis~icts in the .~ co~ty. It is. ~ prhmn~ dut~ of each }~ard of rev.~.c,.~ ~ e~amine t-]~e asses~e~nt recoil to s~p %hut all t;u.:al)].(] ~,]:-c']03rt¥ in ~n a~;..qcs~m~:nnt dj. sO:ich ],n~'; bc~c~] p~:c~r].v u~nn ~e list ar~] va].u:nd by the ~n~'~ -. . a ..... s.,o]: In. c~]se zu]v Dro~>prty, ciO]er real or l~- sonal, )ms b~n c~itt~], ~m )~-d h~s ~ dui], of ~m~ki~[ the assessment. ob ~...¢.,.zon., of ~nr$on.~ ,,.~ho fca]. aqqriev(.~] with any asses~m~ts for the c,n~-c~,t .yca~: should ]~ consid.~.r~] very ca~-efully b.v ti',? }~7~rd. Such Page 2 of 3 h,.,..~ t).~., aut}.~o~y to ~?ke corrcction~ it mu~t 1'~_ revic..~-] Jan de6~.]~and the ~nrd d~ to }~ ~unt. 5~e' ~ m.~v 'adjourn heard. If .c~].aJmts are reemiv~ after tl-~e a~ljou~nt of ~e l~rd of revim.~, tbpge shall ~ he~d and det~'~in~l b~ the ~tm~, l;~2rd of ~ual~za~.0n. non-resident ~r~¥ file ~-Tcitten ob'jechions to-hi~ a.~sos.~r.-~.n% wi'th t~ ~'~ asses-- prior' to the meatincf of the }.~L'd of review. Such object~.on~; mu~;t J~e presell . ~.o~ conside~.'ntioa wki].e it is Jn session. Since ab least c;~e" m.m'r3x-:r of each local bo.~g'd of re-~.~-~ is rcm~ir,] t:o attend thu J.nstruction~! n:~.~.tin.q a'h t.be county seat, tha lwx-~-d should, clisca~$ any sF~ific in- st~lcti~s p:~rtT~in~.nf[ to th.~ %..~rk of revicf~. Bnfor~ adjo:uming, .tJ~e board of re.v~c,~ or C~.olizatic, n should pre~u:e gm.°fficial' list Of '~f=c, .... =~,..,~..~,,-,~" '7~%~ ].a~.; rdouires, tlL%t th.-.- ,- cb.~c,es. }'.~% listed On a separate fo~ %~:~.ch J.s ~ppmn:]~d 'to th2 ass!~ss~n~mt P~k. The.asSessments of onitt~']. Dro;>?~/ ;~dst bm listc~ Jn detail ~nd al! as~esi~n~ '~at )%~u/e']~en incrcas~ or decregs~ should re~rd s~u!d ~.'~ si~m~d all~! dated by tb~ ~mmL~,3fs of' t~ Poard of review or a~Ja!iza- ~[on. Ti~ chanqas iis2z~d in 'die proceedings sPould }~ ~tered in U~ asses~%~nt b~k by .t~ county ~.,ssezs~r. .' ~-2o-8o CITY OF HOUND Hound, Minnesota May 16, 1980 ' COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-184 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Recommendation On May 12th, the Planning Commission heard a request for a special use permit to build a self-service car wash on Lot 30, Auditor's Subdivision 167. The minutes read as follows: Stannard moved and Polston seconded a motion to approve the Special Use Permit for self-service car wash subject to provision .... will blacktop entire surface. The vote was unanimously in favor. A hearing is required for a special use permit. June 10th is recommended. on-a~d L. Kopp ! ~ L APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT -VILLAGE OF MOUND FEE'S FEE OWNER 0_h_~__~lO~ ~=. ~id~_~!'l PLAT PARCEL LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOt _36) A~dft0t*.~. Subdtv. #167 Mound; M_fnn_. ...... ZONING Commercial Self Service car wash SPECIAL USE PERMIT (uso) Address 1716 Tel. No. |,?9--Q~fla Applicant's Interest in Property State why this use, if granted, would not be cor~trary to the gene, intent of the ordinance to secure public health, safety, general wt stantial justice. Due to the gas stations and other small repair shops now in existance in the area we feel this proposal is not contrary use of the propertye . feet: Residentsandownersofpropertywithin~0 Lake State Telephone Co. Geo. Hastings & Agnes J~ckson V. Cullen Smith West Suburb~uBlrs Verna Kasten Royal Dosset Chamberlain Goudy (VFW) Gerald Laube Marlys Salden Evan Jones Gordon Gyllen Jay Toborman &Don Loschieder Gene Johnson J.B. Connors Robert Brown Valek Corp. Geo. Nolson NorbertEbert Theo. Zabel Edward Bjerke Norman Welch PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: __Tabled to May ]2th m.eetinq .at Apri,1 28th meeting. May 12, 1980 Granting approval. DATE COUNCIL ACTION Resolution no, 1 / ? 3 \ / ,/ BUSIt /IF2. I$11 0 0 q 0 o O~ : c //'77 ~l. II ** P E T I T I O N ** I F~L THAT· THE SELF SER¥ICE CAR ~.SH ~S PROPOSED-BY THE ATTACHED DRAWINGS IS AN ASSET TO TEE C0~:2,~UNiTY . I P~.VE NO STRONG OBJECTIONS TO ITS DE¥~ELOP~ENT ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOT 30 AUDITORS SUBDIV. # 167, MOUND, MINN. I17~. 5720-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota May 15, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-178 SUBJECT: Retaining Wall Request'- Reconsideration Last fall, the Gundersons, Lots 9 and 10, Block 9, Pembroke, 4667 Hampton Road, requested a retaining wall in front of their property. The COuncil denied the request, see copy of the minutes of November 6, 1979 attached. The Gundersons have requested to come before the Council and asked that the Council reconsider their request. This will be on the May 20 agenda. Leonard L. Kopp cc: Gunderson REGUL)~R MEETING OF THE £1T¥ COUNCIL November 6, 1979 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341'Maywood Road in said City on November 6, 1979 at'7:30 p.m. Those present were: Mayor Tim Lovaasen, Councilmembers Gordon Swenson, Robert Polston, Donald Ulrick and Benjamin Withhart. Also present were City Manager Leonard L. Kopp, Assistant City Engineer John Cameron and City Clerk Mary H. Marske. PUBLIC HEARING On Sale Beer License.