Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
81-11-03
AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL November 3, 1981 City Hall 7:30 P.M. ~.' Minutes of October 27, 1981 Pg0 ~. PUBLIC.HEARINGS ff.' Street Vacation "Portion of west side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point" Pg. J~. Street Vacation "Outside. corner of Leslie Road abutting Lot 8 and part of Lot 9, Block 21, WychwoodI' Pg. /35. Variance Application - Gregg Malik Pg. ~. Tree Rebate Payments - List #22 - $2,722.00 Pg. ~. Set Bid Date Opening - Mound/Spring Park Water Connection - Proposed Dat~ December 8, 1981, 10:O0 A.M. Pg. ~. Approve specifications for Advertisement for Bids - Pick-Up Truck - Water Dept., Gre~ Skinner Pg. ~. Comments and Suggestions from citizens present (Please limit to 3 minutes) '~. Day after Thanksgiving Off - Past Practice? ~. Return to County - Lots 27 and 28, Koehler's Second 13. 14. Addition to Mound 110 Street Lights - Locations adjacent to Arena Mr. Ron Blaschko (Map attached) Transfer of Sewer Capital Outlay Fund to Sewer Fund Update on deteriorating City financial situation. (See attached materials) Transfer of Funds Payment of Bills 15. Information/Miscellaneous 983-989 990-999 lO00-1014 I015-1017 1018-1020 1021-1023 ln24-1025 Pg. 1026-1031 Pg. 1032-1033 Pg. 1034 Pg. 1035-1038 Pg. 1039 Pg. 1039 Pg. 1040-1076 PAGE 982 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL October 27, 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 Road in said City on October 27, ~981, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Acting Mayor Robert Polston, Councilmembers Pinky Charon and Gordon Swenson. Mayor Rock Lindlan and Councilmember Donald Ulrick were absent and excused. Also present were City Manager, Jon Elam; Building Inspector, Henry Truelsen; Secretary, Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: Gary Paulsen, Michael Ostvig, Verndn'Marsh, James Riley and Mr. & Mrs. Bud Skoglund. Acting Mayor Polston opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. MINUTES The Minutes of the October 13, 1981, Regular Council Meeting were presented for consideration. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of October 13, 1981, Regular Council Meeting, as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PARK COMMISSION VACANCIES The City Manager reported that the Park Commission has asked that the Council appoint the following people to fill vancancies of unexpired terms on the Park Commission. 1. Mr. Lowell Swenson 2. Mr. Andy Gearhardt 3. Mrs. Phyllis Jessen Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion appointing the following people to fill vacancies of unexpired terms on the Park Commission: 1. Mr. Lowell S~enson - 1545 Bluebird Lane - Mound 2. Mr. Andy Gearhardt - 2075 Grandview Blvd. - Mound 3. Mrs. Phyllis Jessen - 5189 Emerald Drive - Mound The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PLANNING COMMISSION VACANCIES The City Manager reported that the Planning Commission has asked that the Council appoint the following people to fill vacancies of unexpired terms on the Planning Commission. 1. Mr. Michael Vargo 2. Mr. Stan Mierzejewski Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion appointing the following people to fill vacancies of unexpired terms on the Planning Commission: 1. Mr. Michael Vargo - 5825 Sunset Road - Mound 2. Mr. Stan Mierzejewski - 1942 Shorewood Lane - Mound The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. October 27, 1981 PURCHASE AGREEMENT- PALMER AND NANCY KOOSMAN The City Manager explained that Palmer and Nancy Koosm~nwould like to purchase a lot owned by the City of Mound. The lot is wetlands. Mr. Koosman presently owns the lot to the east of this property (Lot 4, Block 14, Mound Terrace and that part of Block 16 that lies south of Lot 4, Block 16, Mound Terrace) and would like to put them together to insure that the wetlands are protected. There are also $4,671.97 ~n assessments against th~s property and Mr. & Mrs. Koosm~nnwill pay those. The City Manager recommended selling this property with the condition that Mr. & Mrs. Koosmann.be prohibited from filling in the wetlands or building upon it, because the City does drain out storm sewer lines on Chestnut into it. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following ~esolution. RESOLUTION #81-350 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT SELLING LOT 4, BLOCK 14, MOUND TERRACE AND THAT PART OF BLOCK 16 THAT LIES SOUTH OF LOT 4, BLOCK 16, MOUND TERRACE TO PALMER AND NANCY KOOSM~NWITH CERTAIN STIPULATIONS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION REGARDING MINNETRISTA SOLID WASTE LANDFILL SITE This item was carried over from .the October 13, 1981, Council Meeting. The City Manager has prepared a Resolution for the Council to adopt opposing a waste disposal site for Minnetrista to be sent to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-351 RESOLUTION REGARDING HENNEPIN COUNTY SOLID WASTE LANDFILL SITE SELECTION The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SNOW REMOVAL BID FOR THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT The City Manager explained that two (2) bids were received for snow removal in the Central Business District for 1981-82. They were Illies and Sons; and Widmer Bros. Inc. The low bid from Illies& Sons was recommended for approval. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-352 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BID OF ILLIES & SONS FOR SNOW REMOVAL IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT FOR 1981-82 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PROPOSED CLINIC PARKING LOT - SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING The City Manager explained the differences in the Engineer's Plan A and B. The cost of the project, either Plan A or B, with excavating and grading would be approximately $20,000.00. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to set November 24, 1981, at 7:30 P.M for a Public Hearing on the Proposed Clinic Parking Lot based on Plan A drawn up by the City Engineer. The vote_was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Discussion by the Council was that the cost of the proposed parking lot would be assessed to the abutting property owners and the maintenance cost of this lot would be added into the overall Central Business District annual assessment program. PUBLIC HEARING - DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Acting Mayor Polston opened the Public Hearing and asked for any comments of objections from the public. Hearing none he closed the Public Hearing. Swenson asked if any of the people on the shutoff list had made arrangements to pay their bills. The City Manager responded that the ones that have made arrangements have been deleted from the list. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-353 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF $'1127.21 AND AUTHORIZING THE SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Councilmember Ulrick arrived at 7:40 P.M. VACATION OF AN EASEMENT - LOTS 12, 13, 14 & 15, KOEHLER'S ADDITION TO MOUND The City Manager advised the Council that the Planning Commission has approved a 6' high chain link fence be installed on the lot line but not on the easement. Mr. Jim Riley owns Lots 12, 13, 14 & 15, Koehler's Addition to Mound and is leasing this property to Continental Telephone who is the . applicant. Reasons for not wanting to vacate this'easement were as follows: 1.If any other fence except a chain link were installed it would create a blind corner on Belmont and Lynwood. 2. If this were vacated and then the County needed this 20 feet at some future time, they would have to buy it back from Mr. Riley If the fence is put on the lot line the vacation of this easement will not be needed. Mr. Riley was satisfied with this idea but wanted some time to think about still asking for the vacation. Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded a motion to set a Public Hearing for the vacation of this easement for November 24, 1981, if Mr. Riley comes in to the City and applies for this vacation and pays the $50.00 for the application. If this is not done by Friday October 30, 1981, then no Public Hearing will be held at this 'time but Mr. Riley will retain the right to ask for the vacation at some future date. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT Acting Mayor Polston asked if there were any comments or suggestions from any citizens present. There were none. COUNTY PROJECT 7002 ON CSAH llO - HENNEPIN COUNTY INVOICE #5762 - APPROVE PAYMENT Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-354 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY INVOICE #5762 - $63,O01.07 FOR THE CITY"S 90% SHARE AS PER AGREEMENT FOR COUNTY PROJECT 7002 ON CSAH 110 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. October 27, 1981 COUNTY PROJECT 7921 ON CSAH llO - HENNEPIN COUNTY INVOICE #5763 - APPROVE PAYMENT Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-355 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY INVOICE #5763 - $37,156.10 FOR THE CITY'S 90% SHARE AS PER AGREEMENT FOR COUNTY PROJECT 7921 ON CSAH 110 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPROVE PAYMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL BILL FROM CITY ATTORNEY - JULY THRU SEPTEMBER Charon moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve payment of a supplemental bill from the City Attorney (July thru September) in the amount of $6,775.00, when funds are available. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPROVE PAYMENT FOR QUARTERLY SERVICES OF MC COMBS-KNUTSON - CITY ENGINEER Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve payment of a quarterly bill in the amount of $27,192.00 from City Engineer, McCombs-Knutson, when funds are available. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The City Manager explained that all the engineering and legal services that can be charged back to individual projects are charged against those projects. RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE PARKING ORDINANCE The City Manager explained that the Police Chief has asked that the Council amend the parking ordinance calling for a no parking anytime zone from Wilshire Blvd. to Chateau Lane on the south side of'County Road 15. The reason for this is that parking on County Road 15 is causing problems for pedestrians'and drivers. Pedestrians are forced onto the roadway in order to walk past parked cars. Drivers have their vision bloCked whi.le attempting to enter County Rd. 15 from Hidden Vale Rd. or Fairview Lane. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-356 RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE PARK?NG ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE A NO PARKING ANYTIME ZONE FROM WILSHIRE BLVD. TO CHATEAU LANE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 15 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. BUD SKOGLUND - FENCE REQUEST Mr. & Mrs. Bud Sko§lund.were present requesting a fence be put up'by the City between their property and Mound Bay Park because the kids using the Park are trespassing on his property, using his dock and they have had some vandalism. Councilmember Polston felt that the Staff should evaluate what the City has done to impact the Skoglund property. Councilmember Swenson stated that the Skoglund home was there before the City moved the Depot Museum into Mound Bay Park. The City Manager suggested that he could ask Chris Bollis to see if this fence could be added to the Mound Bay Park Plan. The Council decided to have Chris develope a plan for this in the Spring and bring it back to the Council for consideration, The Skoglunds agreed to this and no further action was taken. 16~ October 27, 1981 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT RESOLUTION - TURNING DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS OVER THE CONCILIATION COURT The City Manager explained that according to the ordinances kennel fees and woodchipping charges cannot be put on property taxes because there is no provision for this in these ordinances. Therefore, we need a resolution approving the.turning over of these delinquent account to Hennepin County Conciliation Court. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-357 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO TURN DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS OVER TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY CONCILITAION COURT FOR THEIR JUDGEMENT The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SCHOOL DROP-OFF ZONE ON llO AT THE ARENA The City Manager informed the Council that the arena drop-off and loading zone is going to cost the City approximately $19,0OO.00 in cash, now, even though this cost will be assessed back to the school or the arena in the future. He suggested that this money be transfered from the Liquor Fund, as a loan, and then paid back as it is assessed back. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-358 RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING UP TO $20,000.00 ~XACT ~AMOUNT TO BE DETERMINED LATER) FROM THE LIQUOR FUND TO THE COUNTY ROAD 110 PROJECT FOR THE COST OF THE DROP-OFF/LOADING ZONE BY THE ARENA. THIS AMOUNT TO BE PAID BACK TO THE LIQUOR FUND AS'IT IS ASSESSED BACK TO THE SCHOOL OR THE ARENA. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to approve the payment of the bills, as submitted, in the amount of $81,047.77, when funds are available. Roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. BURLINGTON NORTHERN LEASE - FENCE ON SETON CHANNEL The City Manager stated that the fence is already up on the Seton Channel and the lease with the Burlington Northern has still not been signed. The railroad does not want a resident to sign the lease. It wants the City to sign. In checking, Spring Park signed the lease for the other side of the channel and the City Manager is recommending that Mound sign the lease for their side of the channel. The neightbors have agreed to pay the lease fee of $175.00 for alO year lease. The Council agreed to authorize the City Manager and the Mayor to sign the lease with the Burlington Northern. FINANCIAL REPORT The City Manager reported that the General Fund is approximately $60,000.00 over Budget for 1981 so far and he did not expect to make much headwa~ in the next three month~ in reducing this figure. Another reason for not being able to bring this figure down is that the State is now talking about cutting State Aid sharply. This may mean reducing services even further. 162 October 27, 1981 Councilmember Polston thought we should reconsider on the Mound-Spring Park Water Connection and keep the $35,000.00 in reserve. The majority of the Council felt that the water connection is a must ~or Island Park. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT The City Manager reported that George Stevens of the Super Valu called and asked if his parking lot could be resurfaced and restripped now that the street and curb cuts are finished. Mr. Elam explained to Mr. Stevens that the CBD would have to be consulted on this because all the costs are assessed back to the CBD the following year. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to have the Downtown Advisory Committee appoint a 5 person CBD Parking and Assessment Review Committee to work ou.~with the business people., the projects affecting the businesses and to oversee the assessment roll. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE The City Manager suggested that the Council have a Special Meeting on November 17, 1981, inviting the Planning Commission to discuss the proposed zoning ordinance and set a date for the Public Hearing on this ordinance. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to hold a Special Council Meeting on November 17, 1981, with the Planning Commission present to discuss the proposed zoning ordinance. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. WOODEN LIGHT POLES Councilmember Polston stated that the used 60' wooden.light poles being taken down and replaced on County Rd. 110 can be purchased from NSP for $175.00 each. These could be used for lighting one or more of the softball fields in the City. The School Distrist has agreed to buy half the poles if the City will buy the other half. Councilmember Ulrick stated that he would have to abstain from discussion or voting on this item because of a possible conflict of interest. Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #81-359 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO PURCHASE HALF OF THE 60" WOODEN LIGHT POLES FROM NSP FOR $175.00 EACH CONTINGENT ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PURCHASING THE OTHER HALF TO USE FOR A SOFTBALL FIELD Roll call vote was 2 in favor, with Councilmember Swenson voting against and Councilmenber Ulrick abstaining. Motion carried. Councilmember Swenson voted against this Resolution because he doesn't know the total cost of this project i.e. lights to go on the poles and the wiring. FIRE DEPARTMENT Bob Cheney, Fire Chief, was present stating that the Council should not allow the Jaycees to use the new arena for a dance this week because the arena is not completed and does not have a certificate of occupancy. 163 October 27, 1981 Chief Cheney felt that the Council was sanctioning this dance ~ecause they had issued a 3.2 beer license to the Ja¥cees for this event. The Council agreed that they would have to be more careful in the future about issuing licenses for future events and would consult the Fire Dept. about these issues before the license is issued. The Fire Dept. would also like to be aware of ~all commercial and industrial, and multi family building plans as they are submitted in order to make sure the buildings meet the Fire Code. ANDERSON BUILDING Councilmember Polston would like a status report on removing the Anderson Building from the downtown area. He would like to know if this can be done and have some sort of timetable or alternative. The City Manager stated that this building is filled with City equipment and there is nowhere else, at this time to store this equipment. Councilmember Swenson b'rought up the fact that the Anderson Building was purchased with MSA Funds and asked if we can do anything to that building. Councilmember Ulrick wanted to know if we can sell the-land and who would get the proceeds. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion that the Council go into Executive Session to discuss 2 legal matters. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Council came out of Executive Session at 9:55 P.M. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion to adjourn at 10:OO P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, Secretary 5341 MAYWOF_ 2 MOUND. MINNE£~'.'T A (612) 472-11 ~.L NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED STREET VACATIONS "Portion of west side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point" "Outside corner of Leslie Road abutting Lot 8 and part of Lot 9, Block 21, Wychwood" TO WHOM IS MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the City Council of the City of Mound will meet at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. on the 3rd day of November, 1981, to consider the vacation of the following: 1. Portion of west side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point. 2. Outside corner of Leslie Road abutting Lot 8 and part of Lot 9, Block 21, Wychwood. Such persons'as desire t° be heard with reference to the above will be heard at this meeting. /do/r~ Elam, City Manager " : = ¢,~ ,v..--/_ ... ,,, .=: I~ ~ "-t.u ~ % · o .,.-. ,...~ . -~-,,~..~;_ ~ .~.---.,- .. ...,_.,. ....,_. .~.~i.--~. -.,. .¥ .- ~ ...,~';,~, ...,¢~ ~ , _ . :..: _ -v..; ~.., , = ..:~-,., ~-:L~": ,., .--~.~, ~ ·.._-~ =/ /,~...=-.-_.,--._ ~ ': ,_:.. ,-~,,,. ~ .~' ~ --'- ;," /_- z.= ,~ , · .~"-'.:. ~. v-' 'x . -, '-,t- / ,,,ff/_~.~'-,~-'"--,- .J~ ':- .."'~- 5-'.. ... ~_., ._ ~' ..=. .... : . ~'~/..;?;~:. .--, ,, -: . .~ .... ,~.~.. APPLICATION I'OR STREET VACATION CITY OF MOUND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY. OWNED BY APPLICANT: PLAT pARCEL LOT / BLOCK ~ ~ SUBDIVISION S ~,~ ~, ,~-,,-,~ STREET TO BE VACATED REASON FOR REQUEST Applicant's Interest ~n Property Residents andtowne~s qf property abutting the street to /" .~.. /',~3, J ~ ~ ,~ ~.,,/,,' .... Reco~ended by City: Public Works ~ ; Fire ~ief ~ ; Engineer See ~]e. Police Chief Planning Co~ission Reco~endation: To vacate ]6 feet of the street way provldln9 the utilities won't be Infringed. Date September 28. 1981 Council Action Resol. No. ,9qsEP I 0 1981 Date COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. i CONSUITIN~ ~N~INE£R~ ! LflNB SU~E¥OR~ · PLANN~R~ September 23, 19 81 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager · City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Proposed Street Vacation Portion of 3 Points Boulevard Adjacent to Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point - Job #2113 Dear Mr. Elam: We have reviewed the above proposed vacation and have the following comments and recommendations. This was an extension of a State Aid street and therefore, the 66' right-of-way was obtained. It would seem that it may be desirable to keep the entire right-of- way. 1) If the City desires to vacate any of the R/W, they should maintain a minimum of 50' R/W. Since the existing R/W is 66', 16' could be vacated and it could be taken off the one side. If this section is ever upgraded to include concrete curb and gutter, most likely the new road would be centered on the R/W. 2) Sanitary sewer is located approximately in the center of the R/W. If a portion is vacated, the new property line should be no closer than 15 feet to the sanitary sewer. 