- Branty's Restaurant The City Clerk presented an affidavit of publication in the official newspaper of the notice of public hearing on said on sale beer license. Said affidavit was then examined, approved and ordered filed in the office of the City Clerk. The Mayor then opened the public hearing and persons present to do so were afforded an opportunity to express their views thereon. No persons'presented objections and the Mayor then closed the public hearing. Swenson moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-465 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF AN ON SALE BEER LICENSE TO BRANTY'S The vote was unanimously in favor. Vacation of Part of Kildare Road Swenson moved and Withhart'seconded a motion to accept the recommendation of the Public Works Director and direct the staff to refund the application. Lovaasen moved and Polston seconded a motion to continue this item until November 13, 1979. The vote was unanimously in favor. VARIANCE REQUEST - LOTS 10 & 11, BLOCK 14, SETON Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to continue this item until November 13, 1979. The vote was unanimously in favor. STREET CONSTRUCTION Retaining Wall - 4667 Hampton Road Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to construct the retaining wall requested with the stipulation that the project pay one third of the cost and the other two thirds be assessed to the property owner. Roll call vote was two in favor with Swenson, Lovaasen and Withhart voting nay. Motion failed. Retainin~ Wall - Stirling & Tuxedo Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 79-466 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE EN- GINEER AND AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $2,000. The vote was unanimously in favor. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT Ann Thomas an observer for the League of Women Voters introduced herself and informed the Council that a League member will be observing future meetings. '5-20-80 CITY OF HOUND Hound, Minnesota May 15, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-t79 SUBJECT: Partial Payment - Thomas & Sons Attached is a copy of a letter from the Engineer recommending a pay- ment of $100,O00 to Thomas & Sons. The Attorney has indicated that he will advise prior to the May 20th meeting whether a payment should be made or not. '-Leoi~ard L. Kopp May 12, 1980 Plymouth, Minnesota 5,5441 (612) §§9-3?00 Mr. Curt Pearson Mound City Attorney Lefevere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brien and Drawz 1100 First National Bank Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Subject: City of Mound 1978 Street Construction Dear Mr. Pearson: Enclosed is the up-dated punch list on the 1978 Street Construction that you requested. We estimate the cost of the work at $30,000. Mr. Rooney has requested that some of the retainage on the project be released. The present status of payments is summarized below: Payments to date (through payment request No. 11) Retained (through payment request No. 11) $ 1,301,233.28 144,58!.48 Total $ 1,445,814.76 At the meeting last fall with Mr. Thomas, Mr. Prebe, Mr. Rooney, Mr. McCombs, Mr. Malueg, you and I the amount of work completed by Thomas and Sons to date was determined to be $1,471,879.55. Work on this project by Hardrives last year chargeable to Thomas & Sons was $12,451.72 and the estimated cost of work remaining chargeable to Thomas & Sons is $20,000 for a total of $32,450. We estimate extra engineering fees due to the delay in completion will amount to $20,000. Liquidated damages are 72 days at $25 per day or $1,800.00. Using these numbers the present status of the project is summarized below: Work Completed by Thomas & Sons to date Paid to Thomas & Sons to date Work by Hardrives to date chargeable to Thomas & Sons $ 1,471,879.55 (1,301,233.28) (12,451.72) Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper 1/7z Mr. Curt P~arson. May 12, 1980 Page Two Estimated remaining work chargeable to Thomas & Sons Extra Engineering Fees (estimated) Liquidated damages (20,000.00) (20,000.00) (1,8oo.oo) Total $ 116,394.55 Based on these figures the City could release $100,000 to Mr. Thomas, and still have a reasonable cushion to complete the work. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. LS:sc #3238 Enclosure cc: Leonard Kopp Ly!e Swanson, P.E. 1171 JOHN ~. I~EAN GLENN E. PUI~DUE JAME~ D. LAR$ON CHARLES L. LI:I~EVERE HERBERT p. LEI~LER,[E JAME3 P, O'MEARA MARY J. BJOF~KLUND THOMAS b. CREIGHTON WENDY L. FREEbHAN LAW OFFICES ' L~'FEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O' BRIEN & DRAWZ t'tOO FIRST NATIONAL BANK BIJIL~ING May 15 , 19 80 ,,.oo,*L~.H ~,~-~.-..,.,,..~o;.. ,s43o 5Is. Mary Marske City Clerk-Treasurer City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 RICHARD J. SCHIEFF~R Re: City of. Mound 1978 Street Construction - Thoma's and Sons, Inc. Dear Mary: I am enclosing herewith a copy of a letter prepared at my request by Lyle Swanson regarding the Thomas matter. I asked. Mr. Swanson to pull together these figures after I received, a written communication from P.r. Rooney, the attorney for Thomas and Sons. It is my understanding at this time that Mr. Swanson is recommending the release of $100,000 to Thomas and Sons. This will leave us with a cushion of approximately $16,394.55 over and above what we believe necessary to complete the work on Thomas' contract. I therefore request that the City prepare this $100,000 payment, making the check payable to Thomas and Sons and to Thomas J. Rooney, their attorney. You can send the check to me and I will transmit it on to Mr. Rooney to resolve that portion of our dispute. It is my further understanding that these monies will be available to Thomas after the meetinq of Mav 27. Ve r/y ~% ~/r u ly //C~. rtis A./Pear's on, ~' City AttOrney CAP: ih Enclosure cc: Mr. Len Kopp Mr. Lyle Swanson Mr. Thomas Rooney 117o 5-20-80 ~ITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota May 15, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-181 SUBJECT Appointment - Housing & Redevelopment Authority The subject matter was tabled until May 20th. The HRA did post the opening on the bulletin board. 5-20-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota May 15, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-180 SUBJECT: Request for Additional C.S.O. Attached is a request for an additional C.S.O. It is suggested that this be discussed by the Council and sent to the Joint Police Committee prior to final action. --l--eohard L. Kopp 1 ' CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MIN,",IESOTA 55364, (612) 472-1155 May 14, 1980 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Leonard Kopp - City Manager Charles Johnson - Chief of Police Request for Additional Community Service Officer It is respectfully, requested that the police department be authorized to hire one permanent full time Community Service Officer. The attached job description details the duties this person will be assigned. I realize it is unusual to create a new position midway in the budget year. Of primary concern is the funding of such a position within the current approved budget. I believe this can be accomplished by adjust- ing the police budget, the amount the city has received from our Workman's Compensation insurance carrier paid as benefits for the two regular officers that are off duty and injured. As of the end of June, 1980 the benefit is approximately $10,600 and this will be sufficient to cover the cost of a Community Service Officer the final six months of 1980. Attached is a summary of the employee expense and a recommended salary range. A second concern in creating the position is whether or not that position is necessary for the efficient operation of the department. In 1977 the police department had an authorized strength of 14 sworn officers, two Community Service Officers, and two clerks. In 1978 the strength was authorized as 16 sworn officers, 1 animal warden, and two clerks. The 1978 number has since been reduced to 15 sworn officers, 1 animal warden, and 2 clerks. During this same period the department workload has grown considerably even though there are less personnel. This problem is compounded by the fact that we have not been at full strength due to employee injuries since 1977. Currently we are two sworn officers short due to injury. As a result of this shortage many important community programs have suffered, particularly in the areas of crime prevention. It would be a primary responsibility, as shown in the job description, for the Con, unity Service Officer proposed to handle crime prevention programs. For the past several years a responsibility of the Community Service Officer was handling many.administrative tasks such as equipment maintenance and the safe keeping of property. When a light duty officer position was created two years ago, these duties were handled by this person. Addition- ally, the light duty officer was responsible for administrative and statisti~ cal duties, thereby freeing up sworn officers and supervisory personnel for patrol duty. He was also in charge of crime prevention. All of these /I/,. ? duties have had to be absorbed by others since this p0si. ti0n was vacated, The proposed Community Service Officer position would be r~sponsible to handle all of these tasks. It is requested the position be authorized effeCtive July 1,. 1980. Respect fu 1 ly, Chief of Police £d:lao CITY of MOUND 53,41 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 5536,4 (612) 472-1155 May 14, 1980 TO' FROM: SUBJECT: Leonard Kopp - City Manager Charles Johnson - Chief of Police Personnel Costs for Proposed Community Service Officer 1. Suggested annual salary range: Step 1 0-6 months $ 974 2 6 mo - 1 yr. 1,035 3 ! yr - 2 yrs. 1,157 4 2 yrs. - 3 yrs. 1,272 5 3 yrs and up ],400 All fringe benefits to be same as adopted in the Administration Code for other city personnel. 2. 