3) We would recommend that no more than 10' be vacated along the northwesterly side. The proposed addition shown would extend approximately 18' into the ex- isting R/W, which would leave less than 10' to the edge of the driven road. If you need any further information, please contact me. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. lr Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled paper Minnegasco Minnesota Gas Company 733 marquette avenue, minneapolis, minnesota 5,5402 October 6, 1981 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 RE: Proposed street vacation Dear Mr. Elam: Here is your sketch showing the proposed vacation of a portion of Three Points Boulevard on which we have shown the location of our existing gas service lines. Since we must maintain the functions of these faCilities, we herein object to this proposed vacation unless suitable easement rights are reserved the Minnesota Gas Company, pursuant to MSA 160.29, over the area proposed to be vacated. I would appreciate your keeping me informed on this matter. If you should have any further questions, please call me at 372-S081. Very truly yours,/o Real Estate Technician WRS/lck Att achment --% , - October 8, 1981 Northern States Power Company Minnetonka Division 5505 County Road 19 P.O. Box 10 Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Telephone (612) 474-8881 City of Hound 5341 Haywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Jori Elam, City Maria§er Dear Mr. Elam: In regards to your letter of October 1, 1981 for the two proposed street vacations at: Portion of West side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point And Outside corner of Leslie Road adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16, Block 21, Wychwood; we foresee NO NEED for those portions of the streets. Sincerely, D. C. Flewelling~ Customer Service ~esentattve DCF/mf 7% Continental Telephone o! l. innesota, Inc. ~outJ~ D~t ~c~ P.O. Box 252 2365 Commerce Boulevard Mound Minnesota 55364 (612) 472-8865 October 6, 1981 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Attention of Mr. Jon Elam Subject: Street Vacations Dear Mr. Elam: Continental Telephone Company of Minnesota has no objection to your proposed vacation of the outside corner of Leslie Road, adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16, Block 21, Wychwood. We have no facilities located on this right-of-way and cannot see any future needs. Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point, is a different story. We have three existing buried cables located in this right-of-way. This is part of our underwater route across Lake Minnetonka that feeds the North Shore. We need to retain this route. Yours truly, District Engineer RSB/mi s xc. George Kraemer Dave Penney Continental Telephone o! Minnesota, Inc. South District P. O. Box 258 2365 Commerce Boulevard /',Aound, /V~innesota 55364 (612) 472-8865 October 29, 1981 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Attention of Mr. Jon Elam Subject: Vacation of Three Points Boulevard Dear Mr. Elam: On 10-6-81, we sent you a letter opposing the vacation of a portion of the west side of Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to. the end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point. Our cables are located in this right-of-way. Since that time, we have talked to Greg Malik, owner of Lot 1. He has agreed to grant us an easement, for our existing cables, across the vacated right-of-way that will revert back to the property owner. This will remove our opposition to your proposed vacancy of this right-of-way. Yours truly, Roy'S. Berkas District Engineer RSB/mj s xc. Greg Malik C:ITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA (612) 472-1155 October 6, 1981 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Manager Public Works Department Proposed Street Vacations The Public Works Department can foresee no future need for that portion of the west side of Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to the end of Lot 1, Block-23, Shadywood Point. There are no utilities in that portion of the right-of-way. The outside corner of Leslie Road adjacent to Lots 7,8,9,14,15 & 16, Block 21, Wychwood could be vacated but we will have to keep it entirely on a utility easement. It contains sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main. Respectfully, Robert Shanley - Public Works Director RS/ich October 1, lgSI 5341 M AY',','G DI~ MOUND. MIN,'q£SCTA 553C4 {612) 472-1155 TO: Hinnegasco Northern States Power Company Continental Telephone Company Public Works Department Fire Department Police Department FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: Two Proposed Street Vacations: 1. Portion of West side of Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to end of Lot l, Block 23, Sh'adywood Point 2. Outside corner of Leslie Road Adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16, Block 21, Wychwood The City of Mound has requests for vacation of the subject portions of streets which are not blacktopped and are now in grass due to the recent street construction. Attached are copies of the portion of street proposed to be vacated. Do you have any utilities in these portions of the streets or do you foresee a need for these portions of the streets? Thanks for your help in supplying this information. JE/ms aon Elam CITY of MOUN : 5341 MAYWOCD RO,',:. MOUND. MINNESOTA (612) 472-11£5 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED STREET VACATIONS "Portion of west side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen Elyn to end of Lot I, Block 23, Shady~ood Point" "Outside corner of Leslie Road abutting Lot 8 and part of Lot 9, Block 21, Wychwood" TO WHOM IS MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the City Council of the City of Mound will meet at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. on the 3rd day of November, 1981, to consider the vacation of the following: 1. Portion of west side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen ElYn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point. 2. Outside corner of Leslie Road abutting Lot 8 and part of Lot 9, Block 21, Wychwood. Such persons'as desire t° be.heard with reference to the above will be heard at this meeting. II l0 I0o LEGAL DESCRXPTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY APPLICANT: PARCEL STREET TO BE VACATED · P~EASON FOR R~QUEST Residents and owners of property abutting the street to be vacated: Recommended by Utiliti~s: NSP ; Minnegasco~; Continental Tel. Np.0bject[, Recommended by City: Public Works ~ Fire Chief ~ ; Engineer See 1.etter ' on Cfle poZice Chief ~d~.~..,~./~2Z~ ~ ~ ~ , Planning Commission Recommendation: To vacate the street right-of-way requ~ste_d _.pro~dlng the City retain all the___9_approprlate utility easements. Date September 28, 1981 Council Action Reso]. No. Date ~ool A. TH OI,4 AS WURST GERALD T. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOHA5 F. UNDERWOOD ALBERT FAULCONER ~ JAHE5 D. LANSON LAW OFFICES WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON I100 FIRST SANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 October 28, 1981 TELEPHONE (61:='} 338-8911 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: City of Mound Proposed Street Vacation - Portion of Leslie Road Dear Jori: This will confirm our telephone conversation of October 28, 1981. We have received from Mr. Cameron a letter with drawing attached concerning the proposed vacation of a portion of Leslie Road. I have also been contacted by the owner of Lot 7 who is extremely concerned about this vacation and the effect it may have on her property. This is a very unusual situation because of the way lots 7, 8 and 9 and lots 14, 15 and 16 of block 21 are all affected. The question is what happens to the land if it is vacated by the City of Mound? I have my own opinion which I have checked with the surveyor at the Registrar of Titles and with Elsie Wolfe in the Registrar's office. My advice at this point is not to vacate this portion of the street. The reason that I recommend_aga_inst vacation is that the titles to ~h~se ~i~ ~ropert~i¢~ .~1I' ~.~.{~'~i;=~re r-- egiste~ed l~nds,-will all be ~fe~t~d_b~ the vac~tionl There is no way that the registrar, myself or anyone else Can d~termine_how~ the vacated la~ ~uld be .apportione~ ~mong_the six lots. If lot 14 were to obtain title to the center of the street as would be the normal case, it would totally landlock lot 7 and it is my opinion that it would not be in the public interest to allow such a vacation. ~ only way these people could ascertain how the vacated lands would be aoportioned wOuld be by.-~ ~--~rt proc~~ ~-~chI~ould COISt all of the_p~ies a substanj2~m] ~,~n~ m~ money~ The City vacates its interest in the street but does not determine who receives the vacated land and in this case, the only way that could be determined would be through a court proceeding with expensive surveys and other legal ramifications. I would think that the property owners would be very concerned about the expenses and the title difficulties that they might be creating by a vacation. It also could result in neighbors who have gotten along ending up in a fight over the vacated lands and, therefore, unless the parties involved all petition the City for the vacation and sign a statement indicating that they under- Mr. Jon Elam Page 2 October 28, 1981 WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON stand that this will cause title problems which can only be resolved by a court order, then and only then would I recommend the vacation. Jon, this is a very complicated subject and is compounded in this case by a very unusual arrangement concerning the way the lots abut the street. I will be happy to try to answer any questions that you or any member of the council have prior to the hearing or at the hearing on the vacation. V~ry truly yours, Curtis A. Pearson City Attorney CAP:ms cc: Mr. John Cameron )~)~'?