1980 Costs: Salary $ 5,844 PERA 351 Social Security 339 Health Insurance 375 Workmans Compensati, on Insurance 58 Life Insurance/LTD 143 Unifcrm 350 7,460 Workmans Compensation reimbursement for injured officer 1980 CS0 Cost Respectful ly,~ //~ ~ Chief of Police Remaining $ 10,600 7,46O $ 3,140 1leS CITY OF HOUND Job DeScription JOB TITLE - Core, unity Service Officer DEPARTMENT - Police JOB SUMMARY This is a permanent non-sworn position with basic responsibility for five types of special services within the police department: Crime Prevention services; inventory control and safe keeping of departmental equipment; inventory control and safe keeping of private property in custody of the police department; administrative assistance; and providing service to citizens calling or walking into the police department. This position may also be assigned other tasks directed by the Chief of Police. JOB DUTt~!S: l. Become familiar with Crime Prevention programs developed by the State of Minnesota and the police department. Disseminate information relative to these programs, develop new programs, educate the public, assist the public in participation of crime prevention programs such as Operation Identification, premise surveys, and other programs as may be adopted by the police department. 2. Develop and maintain orderly records and materials for Operation Identification participants and information relative to other programs and information available ~o the public. 3- Assist citizens that call or come to the police offices. This involves taking reports as necessary or arranging for other assistance when appropriate. 4. Provide administrative assistance in the maintenance'of official department statistical information. 5. Maintain records and inventory.of department vehicles and.equipment and supplies. Ma'intain records of and c~-der routine and s~ec'ia! maintenance Of department vehicles and equipment.. Maintain an ongoing i. nventory of expendable departmental supplies, (exception - office suppl'ies) obtain and maintain cost and vendor information, and prepa're reorder vouchers for approval by the Chief of Police. 6. Maintain custody and proper inventory of all property received by the police department for safe keeping, seized as evidence, or found property. Make every effort to locate and return property to legal owner when property is available for release and prepare unclaimed property for sale or disposal. 7. Adhere to all departmental rules, regulations, and operating policies. 8. Promote good moral w~thin the department, and good will and cooperation with citizens, community organizations, and other city departments, and other law enforcement agencies. 9- Participate in departmental training programs as directed. 10. Perform other duties required by the sergeant~ or Chief of Police. MI[IIMUH JOB QUALIFICATIONS: 1. A high school graduate or equivalent with college or'law enforcement vocational education highly desirable. 2. A valid Minnesota drivers license. 3- Good moral character with no felony convictions. 4. Good physical health 5. Experience with law enforcement agency and crime prevention programs is highly desirable.' KNOWLEDGE, i. Ability 2. Ability 3- Ability 4. Ability city SILLS, AND ABILITIES: to understand laws, to effectively communicate oral'ly and to keep information confidential. ordinances,.and resolutions of the municipalities. in Writing. to establish and maintain effective working r~lationships.with other departments, employees, and the general public. 5-20-80, CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota May 16, 1980 COUNCIt MEMORANDUM NO. 80-182 SUBJECT: Wine ticense Renewal - A1 & Alma's A1 & Alma's have made application for the renewal of their wine liCense. The Police Chief has reported there have been no violations of State or tocal Ordinances over the past year. The renewal of the wine license is recommended. This will be listed on the May 20th agenda. Leonj~rd L. Kopp ' t! ,1 5-2O-8O CITY OF ~OUND Hound~ Hinnesota May 16, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-183 SUBJECT: Liquor License Renewal '- Donnie's on the Lake, Inc. Liquor licenses are due July 1st. We have received the application from Donnie's on the Lake, Inc. for renewal of Class A and Class B Liquor Licenses. The Police Chief has reported there have been no violations of any nature over the past year. The renewal of the license is recommended~ This will be listed on the May 20th agenda. /1 ,o TO: FRO},i: sUBJECT: INTEROFFICE Mr. Leonard Kopp - City Manager Charles Johnson - Chief of-Police Stop Signs at Idlewood and Oaklawn MEMO,"' DATE Ma~! 16, ...... ... 