~k CONSULTINGENGINE[R$ ~LRNOSURV[Y(~R$ I; ?LANNF..R$ Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 October 20, 1981 Hr. Curtis A. Pearson Wurst, Carroll & Pearson 1512 First National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, HN 55402 Subject: City of Hound Proposed Street Vacation Portion of Leslie Road 3ob #2113 Dear Curt: Enclosed is a copy of the County half section and a copy of a portion of our street-plans for Leslie Road. The one drawing shows the portion of Leslie proposed to be vacated, shaded in red. The owner of Lot 7, Block 21, Wychwood, wants to know what portion, if any, would revert back to their lot. This question will probably come up at the public hearing on the 27th. I thought this would give you a chance to look at it beforethe meeting. If you need any further information, please contact me. OC:lr cc: Oon Elam f City of Mound Yours very truly, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~Oohn Cameron Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan p~,r,~eq on recycled ~,-;L~e~ ] oo,, COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ~NGIN££RS LAND SUrVEYOrS · · September 23, 1981 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Proposed Street Vacation Portion of Leslie Road Adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 & 16, Block 21 Wychwood - Job #2113 Dear Mr. Elam: We have reviewed the above proposed vacation and have the following comments and recommendations. l) 2) Since the street and park in this area have been up- graded, we see no future use of this area for road purposes. This portion of Leslie Road has sanitary sewer, watermain and gas located in it, therefore, it would seem best just to retain the entire R/W However, if you decide to vacate it, utility easements should be retained on the entire area to be vacated. 3) We would recommend a l0 foot boulevard be retained behind the existing curb. The area which could be vacated is indicated on the attached drawing. If you need any further information, please contact me. Yours very truly, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~~o~n' Cameron Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled paper Minnegasco (~/ Minnesota Gas Company 733 marquette avenue, minneapolis, minnesota 55402 October 4, 1981 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 RE: Proposed street vacation Dear Mr. Elam: Here is your sketch showing the proposed vacation of a portion of Leslie Road on which we have shown the location of our existing 1-inch gas main. Since this gas main is an important part of our distribution system for this area we herein object to this proposed vacation unless suitable easement rights are reserved the Minnesota Gas Company, pursuant to MSA 160.29, over the area proposed to be vacated. A copy of such a Resolution is used by the City of Minneapolis which I have enclosed for your information and consideration. I would appreciate your keeping me informed on this matter. If you should have any further questions, please call me at 372-5081. Very truly yours, William R. Schram Real Estate Technician WRS/lck At t achment Enclosure ? 1o0~' ,l,~\ Vacating a portion or Stevens .... (~/~ LakeAV fromRd.E ~4th St U) Diamond from E 54th St to Diamond ~ke · " Rd is hereby vacate; except that such vacation shall not aff~t ~e e~s~ng easement ~ & au~oSty of Mi~esota Gas ~ and ~e ~ty of Mi~eapolis, their succes~rs & assigns, ~-enter u~n ~at p~on ~ ~e afore-descr st w~ch is descr ""~ql--T6-'l~--City of Min- [1 neapolis, the entire to be vacated portion of Stevens Av; to operate, maintain, repair, replace, alter, inspect or remove its above-descr utility facilities and said easement rt & authority is hereby expressly reserved to the above-named corporation and the City of Minneapolis, and no other person or corporation shall have .the rt to fill, excavate, erect bldgs or other structures, plant trees or perform any act which would in. terfere with or obstruct access to said st upon or within the above. descr areas without first obtaining the. written apprvl of the cot. potation and the Director of Public Works o! the City of Minneapolis having utility facilities located within the area involved' authorizing it to do so. Where the are.-'dez~'..above in regard to the other corporation, or. any part thereof, lies within the area descr above in regard to the City of Minneapolis, the rts reserved to the other corporation shall be subordinate to the rts reserved to the City of Minneapolis to the same extent that said rts would 0e subordinate if. this st had not been vacated. Passed August 14, 1981. Alice W. R ainville, President of Council. Approved August 20, 1981. Donald M. Fraser, Mayor. Attest: Lyall A. Schwarzkopf, City Clerk. lolg October 8, 1981 Northern States Power Company Minnetonka Division 5505 County Road 19 P.O. Box 10 Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Telephone (512) 474-8881 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Jon Elam, City Manager Dear Mr. Elam: In regards to your letter of October 1, 1981 for the two proposed street vacations at: Portion of West side of Three Points Blvd. from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point And Outside corner of Leslie Road adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16, Block 21, Wychwood; we foresee NO NEED for those portions of the streets. Sincerely, -'~ ~---- '3.--~4. ~, ~ D. C. Flewelling Customer Service AR~presentative DCF/mf Continental Telephone of Minnesota, Inc. South District P. O. Box 258 2365 Commerce Boulevard Mound, Minnesota 55364 (612) 472-8865 October 6, 1981 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Attention of Mr. Jon Elam Subject: Street Vacations Dear Mr. Elam: Continental Telephone Company of Minnesota has no objection to your proposed vacation of the outside corner of Leslie Road, adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16, Block 21, Wychwood. We have no facilities located on this right-of-way and cannot see any future needs. Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to end of Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point, is a different story. We have three existing buried cables located in this right-of-way. This is part of our underwater route across Lake Minnetonka that feeds the North Shore. We need to retain this route. Yours truly, District Engineer ~SB/mjs xc. George Kraemer Dave Penney Io10 · October 6, 1981 CI FY of MOUND 5341 MAYWO©D R~,,t-,: MOUND. MINNESO'ffA 5526.: f612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Manager Public Works Department Proposed Street Vacations The Public Works Department can foresee no future need for that portion of the west side of Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to the end of Lot 1, Block '23, Shadywood Point. There are no utilities in that portion of the right-of-way. The outside corner of Leslie Road adjacent to Lots 7,8,9,14,15 & 16, Block 21, Wychwood could be vacated but we will have to keep it entirely on a utility easement. It contains sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main. Respectfully, Robert Shanley ~- Public Works Director RS/jcn 1oi. I ! ! PG. 56 - 65) '-7 0 '"2 I /.ol ! _F-_~I IF' i _1oI~ - October 1, 1981 TO: Minnegasco Northern States Power Company Continental Telephone Company Public Works Department Fire Department Police Department FROM: The City Manager SUBJECT: Two Proposed Street Vacations: 1. Portion of West side of Three Points Boulevard from Glen Elyn to end of Lot l, Block 23, Shadywood Point 2. Outside corner of Leslie Road Adjacent to Lots 7, 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16, Block 21, Wychwood The City of Mound has requests for vacation of the subject portions of streets which are not blacktopped and are now in grass due to the recent street construction. Attached are copies of the portion of street proposed to be vacated. Do you have any utilities in these portions of the streets or do you foresee a need for these portions of the streets? Thanks for your help in supplying this information. JE/ms APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF MOUND NAME OF APPLICANT FEE $ ~- ~ ZO NG_ - g - 6o o PROPERTY ADDRESS PLAT 4908 Three Points Blvd. PARCEL Address 4908 Three Points Boulevard LOT Numbe INTEREST IN PROPERTY FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Telephone 6'//~- 9~'7~/ ADDITION. Addre s s B LOCK Shadywood Point; Telephone Number VARIANCE~ESTED: FRONT [ ~ [ ACCESSORY NO T E: FT.[ YARD ,? FT. LOT SIZE'-' YARD LOT SQ. FT. FOOTAGE N. C. U.* or OTHER (describe)Y REASON FOR REQUEST: 1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement in relation to lot lines, other buildings on property and abutting streets. 2. Give ownership and dimensions of adjoining property. Show approximate locations of all buildings, driveways, and streets pertinent to the application by extending survey or drawing. 3--. Attach letters from adjoining affected property owners showing attitude toward request. A building permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the ~ council resolution or variance granted becomes null and void. ~,~00~T 2 !Yack:lances are n°t trar~ferable')T~,.~0i '" r (itt /~ / APPLICANT ~ ~.'~ (~ , ' DATE /~/} /, ~/' ~ ~ignature I PLANNING COMIVIISSIONRECOMMENDATION That the Council vacate the maximum amount [ (16 feet) of Three Points Boulevard that they can and recommend granting the variance/ ..~necessary based on the amount of vacation to build garage requested and also acknowledgin~ ,~the side yard setback and lot size deficiencies DATE October 26, 1981 ] COUNCIL AC TION: RESOLUTION NO. DATE *non-conforming use /(~/, ~ Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1981 - Pa§e 2 Subdivision of Land Lots 10,11,12 & 13 and Part of 8,~ ~ 14, Block 6, Whipple Applicant was not present. Application has no survey or legal descriptions I- of the proposed division of land. · ?;-' i~ , · Paulsen moved and' Hanson seconded a motion to table. The vote was unanimously in favo . ' ~,- Street Vacation of Oxford Lane from Aberdeen Road to Hanover Road Applicant, Jeannette Rivers, was' not present. City Manager reviewed the circumstances that prompted Mrs. Rivers to apply for the street vacation and noted that she has maintained this area for 30 years and wants to retain it as a driveway to her property. Discussed whether this might landlock Lots 17, 18, 19 & 20, Block '9, Devon. (Hanover could be put through.) Weiland moved and Hanson seconded a motion to recommend that the City vacate the street as requested, but retain an utility easement over the entire 30 feet of right-of-way for existing Sanitary Sewer and Gas line and that no further filling, excavating or construction be allowed on the vacated street. Stannard and O'Donnell voted nay; all others voted i~.favor. Motion carries. Stannard stated there were many reasons not to vacate--main, one is access to lots on Hanover; O'Donnell feels most of road being used for utilities, etc. The City Manager reported that "Vacations'.' cost much more than the $50 fee charged--~-- losing propOsition to vacate; perhaps the.City should look into alternative such as a maintenance agreement or at least, raise the fee to $1OO." . O'Donnell moved and Weiland seconded a motion to recommend to the Council that the fee for a "Vacation Application" be increased from $50 to $100. The vote was all in favor except Paulsen voted nay. He is opposed as it is an ambiguous amount of money; thinks it should be based on realistic figure. Variances-Street Front, Side Yard and Lot Size Lot 1, Block 23, Shadywood Point ~ Gregg Malik was present. Presently has a Vacation request before the Council; noted that the letter from the Telephone Company is wrong; there'are no phone lines in street on side proposed to be vacated; a revised letter to that effec: will be forthcoming and Malik is, on that.basis, requesting a 16 foot vacation However, will still need a street front variance for his proposed garage addi- tion; side yard and lot size are existing deficiencies. O'Donnell moved and Hanson seconded a motion to recommend Council vacate the maximum amount (16 feet).of Three Points Boulevard that they'can and recommend granting the variance necessary based on the amount of vacation to build garage requested and also acknowledging the side yard setback and lot size deficiencies. Stannard and Weiland voted nay; all others in favor, motion carries. Reason against is that against allowing building within ~ feet of ri~ht-of-way. Variances-Lake Front, Side Yard, Lot Size and Accessory Building Lot I0, Block 1, Shadywood Point Thomas Davison was present. I0/?, (]ITT of X,IOUND 5341 MA, CWO, OD R©,-'..r'£ MOUND M,NNESCTA £:.;554 (612) 472~ 1 '~ 55 TO: City Manager FROM: Tree Inspector SUBJECT: Rebate The following people have removed diseased trees on their property .in full compliance with City and State Laws. Please submit this list to Council. Respectfully, Chris Bollis Tree Inspector CB/jcn CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA REBATE LIST f~22 NAME ADDRESS NO. OF TREES TOTAL DBH DOLLAR~ Curtis Johnson P.O. Box 246 2 13" $26.0( Spring Park, Mn. 55384 Duwayne Dorfner 4849 Glasgow Rd. 5 68" $136.0( Jim Roberge 1738 Avocet Ln. 1 19" $38.0C Bruce Melenich 5717 Grandview Blvd. 1 15" $30.0£ Elmer Peterson 4926 Bartlett Blvd. 7 234" $468.0( Clarence Johnson 3615 37th Ave. So. 1 30" $60.0( .~ Mp1 s_, Mn. 55406 ...... R~rt Vanecek 5724 Sunset Rd. 1 16" $32.0£ Carol Adair 3149 Argyle Ln. 1 14" $28.0( Byron Peterson P.O. Box 195 1 30" $60.0( ..... Mo_und ,_ Mn.. .............. Donald Brandenburg 2567 Emerald Dr. 3 93" $186.0C Roger Meland 4977 Brunswick Rd. 2 75" $150.0( Charles Auger 3117 Highland Blvd. 1 29" $58.0( Don Westman 5716 Lynwood Blvd. 1 32:' $64.0( Bob Johnson 5488 Tonkawood Rd. 1 34" $68.0~ Mary Peterson 6619 Bartlett Blvd. 1 25" $50.0.', M~q~ael Savage 3125 Highland Blvd. 1 40" $80.0( Clarence Segner 5101 Edgewater Dr. 1 18" $36.0( J~ssek Wesley Oak A10lson Leo Fitzgibbons Neal Cook H. E. Bielke Ted Breckheimer Rick Lindlan Schultz L. Hildebrandt Bruce Coilings Tom Green Harold Kutzner 2431 Wilshire Blvd. 2175 Noble Ln. 5724 Lynwood Blvd. · 5765 Sunset Rd. 5804 Sunset Rd. 2143 Overland Ln. 4636 Hampton Rd. 1720 Resthaven Ln. 1730 Shorewood Ln. 6323 Bartlett Blvd. 4986 Bartlett Blvd. 1724 Shorewood Ln. 4644 Carlow Rd. ~2 28" 66" 30" 92" 56" 22" 30" 37" 44" 45" 65" 27" 34" $56. O0 $132.00 $60.00 $184.0C $I12.0£ $44.0C $60.0[ $74.01 $88. o¢ $9o.o( $13 O. O( $54.0( $68. O( TOTAL $2,722.00 October 21, 1981 545 Indian Mound Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 473-4224 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Mound-Spring Park Water Connection CSAH 125 Dear Jon: The City of Spring Park, at their October 19, 1981 council meeting, passed a resolution to proceed with the CSAH 125 water connection. A copy of said resolution will be forwarded to you shortly. As indicated previously, it may be prudent to take bids yet this year, although construction of the new bridge is not scheduled until May, 1982. Perhaps you can discuss a bid letting date with the council at your next regular council meeting. I believe a mid-December bid date would be desirable although early January, 1982 would be okay also. Let me know as soon as possible about the bid date so I can take care of the Advertisement for Bids and notification to the local newspaper and Construction Bulletin. If you have any questions and/or comments please feel free to contact me at 473-4224. Sincerely, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Vice President bt 545 Indian Mound .~ Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 VI (612) 473-4224 October 29, 1981 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Mound-Spring Park Water Connections - CSAH 125 Dear Jon: Enclosed is a copy of Resolution 81-33, City of Spring Park, Minnesota, approving plans and specifications for the above referenced project. Please let me know when a definite bid letting date is established. Sincerely, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES ~6rge W. Boyer, P.E. Vice President bt Enclosure CITY OF SPRING PARK SPRING PARK, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 81-33 APPROVING PLANS & SPECS FOR BLACK LAKE BRIDGE INTERCONNECTION WHEREAS, the Cities of Spring Park and Mound have entered into a Joint Powers Agreement for the inter- connection of the water systems of the two Cities, and WHEREAS, determination was made to perform this work in conjunction with the construction of Black Lake Bridge in 1982, and WHEREAS, Eugene A. Hickok & Assoc has presented plans and specs for this project, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the CITY OF SPRING PARK that said plans and specs hereby approved for construction in 1982. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRING PARK THIS 19thDAY OF October ,1981. ATTEST: CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA SPECIFICATIONS FOR ONE 1982 3/4 TON DIESEL 4 WHEEL DRIVE PICKUP 1. INVITATION FOR BIDS: Sealed bids will be received by the City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota until ONE 1982 3/4 TON DIESEL 4 WHEEL DRIVE PICKUP INTENT OF CONTRACT: Furnish and deliver to the City of Mound one (1) 1982 3/4 ton diesel 4 wheel drive pickup, only meeting or exceeding the specifications of this proposal. Unit bit shall be a 1982 standard production model with all latest changes and features. Only truck and body models (1982) in production will be congidered in,the award. BID BOND: Ail proposals must be accompanied by a certified check or bidders bond made payable to t~e Treasurer, of the City of Mound for a least 5% of the amount of the proposal, said surety to be forfeited to the City if bidder awarded a contract and fails to fulfill the same. ~' CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA Specifications for a 1982 3/4 ton Pickup Truck ITEM G. V. W. Wheel Base Cab to Axel Transmission Engine Axle Front Rear Springs Front Rear .kes Steering Cab. Mirrors Alternator Battery lights & wiring Instrument Panel Bump er Wheels & Tires Engine Heater Color Tank Options Quote for 1982 3/4 ton REQU IR~ENTS (MINIMUM) 8600 lbs. 131% inches or longer 56 inches Automatic, 3 speed, 3 drive range 6.2 liter - deisel 379 cub. inch Heavy Duty Heavy Duty t~avy Duty Heavy Duty Power Power assist Full width bench seat, full dept. foam arm rests on doors, sunvisors Dual below eye level, stainless steel mirrors 60 amp. Heavy duty regulator Dual Standard lighting Full Gauges Frontr white Lt234185R, 16E Steel Radial, 10~ Ply front & rear Frost plug one coat primer & one coat white behind seat Rust proofing pickup truck Name of Company BIDDER TO FILL IN-GIVING DETAI lbs. Inches inches' make speed lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. yes no amp. amps volt Date Signature ITEM October 30, 1981 TO: City Council FROM: Jon Elam, City Manager These two lots were taken by the City in 1973 for park land. These lots are not presently accessible and are nothing more than a weed patch that we must mow. The owner of the lots to the west would like to buy them. To do that we need to release our interest in these lots, so they can go up for auction next Spring. I strongly recommend we do this. JE:fc .1 ':IN'~;'-INOQgN~"I'< ~'2Li CITY of X'IOUND 5341 MAYWO©D qOAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 October 26, 1981 TO: FROM: All Department Heads - Jori Elam, City Manager In 1973, the City had conveyed to it (by the County) two lots, Lot 27 and 28 of Koehler"s Second Addition to Mound for use as a park. Do we need to continue to retain this right or can we notify the County to put these lots up-for sale at next years auction? It seems to me' that we need another park (land locked, .no less) like we need more Streets, but I will follow anyones thoughts or stroE9. suggestions. Please let me know at your convenience. (See location map attached.) JE:fc enc. of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 5536~ (612) 472-1155 October 2fi, 1~81 TO: FROM: All Department Heads -- Jori Elam, City Manager In 1973, the City had conveyed to it (by the County) two lots, Lot 27 and 28 of Koehler's Second Addition to Mound for use as a park. 'Do we need to continue to retain this right or can we notify the County to put these lots up'for sale at next years auction? It seems to me' that we need another park. (land locked, no less) like we need more streets, but I will follow anyones thoughts or strong. suggestions. Please let me know at your convenience. (See location map attached.) JE:fc enc. October 26, 1981 TO: FROM: All Department Heads - Jon Elam, City Manager In 1973, the City had conveyed to it (by the County) two lots, Lot 27 and 28 of Koehler's Second Addition to Mound for use as a park. Do we need to continue to retain this right or can we notify the County to put these lots up'for sale at next years auction? It seems to me that we need another park (land locked, no less) like we need more streets, but I will follow anyones thoughts or strong suggestions. Please let me know at your convenience. (See location map attached.) JE:fc enc. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOCD ROAD MOUND. MINN£SO'fA ~354 (612) 472-1155 October 26, 1981 TO: FROM: All Department Heads - Jori Elam, City Manager In 1973, the City had conveyed to it (by the County) two lots, Lot 27 and 28 of Koehler"s Second Addition to Mound for use as a park. Do we need to continue to retain this right or ca~ we notify the County to put these lots up'for sale at next years auction? It seems to me' that we need another park (land locked, no less) like we need more streets, but I will follow anyones thoughts or strpn.9' suggestions. Please let me know at your convenience. (See location map attached.) JE:fc enc. /o. I ITEM #10 October 30, 1981 TO: City Council FROM: Jon Elam, City Manager Mr. Ron Blaschko, who lives on Alder Lane, came in to complain about the fact that there are four (4) street lights being installed across the street from his house on the back side of the Arena. He-feels that this will light up the front of his house like a commercial district. Since these houses also abut the Hennepin County Library, whose parking lot is lighted up all night, they feel that they are really being squeezed between the two districts. My recommendation is to eliminate at lease two of the four light (and save the cost) while still being able to light up Alder Road very adequately. The Ice Hockey Arena Association also supports this reduction. (SEE MAP ATTACHED) JE:fc ITEM #11 October 30, 1981 TO: City Council FROM: Jon Elam City Manager We need to have a resolution passed for the close out of the Sewer Capital Outlay Fund to the Sewer Fund. The amount of the transfer will be $48,045.00. We need to state in the resolution that we are closing Sewer Capital Outlay Fund by transferring the January 1, 1981, Fund balance of $48,045.00 to the Sewer Fund. This will cose out an unused Fund, while helping to reduce the existing $84,000.00 deficit in the Sewer Fund. The difference will come from a rate increase. JE:fc Treasury Aide Uig s Stat , [oc ! '/ ': By TmOTH¥ D. ~CltSL~LIt~,~ ~..': *~. mt d~fipfion ima~ rap. Omn~ . s~I~o/~W~STU~JO~s~ 1~ (~, OMO), a mem~r of ~e ~t- W~GTON-The T~'s ~[~l~, w~ ~d ~e f~e~ ~ve~ent h~ a '.~ ~d.~ ~d. 1~ l~e~ ~ ~.] mle'~ helphg s~ ~d 1~ ~ve~en~ t~ m ~ t~er~ ~ve~t ~.~d.l~y. "We never would have open~ :~ ~ ~ ~venues ~e~v~ ~ ~ve ~e W~ ff We hadn't indu~ ~ple ~ d~ ~e o~ Under. ~ ~5~ Ture. suggested that cash-starved states '~ould boost their own taxes even if that would subvert the intent of President Rea- gan's economic recovery plan. Mr. Ture ac- knowledged that the administration's eco- nomic program relies on its 25% 'cut in fed- er'al individual tax rates through fiscal 1984 to help boost savings and investment. But, he said, "states aren't compelled-to work with the federal government" in that pro- Mr. Ture made his comments at a meet- in~ with several ,members of the President's .-Advisory Committee on Federalism. The 'panel Is exploring ways to return federal revenue sources to states and cities as they are given control of several domestic social programs. Panel members representing ~e and local'governments urged adrninistrntion offi- cios to continue federal revenue sharingto local guvernrnents and to consider turning back a portion of federal income-tax ro- celpts to them. Some members suggested that a percentage of federal corporate tax receipts be sent to state and local guvern- ments for their use. ". .~ '. · 'The Reagan administration has proposed a 12% cut in revenue-sharing aid to the cities, a move that Mr. Ture strongiy sup- POrted. He contended that the reyenue-shar- lng.program is "very seductive" because it disguises the tax costs to' taxpayers. "Cit- izens should see wheat a program costs and decide if they want it," he asserted. The Treasury official suggested that* the federal income-tax cuts represent the only revenue the federal government should yield to the states. He said that the tax cuts through fiscal 1984 translate into an average 22] billion "turnback' per state, and.ira- )lied that state and local government should look to that source. .' Some state and local officials said they would never be elected if they raised taxes to the degree needed to deal with their fi- nancial troubles. In his comments, Mr. Ture painted a pic- ture of state and local governments compet- ing for industry and for residents through their tax and fee system. He suggested the federal government shouldn't provide any fi- nancial help for services supplied by state ~and local governments. "We have a very mobi]e country,'~ he as- serted, indicating that under the federalism he envisions, people would decide what ser- vices they wanted from a community or state and how much they were willing to pay for them, then moving to the area best filling the bill. ', velop the Western territories," Rep. Brown asserted.~' ., ,~ ~ ~ · .The panel is expected to submit recom- mendatioas to the President by Dec. 31. It is l considering several federal taxes as candi- dates for returning revenues'to the states and local governments, including the federal estate and gift tax, motor fuel tax, liquor* and tobacco taxes. league of minnesota oities October 27, 1981 TO: FROM: RE: Mayors, Managers and City Clerks Donald Slater, Executive Director Peggy Flicker, Legislative Counsel Status Report: The State Financial Crisis and Its Direct Impact on. Your City LOCAL GOVERNMENT AIDS (LGA) PAYMENT DELAYS CERTAIN; CUTBACKS LIKELY ate Financial Picture Worsens - Cash Flow and'Deficit'PrOblems It is now clear that the state faces a huge deficit in the current biennium. State spending obligations are now estimated to exceed projected state revenue collections by at least 600 million dollars. In addition, the state's cash flow problem has not been solved, despite increased short-term borrowing by the state. A special session will be called - probably in mid-November. How Your City is Affected by the State Crisis I. 1981LGA Payment Delay The State Revenue Department announced late yesterday that the November 15~ 1981 LGA payment will not be made on time~ Unless the Legis-latur~ a~t§ to solve or ' ~lleviate the ca~"'fl6w p~le~, it-is likely that cities' entire November and December, 1981LGA payments will not be made until 1982. And depending on legis- lative action to solve the deficit problem, it is also possible that those payments, when made, will be cut. II. LGA Payment Cuts It is very possible that your city's 198~L~A payment (already planned for in your 1982 budget) could be cut by as much as(20%~ Unlike the 1981 round of cuts, your city will not automatically have the opt~to levy property taxes to make up for some or all of the cuts. The Legislature would have to both amend the levy limit law and make changes in the way property taxes are paid and administered in order to allow for a levy. The politics and practicalities are such that your City could well have to deal with an unrecoverable cut in your 1982 budget. OVER 300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 [612) 222-2861 )tions the Governor and Le islature Ma Consider I. 'Cash Flow 1. Treat Local Governments Equally Minnesota cities are now being told to bear most of the burden of the cash flow problem, since the LGA program is of greatest significance to cities. School aid payments are not being delayed because the Governor has inter- preted the law prohibiting him from unilaterally cutting school aids to also forbid a payment delay. The Legislature and Governor could at least spread the burden of the cash flow problem and be more equitable by amending that law at the special session and delaying payments to all types of local government. 2. Give Cities More Tools to Handle Local Cash Flow Problems If LGA payments must be delayed into 1982, the Governor and Legislature may alleviate some hardships by allowing cities to borrow in anticipation of receipt of LGA. Other actions may also need to be taken to allow cities to cope, legally and practically, with the delays. 3 Raise Revenues Because of timing considerations, it may as a practical matter be too late to alleviate the current cash flow problem through some sort of revenue increases or speed-ups. However, this alternative may be considered for the immediate problem and certainly ought to be considered in regard to preventing a similar situation in 1982. II. Deficit 1. State Budget Cuts (Local Tax Increases?) The only place the state can make any significant expenditure savings is in the transfer payments it makes to local governments - school aids, home- stead credit, LGA, etc. If the budget is to be balanced only through expenditure cuts, then cities will be hard hit. LGA cuts would have to be about 20%, and other cuts might come in the 1982 homestead credit payments.- It would be possible to accompany LGA and homestead credit cuts to cities with additional special authority to raise some or all of the lost state revenues from local property taxes. However, there are major political and practical problems with obtaining any ability to raise local taxes for 1982. 2. State Revenue Increase Given the staggering size of the projected deficit, more and more people are discussing state revenue increases as at least a partial solution to the budget problem. Without any state revenue increase the impact on many cities' budgets of severe state cuts could be devastating. -2- (more on page 3) Autocon Industries Charles Anderson Buffalo BituminoOs '" Boustead Electric Burlington Northern II II Bowman Barnes Climax, Inc. Commissioner of Revenue Fran Clark Dorothy DeLaney Dustcoat lng, Inc. Dependable Services Judy Fisher Jon Elam Hennepin County Jones Chemicals Bob Johnson IBM Glen Litfin E×cav Long Lake Ford Tractor Rick Mauderer Mound Police City of Mound Mound Postmaster City of Mpls MS Print, Inc Mound Bank Metro Fone Communications Reo Raj Kennels C.S. McCrossan Michael Polley D.F. Schmidt Constr Soil Testing Services T & T Maintenance Wurst, Carroll & Pearson 257.30 547.10 2,944.50 225.1B 533.33 175. OO 65.5O 97.15 2,985.41 15.90 40.56 1,411.70 33.00 10.70 14.88 562.50 192.20 857.14 373.2O 75.OO 66.59 5o.oo 21.07 68.49 89.91 56.00 241.75 9.10 35.4O 235.50 243.00 150.18 3,702.50 203.00 22.75 1,500.O0 Waconia Ridgeview Hosp 13.O0 .",'":,~ r i gg S ~ ~ooper ;donnson Bros. L~q Old Peoria Ed Phillips & Son 5,283.08 ~,g&g.~ 1,363.06 2,734.26 TOTAL BILLS 34,O71.45 TRANSFERS Street to Imp & Equip Outlay Park " " " Finance " " Elections " " Diseased Trees" " Sewer " " " Water " " " Cemetery " " 1,666.66 333.33 80.17 25.00 176.66 375.00 416.67 25.OO Street to Sewer " Water " Police" Liquor to S hop II II I! & Stores II II II General 430.39 97.38 403.54 642.60 1,5OO.OO - /03? CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 553{7,4 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Downtown Advisory Committee Rob Chelseth, City Planner 22 October, 1981 Agenda for Next Meeting and Enclosures The next meeting of the Downtown Advisory Committee has been scheduled for Monday, November 2, 12:00 Noon at Branty's.