1980. In November of 1979, the City Council approved a stop sign at Idlewood and Oaklawn. When the resolution was passed, they asked that a report be forwarded to the Council in six months showing what, if any, benefits were derived as a result of the installation. Attached is a memo from Sgt. Brad Roy to me pertaining to a survey he conducted with residents in that neighborhood. As a result of the survey, it is recommended that th6 stop sign remain as is. Respectfully, Chief Charlte~ Johnson ' Mound Police Department Ii TEROFFICE MEI TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Sgt. s.g. Roy Stop Signs - Id~ewood & Oaklawn DATE The following are comments solicited from r~idents of 0ahlawn Lane between. Cty. Rd. 110 and Hawthorne Rd. The same question was asked of all r~side~ts. "Have you not~ced any difference in the speeding problem on this s~reet since the signs w~re ~rected?" 2901 0aklawn - "Northbound t~affic has slowed, the southbound traffic fa~ls to stop for the sign". Comment by LouSe Heitz. 2929 " - "Some of the problem people have moved away. Have noticed no difference". Commen~ by Harriet Gustafson 2942 " - house is vacant 2943 " - "They work". Comment by Jane Johnson 2949 " 2952 " - "A little bit, I 'm glad they are there". - "It has slowed them down, but not a~l stop". by Marie Cox. Comment 2954 - no one home 2965 " - "Pretty much". Comment by Cecelia Daniels 2971 " - not home 2977 " ,'To some degree. Most people stop for the sign". Comment by Mary Ann Barrett. * *It might be noted that one of 'the people polled earlier stated that it was Mrs. Barrett in fact who often fouL,s to stop for the sign. The general concensus seems to indicate that the signs have been of some benefit and it is my recommendation that theY remain in place. STATE OF ~INNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Larry Elm and Virginia Elm, Plaintiffs, VS. City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation, McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Defendants. D.ISTRICT coURT ~ '~' FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT SUMMON S THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS, YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to serve upon plaintiffs' attorney an Answer to the Complaint which is herewith served upon you within twenty (20) days after service of this Summons upon you, exclusive of the date of such service. If you fail to do so, Judgment by Default will be taken against you for the relief prayed for in the said Complaint. Dated: ~rle T. Andersoh, j~. /Attorney for Plaintiffs ( ~40 Dain Tower ~ Minneapolis, MN 55402 339-9701 STATE OF MINNESOTA. COUNTY OF HENNEpIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL~DISTRICT Larry Elm and Virginia Elm, Plaintiffs, vs. City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation, McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Defendants. COMPLAINT Plaintiffs for their cause of action against defendants, state and allege as follows: I. That at the times herein mentioned, plaintiffs were the owners and in possession of the following described real property being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and commonly known as 2012 Villa Lane, Mound, Minnesota: Lots 1 and 2, Block 5, "Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park, Mound, Minnetonka" AND That part of the land designated on the plat of "Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park, Mound, Minnetonka" as Water Bank Common lying between the Northeasterly line of Lots 1 and 2, Block 5 of said Addition and the shore of Lake Minnetonka and between extensions of the Northwesterly line of said Lot 1 and the Southeasterly line of said Lot 2. II. That subsequent to July 6, 1978, and over a time span into 1979, defendants wrongfully or negligently entered upon plaintiffs' property, constructed a storm sewer thereon, and destr.oyed trees and vegetation without having paid plaintiffs compensation therefor and without having obtained an easement or other right to do so. III. Said storm sewer outlet was subsequently moved by defendants from plaintiffs' property in September or October of 1979 but defendants have refusc~ to restorethetrees and vegetationwrongfully or negligen~y removed ii.CC- or to take' proper measures to'prevent soil erosion, from plaintiffs' property, or to r'emove their debris despite plaintiffs' numerous demands that defendants do so.' IV. That as a result of defendants' wrongful acts and refusal to act, plaintiffs have been deprived of a portion of their property and the enjoyment thereof; and have been damaged, in the reasonable amount of $25,000.00. WHEREFORE, plaintiffs Larry Elm and Virginia Elm pray for judg- ment against defendants in the amOunt of $25,000.00, together with their costs and disbursements in prosecution of this action, and for such other and further relief as to the Court may seem just and equitable. ~Attorney for Plaintiffs ~040 Dain Tower ' Minneapolis, MN 55402 339-9701 -2- MOUNO MI,NN~$OTA 55364' t§12) 472-1155 Mr. James W. O'Brien Williams/O'Brien Associates, Inc. 45 S. 9th Street Minneapolis, MN. 55402 Dear Jim: Thank you for your letter of May 5th relative to your efforts to resolve the leaking roof/skylight problem. We were happy to receive your letter, but the Council was looking for something definite in the way of repairs or re- modeling. We will greatly appreciate it if you will give us some alter- natives so that we can get going in the early summer to get this repaired or remodeled. The Council will be meeting on May-20th and again on June 3rd. Can you have something definite to give the Council at either of those meetings? Thanks much. Sincerely, Leonard L. Kopp City Manager cc: City Council City Attorney 'THOMAS WILLIAM PROKASKY & ASSOCIATES May 13, 1980 INC. · AR'CHI,T/~?~ Mr. Charles E. Riesenberg City Planner Mound Planning Consultants Isberg, Riesenberg, Chelseth & Assoc., Inc. 2116 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 Dear Chuck: The Wheelchair Elevating Devices ordinance has not been. passed into law yet. The Building Code Division is hope- ful for early June. Based on the "final" draft these devices are limited to 54" in height and must meet other restrictions such as solid side walls and self closing gates. (They will not give out the draft ordinance). I have begUn inquiries with the State Elevator Inspection Department as to variance procedures on the height (we are slightly over 54"). I intend to consult manufacturers as to the availability and price of conforming equipment. We can be sure that the price will be 'considerably more than the October 1978 estimate. The elevator option, that was considered initially, would be the most desirable solution and would lend itself to uses other than just by the handicapped. The City decided that the cost, being four or five times the lifts, was too much. If, however, the cost of the lifts has been multiplied by regulation the elevator option should be reconsidered. I talked to Leonard Kopp and he asked that we proceed with the Island Park City Hall and the Depot now. TWP/pss CiTY of MOUND Nay 1S, 1980 534; ~,IA~WOOD ROAD MOUt'~f~. Md'~INESOTA 55364' (612i 472-I155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Lyle Swanson Charles Riesenberg City Manager Minnehaha Creek Watershed Request for Drainage and Stormwater Management Plans Attached is a copy of a letter from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed requesting plans for the subject. As I understand it, 1) the Comprehensive Plan will incorporate the wetlands and flood plain plans, and 2) almost all the storm drains will be in with the 1980 street construction. Will the two of you each work with John Holmquist of the Mi'nnehaha Creek Watershed to see what is needed and then contact me so we can get Council approval to do what is needed? [e-o~ rd L. r, opp LLK/ms cc: City Council John Holmquist, Hickok & Associates ,~ y~ ~: ;,~m . ~; ? ~' ~. LAKE P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 . ' David H Cochran Pres · Albert [ lehman - Ja~es S Russell · John E Thomas · 8arbalra Gudmundsgn , TO' Ail Municipalities within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District FROM: DATE: David H. Cochran, President May 12, 1980 Municipal Drainage Plans and Stormwater Management Each of the municipalities within the Metropolitan area which has not previously done so is required to prepare a com- prehensive plan under the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act. The Metropolitan Council will request each municipality to include a stormwater management component as part of the comprehensive plan required by the Act. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has previously developed standards and design criteria governing 'stormwater drainage which are incorporated in District Regulation G. We believe that these criteria are appropriate in all parts of the watershed and may be of assistance to you in preparing the stormwater management component of the comprehensive plan now required under the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act. A copy of the regulation is attached as Exhibit A. Stormwater management has been.addressed by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as one of its primary responsibilities. Regulation G recognizes the need for municipal stormwater management, and urges each municipality to prepare a stormwater drainage plan which would specifically identify those marshes and other natural areas to be left undeveloped to provide natural storage and filtration of surface water runoff. l l, J Memorandum to: ~All Municipalities within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District May 12, 1980 Page 2 In addition, Regulation G incorporates the stormwater disposal criteria adopted by the Board of Managers on June 15, 1972, which established design criteria'that are applied by the managers in evaluating new'drainage plans for property developments within municipalities without a municipal drain- age plan [Regulation G, Paragraph 2(a) thru (i)]. 'One of the primary objectives of these design criteria is to discharge stormwater drainage through marsh lands, retention basins and other natural treatment facilities prior to discharge of such waters into receiving public waters [Paragraph 2(b), (c) an (d)]. Another major feature of these design criteria is the encouragement of creation and use of temporary storage areas or retention basins where feasible to maximize upstream storage and to reduce peak flows and erosion damage [Regulation 2(e)]. The district has recently completed an EPA-funded study of the use of marsh land for treatment of stormwater drainage. This study indicates that appropriately selected marsh lands can be effective in improving the quality of stormwater runoff as well as providing natural retention areas to reduce peak flows of stormwater. The development of stormwater management plans consistent with the standards of the district, maximizing the use of natural systems for treatment and retention of stormwaters, could result in substantial savings to municipalities not Yet fully developed by reducing the need for construction of sub- stantial and expensive storm sewer facilities upon subdivision and development of property within the municipality. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District urges the munici- 'palities within the district to adopt municipal drainage plans incorporating the standards contained in Regulation G. The district's engineering staff will be available to provide assistance to city personnel in reviewing this matter and pro- viding additional suggestions or comments if desired. If we can provide additional information regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact any member of the Board of Managers or the district's engineer, E. A. Hickok & Associates (473-4224). cc: Board of Managers MUNICIPAL DRAINAGE PLAN 1. Po/icy Statement. The fast runoff drainage from a street or parking Io! results in a constant street cleaning or flushing operahon. The byproducts 0f thts street cleaning and flushing process include motor oils. ~z. plast;cs. Mhd. MIt and other debris. garbage and foreign materials which are usually de,sited in the nearest stream or take. thereby contributing substantial ~llu[iorlal materiaJs Io the public waters. basins in new slorm wa~er drai~ge systems d~charg~ng directly to the ~ters the d~strict, it is the policy ~ this ~stdc~ to avoid direct sudace water I1 is the ~liCy Of the managers that each m~nicipali~y shall preoare a munici~l drainage plan for the management and ~rans~rtat~on of surface wa~ resul[ing from urban develop~nt. Each munic~pal~tv an~ the district should identify in ~he municipalities' land development guides and drainage plans the swamps and marshes Io be lef[ in thei~ natural state. Such des~gnaled areas should not be used as dumps, fill sites, or olherwise altet~ without wr~tlen permission of the managers. 2. R~ulat/on. In order to provide for coordinated management of surface waters. develop~ of land shall submit 1o the municipality a surface wa~er draJnage p~an which is in confo~mitV w~th the municipal drainage plan. In the absen~ of aDDroved municipal drainage plan. the mu~ic~pahty and [he develo~r of land tt~bu~ar~ to such water areas must f~le a drainage plan with ~he deslr~ct and of any land improvement. A permit apphcat~o~ for work not authorized by the mumcipal drai~ge plan shall be submiHed to and considered by the managers of the d~st~ct~ T~ perm~Y apphcation shall include a grading and saddenS-control pJen des~gn~ control the deposit of sediment ~n the public waters of the watersh~ d~str~ct. The managers shall act u~n the ~m~ appl~ca[~on w~yh~n 45 days of f~hng A written ~rm~t must ~ ~eviously ~cuted ~efore anv work ~f commenced b~ the mun~cipahtv or land develo~r. a The system shall be court,Dfc with the ~erall ~1o~ control plan ~ the dmstric~ b. Storm wa~er ~nage th~ll be d~scharged through mash:ands, swamps. g. Wide. shall~ grass wate~ays.*-where feasible. ~hall be used space plans of the h In any pleased ~vel~ment the posslblhty shall be co~idered of ~aczs a'e ame~ble Io this co~ept and ~ole developments may be he,led by this method. designed for ~ less lhan the disc~rge from a 100-year storm. All retention facilities shall be cl~n~ Is required, de~ndi~ on c~d~tions. EXHIBIT "A" ON lAKE MINN~rONKA 'INDIAN 13URIAL MOUND~, May 15, 1980 5341MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 TO: FROM: City Manager Building Inspector SUBJECT: Premises at 2025 Arbor Lane Yesterday, 5-14-80, Steve Anderson of the Police Dept. and myself made visual inspection of this property. Noting that the yard itself could use a raking, as there were in areas leaves, also alongside the deck on the east side of structure there wasa bale of hay spread out that was evidently used for covering of sorts, possibly up against the house. We did not feel there was an excessive amount of leaves, t~ash or debris on the property. Today, 5-15-80, the enclosed pictures Numbered 1, 2 and 3 show the property in its present, condition. My feelings is that the only unsightly condition of the. premises is the open bale of hay which I feel is not excessive. However, it could cause the inhibitency of rodents or unwanted guests and the uninstalled . dock which is stored in a pile at the lake front. I left word at Mr. Mann's office at 10:30 A.M. and he was not in but would contact him later in the day to suggest to him the yard be raked and the hay removed from the premises. I will also suggest that the dock be installed, however that is not against any City ordinance that I am aware of. Respectfully, 4 /' i-- Henry ~ruelsen HT/dd enc: l/q,7 2025 Arbo'r 5-15-80 at .10:45 A.~ Picture #1 Front entrance from Arbor Ln Picture #2 East side of deck bale of hay (insulation) Picture #3 Lakefront Stacked dock sections TO: FRO~/I: SUBJECT: Posts at Eagle Lane & Harrison Bay In 1978 the Park Commission asked to have the access at the end of Eagle Lane closed off as requested by the residents of that street. At that time Chris Bollis installed two posts with a chain placed between them. After about two weeks the Parks Department was told to take the chain down because of numerous complaints from residents on neighboring streets that use it for lake access. Later that summer we were told to put the chain back up because of traffic complaints fram people living on Eagle. Since that time we.have taken it down and put it up three more times. During the 1979 construction season a six foot wide path was installed as per our plans fo~ dead end streets on commons. This spring we put the. chain back up and on Tuesday May 13 Hardrives installed four posts at the end of the road. As you know it caused complaints at the Council meeting from Three Points residents that want tO use it for launching fishing boats. If we pull the posts we will receive numerous complaints from Mrs. Steffens at 1716 Eagle Lane as we have in the past. The residents are going to the Park Commission meeting on May 22. Until a decision is made we will leave the posts up as per the last order. Respect, fully, Robert Shanley - Public. Works Director RS/jcn TEROFFICE. M TO: FROM: Leonard Kopp Public Works Director DATE May 15~..... '~.~.A98_p_0 SUBJECT: Trash at Black Lake I have talked to Chris Bollis about complaints of littering along County Road 125 at the Black Lake Bridge. He stated that they empty the barrels every Monday & Friday. At those times they also walk the shoreline.area and pick up any trash that is not in.the barrels. On May 14 at 1:30 p.m. I drove to the area to check on the barrels and found them to be nearly empty but quite a large amount of cams and bottles lying around on the shoreline. At the end of this month we will be getting some of our summer kidS.~ and will be able to pick up this and other areas more often than we presently do. We will check o~ these barrels daily and empty them whenever they get full which may help eliminate some of the complaints. Regpmctfully, ~ Robert Shanley Public Works Director RS/j cn ~Ol 399 5C0 5O2 516 530 5of CITY CF ~CUI~D 'MA~CH 31, lgdO COK i~Ei~"[ Y F,~--I C~-DA rF 55,990 39.0 23,017 16.3 5'-~ ,513 42.1 Z ,oY2 1.8 141,15_> lO0.O c. XP L:~'., S ES S~L~P,t ~S 5kLLiNG ]LL kPk~,,~ k ALLLLNIING 6 ~,ugl'i PCSI'A~E L-L [UT~-s 1C l'f roLL LfiU~L 2,5CG 35O 23.00 a.az .C 2 32)4-74 23.0 l,d50 '' 2,000 1.4 110 · ,. 41 18 211 116 122 647 16.4 ur~Li_a '- 1 ~ibt. Lbh'l ............... .LAST CU~<P,E~.~T PERIOD A:~GUAT RATIO YEAR YEAK-I b-DATE AMU UNI' R~ 1' 7,341 749 43,1 79 ~1.~3 $ 50~650 ~2.86 l.T3 2~0~8 1.73 1~0.00 - $ 118,161 100.00 33,246 17.00 - .$ 90,999. · 77.00 9,931 23.0C $ 27,182 23.00 i,373 3.18 $ 4,119 3.49 2,366 5.48 '7 ~125 6.03 3~ · 03 35 . C8 4Z .0 350 .81 . 1,050 600 1.39 I~800 1.52 575 1.33 1,150 .97 14 .O3 40 .'04 263 .61 544 .~6 132 .31 181 .15 273 .63 558 .41 104 °25 149 .13 57 .13 111 .09 130 .BO 390 .33 175 .15 199 .46 291 .25 168 .39 73Z .62 57 .13 ~5 .08 100 .23 205 .17 630 1.46 1~'1~8 1.48 35O 7,431 17.21 $ 20,596 1'1.68 5.79 $ 6,266 5.32 11 ¥3 CUt, RENT P ER iCi'd Y E.A~-I'C~D AT E ............................................................. .1%M Ci~IXi I ........... X .TiO AN6UhT .... F, AT I ~ · ' I',l' ~-R IS~S l'...l ii~L~"l ~ ............................... ~ ........ 16 ..... 03, ...... .$. .... ~'i Pt~ 5 o01 . 1C'I'AL CI'I-:ER ~t ;',ICG ~ ~. ............. ~. .... 2]. ..(3.,~ ....... $ 104. ...... · , ..... °...LAST YEAR. .......... ,, CUFF, ENT PER.[ O0 ,A,"-'t G L~i',,;T ,P, AT ]0 A~gL,iI'~T $ 14 $ 2~514 .0~.. ~ 3~ .03 959 .81 5.E2 $ 7,283 6.16 11'¢1 '99 106 106 120 124 132 139 160 158 165 110 ~,ONI~IPAL LtL~UC~ FUhO BALA~CEShcnT' '-'- MARCH 31, 19'80 CASh IN CANK ii~'y ESI-MENTS ~CAN 'fO 6E/~<AL Fbh~ I h V ~N TORY PREPAiE E~PENSES ASSETS I'CTAL CU2~tzNI. A~S~TS FiA~:L ASSETS f-bR,',l]L~.ti EQOIPMbi'~T FIX"I~JI'~.i-S A£uo~.ULAI,':b L;~Pi<rCI~'I'ILh $ 1,125 11~,9a9 17,2G0 3,8~0 . ir3,969 16,331 ' ALCb~ULAT~ ANL~IIZAliLi~ $ 41,011 6,901 4,400) 2,5Ci 231,494 $ 241,03~ 200 201 ;,O8 2].0 239 £'19 CURH El'IT LIA6iLITIE5 ACCOUNIS PAYABLE SALES lAX PA%'ABLE ~C Ct~b ED EXPENSES CASI- OVER Ok ShL~'l' LIA~ILllIES ANO EQLITY TOTAL CbR~SNI' LiA6ILIIIES TOTAL LiAUiLIliES Fu,\C 2ALANCE 1' ~.AKSf- EkS L~bl' El' IiqC©ME iC, iAL EQbilY IC'IAL LIA21Li"I'IES ANG ~CIIY 6P, L~t~ - 'f ALLLbk'i'Ii\G $ 24,089 2~105 130 6,510 105,4~7 $ 25, //37