- (Please note the 2 week break due to conflicts in the schedules of some members) A one hour meeting is planned, so mark your schedule. At our last meeting, the low attendance necessitating postponing the group picture to our next meeting (November 2nd); so again, please attempt to arrive as close to Noon as possible. AGENDA - NOVEMBER 2, 1981 I. Review Minutes from the October 19th meeting. 2 Adjourn for group photo Readjourn to discuss completed background study materials. 4. Discussion of added results from the downtown business sur- vey. 5. Prepare work program for conclusion of studies, initiation of plan development. 6. Other business 7. Adjourn See you in November. CITT of MOUND §3~1 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 553f,: (612) 472-1155 TO: FROH: DATE: SUBJECT: Downtown Advisory Committee Rob Chelseth, City Planner 22 October 1981 Agenda for Next Meeting and Enclosures The next meeting of the Downtown Advisory Committee has been scheduled for Monday, October 26, 12:00 Noon at Branty's. A one hour meeting is planned, so mark your schedule. At our last meeting, the low attend- ance necessitated postponing the group picture to our next meeting (October 26th); so again, please attempt to arrive as close to Noon as possible. 1. Review Minutes from the October 19th meeting. 2. Adjourn for group photo.. 3. Readjourn to discuss completed background study materials. 4. Discussion of added results from the downtown business survey 5. Prepare work program for conclusion of studies, initiation of plan development. 6. Other business 7. Adjourn. Piinutes - Downtown Advisory Committee - October 19, 1981 12 noon at Branty's P~-esent, Ron Norstrem, Mary Campbell, Donna Quigley, Georgiann · Daly, Frank Weiland, Gerry Longpre Also~ Rob Chelseth, B~]ee Wold, Diane Arneson Minutes of the precedit~ meeting were approved. Photo of com- mittee was postponed for one week due' to low atteddance and absence of the chairman. Chief of Police Bz~ce Wold reported on crosswalk locations. He noted Hem~epin County is in the ~siness of moving vehicles, not pedestrians. The main intersection at 110 and 15 cannot accommodate an all-stop. E-W crosswalk will be only on the south side of the intersection. A north crosswalk can be added later if the County can be convinced it is necessary. Even though mid-block crossings are dangerous, one will be located from the parking lot to the Ben Franklin area businesses. Another crosswalk near the ice arena may need flasher at night. No crosswalk will be located at Grandview Middle School or at Three Pts. Blvd. Chief Wold would like a crosswalk near Bay Park. Press releases to local newspapers and letters to Tonka employees will advise of traffic law enforcement when flow ret~rns to normal. A crosswalk is understood at each intersection (MN law). Chelseth began a report on the survey of retail businesses. strem requested postponement until more input is received. l~or- Chelseth presented a summary of the Land Use Survey. Architecture in the Mound ~siness district is primarily "modern strip" and "franchise modern". Signs, painting, and window displays are noticed. There's a real mix of things - a hodgepodge effect. No real sore spot exists, except maybe the Anderson Bldg. Daly reported a committee on ~blic ~ildings reccommended it be renovated DAC/2 or torn down. It is likely too near scbo~t property to be the sate a ~Jnicipal liq,]or store. C~lrrently u~ed for storage - possibly underused. Vacant land exists in the Lost Lake area and near Lake Langdon, as well as the Anderson Bldg. A letter from Burlington Northern showed they lease property to Will Johnson of Conco, Inc. 3ohnson resides in Colorado, but visits the Mound area fre~]ently. Norstrem and Weiland may see him in Mound over the winter holidays. His lease could be discussed then. Adjour~unent was at 1~25 p.m. Diane Arneson, Secretary fWhe, n the SPaCe Inva&rs Beam. In,: S°me ToWns HUrl the Law tt'Them ~ '. By MAma T. P_aZnZ~Z~t .' , .. off-duty p~liceman 4~ s~d Wa~ ~ mm~ sm~ c,Ues and ~..me aght 'mni~ ~i~ says '~ lot ~ ~ M~e~ ~m outer ~,:~mg~¥~ watc~tn, me o~FVe~clg~;'~ ~vMe~ or GM~a.. T~, ~ m a ~Y~T~, res~c~ ~e dis~ wh~ ~m- ~ ~volving vid~ ~..~e of ~e-d~ '~m deny ~at ~e ~ ~ fend~, Ed~ Hogan, o~ of H~n s, ~d ~whole~me '~d crea~:'~u ~k says he ~ew he wm viola~g a ~n:,~. "~ i~ cm~ p~l°r ~ ~ ~ ~ ins~ ~e ~m~ ~ ~en. fi~t mv~e~. ~t, he says,", it~ a ~e~y a~- ~e~ in ~u~ ' ' : ~t. ~d he ~a ~t ~,~ ~ [ ~. a 'bicycle shop. sa~ he ~ ~ . r-'~q~ ~ ~?~. ~i~ mach~e ~ a devi~ ~ draw ~ ~ ~e Thea~e Inc.. ~ns ~t tom~ ti ae ~ ~s.it ~a~'~"k '~mp~y's ~s~r~t ~d big 1~ he s~s. But he s~ ~'t ~dev ~ end. age i~y' ~flom P~R ~ ~y a ve~ slow w~., he ~. ,-. ~ent or ~di~," he ~ E~ewhere, ~rM Gabl~,. ~, appwv~ ' Me~w~e, ~.' ~v~ d ~ Gabl~ a oneyeg permit for a ~de~e p~lor ~es _~at ~e to~'s t~n-~m d~i~ m~t~fi~ op~siHon, lmm ~li~ ~t ~1 ~e disc~on of res~cHom ~ ~y. ~d ~e W~'s P~nt-Te~her ~aOon.' ~ f~L he sa~,."my, o~ ~ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washir oton Av. SoUth: Hopkins, Minnesota ,55343 935-3381 October 23, 1981 Mr. Skip McCombs McCombs - Knutsen and Associates~. Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55441 Sir: As discussed at out meeting in Mound on Thursday, October 15, 1981, Hennepin County will provide the manpower and bituminous material for repairing the manhole/catch basin and gate valve after Mound city crews have adjusted these structures at the intersection of Grandview Lane and County Road 15. Hennepin County will also provide the same service when the catch basin in the northwest quadrant of Southview Lane is reset. The County does not accept any direct responsibility for these modifications. However, since Grandview Lane is the posted detour for the CSAH llO recon- struction and we have resources available for this type of assistance, we deem this cooperative action to be appropriate. If there are further questions please call and please give us two days notice for when these activities will occur. Sin rely~ /7/ Davi~ Entrance Permit Coordinator Traffic Engi neeri ng DKZ:de cc: John Elam, City Manager, Mound Dave Feltl, Hennepin County HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer Cra~ A. Mayer 3~4~ Glads%one Lane Mound, ~ 55364 Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound Mn 55364 Dear Jon, Thank you very much for your prompt action both in regards to my $600.00 refund and estimates for redoing Gladstone .Lane. The $600.00 was a surprise and I'm thrilled to have received it. Speaking for the residents on Gladstone Lane, we have decided that the additional cost of redoing the street would not be a wise investment. Therefore, please.forget the "remodeling" plan. However, you may proceed with completing the additional items that we had discussed earlier such as matching Smith's driveway, sodding, rocking, extending road to end of Mayer's retaining wall, and adding rock at out face pipe for water flowage, etc. Jon, again I wan~ to thank you very much for your effort, cooperation, and efficiency. Your job is one of a thankless nature. I want to go on record as personally thanking you very much for all you've done. It's an enjoyment working with efficient govern- ment people who show concern for the community. It was nice to meet you and hope to see you again. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT AGENDA' Regular Meeting, 8 p.m., Wednesday, October 28, 1981 TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL 4901Manitou Road (County Road 19), Tonka Bay Call 'to Order Roll Call Minutes: September 23, 1981 Treasurer's Report A. Monthly Financial Report B. Bills Wayzata Wetlands Review: Dick Hanson, Gray FWBI; Dave Bangasser, City of Wayzata CSAH 125 Bridge Plans: A1 Herzog, Hennepin County~ Installation of Officers Committee Reports A. WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COmmITTEE (1) Committee Report (a) Rockvam Request (b) 1981 Status Report (c) Boat Storage Density Area Use Permits (d) 1981-82 Deicing Permits (e) Co. 125 Bridge Reconstruction (f) Environment (2) Action Items (a) Resolution #38 - License Moratorium (b) Deicing Permits (3) Other LAKE USE COMMITTEE (1) Committee Report (a) Aeronautics Rules Review (b) Water Patrol Report (c) Grays Bay Signing (d) White Bear Lake Cons. Dist. Liquor Ordinance (2) Other Other Business A. Utecht Variance Order B. Resolution #39: Bank Redesignation C. Other 10. Adjournment 10-23-81 lo'-/7 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEETING · ' TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL geptem~er 23, 1981 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was called to order by Chairman Paurus at 8:22 p.m. on Wednesday, September 23, 1981 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall. CALL TO ORDER Members present: Richard Garwood (Deephaven), Robert Brown (Greenwood), Robert Pillsbury (Minnetonka), Norman Paurus (Orono), Robert Rascop (Shore- wood), Frank Hunt (Spring Park), Richard Soderberg (Victoria), and Robert MacNamara (Wayzata). Communities represented: Eight (8). ATTENDANCE Pillsbury Moved, Soderberg Seconded that the minutes of the August 26, 1981 meeting be approved. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). MINUTES Hunt Moved, Brown Seconded that the Treasurer's report be approved and the bills paid. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). TREASURER'S REPORT WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: Brown reported that the committee reviewed the public hearing report of the Utecht variance matter and made recommendations. The status of the 1981 dock license applications and various violation matters were reviewed also; the committee reviewed forms to be used for 1982 dock license applications and for deicing permits, and determined that information regarding details of gas storage facilities should be requested on dock site plans; and future public hearings were dis- cussed - reconfiguration of one section of Grays Bay Resort dockage was DOCK determined by the committee to be a minor change (since (1) it is not a sig- COMMITTEE nificant change, (2) it reduces the number of WAUs and number of boats, and REPORT (3) it increases the safety factor by the ramp) and therefore could be handled by amendment. The committee also reviewed discussions concerning the handling of future commercial multiple dock license applications by implementing a boat storage density use permit process; the committee determined to discuss the matter further based upon a lakewide requirement of one boat per 50 feet of shoreline, and that any commercial application of density greater than one boat per 50 feet would require a Density Use Permit; such a permit for denser DENSITY boat storage would need to be justified (1) on enhanced public use of the USE PERMIT Lake, and (2) on a policy based on the District acquiring benefits for the Lake to offset the increased density. The committee also reviewed for later consideration its dredging policy, vandalism at the dam, the Woodland sewer system, and the dump resolution now before the Board. An update of the Causeway improvement matter was submitted to the Board in the form of a letter from the City of Minnetonka, advising the LMCD that the proposed shuttle service was not deemed viable by the Park District. CAUSEWAY MacNamara Moved, Garwood Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes, (8), Nays (0). Hunt Moved, Paurus Seconded that the Utecht variance application be approved with the following stipulations: 1. the storage of one boat is permitted; LMCD Board Minutes September 23, 1981 Page 2 2. one straight dock is allowed along the east lot line and within the 10 foot easement area, not to exceed 3 feet in width; 3. the dock may extend into the Lake up to a distance of 47 feet or to reach a water depth of 3 feet, whichever is less; 4. no deck is permitted; 5. no lift is permitted; 6. no encroachment is permitted into the McKeand swimming area east of the lot line or into the Association's swimming area as marked; and 7. that an accurate site plan locating the dock and watercraft availability unit be submitted. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). Pillsbury Moved, Rascop Seconded that the 1981 dock license amendment for Grays Bay Resort be approved. Motion, Ayes (7), Nays (1), Hunt voting Nay. Brown Moved, MacNamara Seconded that the Kreslins dock license application be removed from the table and that a temporary license for five boats for 1981 only be approved subject to resolution of the zoning matter with the City of Greenwood. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). The City of Woodland is to be contacted relative to LMCD review of the sewer systems around the Lake and a statement regarding Woodland's latest plans for sewering. LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the committee recommended for approval the Wayzata Chamber of Commerce Special Event Permit application for an Antique and Classic Boat Parade during James J. Hill Days, with stipu- lations modified from last year's race permit. The Power Squadron is continuing its charting project but still needs assistance in locating hazards to navigation - please advise them of any hazards with which you may be familiar. This year's Lake Use Study was done by the Remote Sensing Laboratory (U of M, College of Forestry); the aerial data for 1981 indicates 1,913 boats in use on the Lake at the time of the study (approximately 3 p.m. on Saturday, August 15), which is substantially higher than any previous count; an additional benefit of the aerial study is a map locating moored boats and swimming rafts on the Lake, of value to the Water Patrol's permit program; and the lab Director, Dr. Thomas Lillesand, has offered to give a briefing at the October Board meeting on the photo count (and on other Lake photography). The committee reviewed current seaplane regulations in effect on Lake Minnetonka and determined to invite a representative of the aeronautics division to discuss at its next meeting the status of current seaplane regulations and their impact on the Lake; a review of state and FAA UTECHT VARIANCE GRAYS BAY RESORT DOCK LICENSE KRESLINS DOCK LICENSE WOODLAND SEWER LAKE USE COMMITTEE REPORT LMCD Board Minutes September 23, 1981 Page 3 aviation rules affecting parasailing indicates there are no state rules on the subject but that FAA requires 24 hour notice to fly higher than 150 feet. The Water Patrol presented its June 30 activity report; the Patrol also presented its accident activity chart, updated to include 1981 data with its 1979 and 1980 data; the chart continues to show that most activity is around the circle route and in the restaurant areas, but with virtually no activity reported around the Quiet Waters areas which are being actively enforced; the committee determined to continue its efforts to find a solution prior to the 1982 season of the Grays Bay Quiet Waters signing problem. REPORT Rascop Moved, MacNamara Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). MacNamara Moved, Garwood Seconded that the Wayzata Chamber of Commerce Special Event Permit application for an Antique and Classic Boat Parade during James J. Hill Days at 3 p.m. Saturday, September 27 be approved subject to the following stipulations: 1. that the boats stay 50 feet from shore; 2. that the markers be placed and removed the same day; 3. that the event be conducted under the supervision of the Water Patrol, in agreement with LMCD Code; and ANTIQUE BOAT PARADE SP. EVENT PERMIT 4. that speeds be limited to less than 10 mph. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). The Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol was complimented on its 1981 second quarter activity report. MacNamara Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that Dr. Lillesand be invited to the next LMCD Board meeting to brief the Board on the 1981 Lake Use Study and on related matters of interest to the Board. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). LAKE USE BOAT COUNT PROCEDURE OTHER BUSINESS: Paurus, after announcing his impending resignation from the NOMINATING LMCD, reported that the Nominating Committee (Pillsbury, Chairman and Paurus COMMITTEE and Brown) recommends the following slate for the 1981-82 LMCD Board officers: REPORT Chairman, Robert Brown; Vice Chairman, Frank Hunt; Secretary, Robert Rascop; and Treasurer, Ed Bauman. Pillsbury Moved, MacNamara Seconded that the nominations be closed and that the slate of officers as recommended by the Nominating Committee be elected for the 1981-82 District term. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). OFFICERS ELECTION Pillsbury Moved, Brown ~at the salary of the Executive Director be increased for 1982 ~,580~ Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). MacNamara Moved, Rascop Seconded that the salary of the Secretary/Clerk be increased for 1982 to $6.35/hr. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). SALARIES 1o30 LMCD Board Minutes September 23, 1981 Page 4 Garwood Moved, MacNamara Seconded that Resolution #37 regarding disposal sites in the Lake Minnetonka drainage area be adopted and distributed to LMCD member municipalities, the County board, the MCWD, and the Waste Control Commission. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). Paurus Moved, Soderberg Seconded to contribute $1,500 from Save the Lake funds to Minnetrista for a study on the environmental impact of proposed landfill sites on the Lake. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). The "Blue Water" project, a joint proposal with the Watershed District to (1) assemble and monitor water quality information in a data bank, and (2) identify measures that are required to improve surface runoff, be deferred for development of additional information. The filling of two acres of wetlands in Wayzata as approved by the Wayzata Council was discussed; it was noted that in 1972 Dr. Wood, then Director of the FWBI, recommended no filling; however, present Director Hanson has recommended approval of the filling, drainage from which goes directly in the Lake. Paurus Moved, Pillsbury Seconded, that Wayzata be requested to make a presentation to the LMCD Board to ascertain why the filling of the two acres in question is not detrimental to the Lake at this time. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). The sale of discount books to support the Save the Lake fund was not approved. Campaign Chairman Pillsbury was complimented on his efforts and the results of the current Save the Lake Sticker Campaign which has now reached SI/acre. ADJOURNMENT: Pillsbury Moved, MacNamara Seconded at 10:20 p.m. that the meeting be adjourned. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0). RES. ft37 DUMP SITES DUM~ SITE STUDY "BLUE WATER" PROJECT WAYZATA WETLANDS ADJOUR2YED Submitted by: Jerry Johnson, Secretary Approved by: Norman W. Paurus, Chairman lo,F,/ KAY MITCHELL PHONE CLERK TO THE BOARD 348-5433 BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 October 20, 1981 Mr. Jon Elam, Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: Your letter dated October 19th, 1981 and resolution regarding disposal of sewage, sludge, hazardous or other solid waste in landfills in the Lake Minnetonka Drainage Area, were received by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners at their meeting today. The contents were noted, and Chairman Derus directed that a copy be made available to each Commissioner and Administration, and the original placed on file. Sincerely, c~Yer~ki~h~el Board jc October 30, 1981 TO: FROM: City Council Jon Elam, City Manager We need a resolution to add Acting Treasurer title to Judy Fisher in order to be uniform to City Code 5A.O5. (Positions of City Clerk and Treasurer are combined) (See Curt's letter, last paragraph.) JE:fc A.THoMAs WURST GERALD T. CARROLL THONIAS F. UNDERWOOD LAW OFFICES WIJRST, CARROLL & PEARSO~I. ~too FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540;~ October 29, 1981 TELEPHONE (612} 338-8~11 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Council Meeting October 27, 1981 Dear Jon: This will confirm our telephone conversation of October 28, 1981. It is my understanding that there were four members of the council present and that a motion was made to approve an action of the City. The motion was duly seconded and at the time of the vote two members voted in favor, one voted in opposition and one abstained. It is my further understanding that the chair ruled that the motion carried, but that a question was raised by either you or some other member as to whether that was correct. You have asked me to advise you concerning this matter. It is my opinion that the motion prevailed as announced by the chair. The reasons are as follows: There are no statutory provisions regulating voting by city councils and the council may use whatever procedure it prefers. It has been by tradition, if not for any other reason, that the Mound City Council follows Robert's Rules of Order. I have checked our ordinance book and find nothing concerning council procedures or bylaws. I have checked the statutes and find in Section 412.191, Subd. 2 that "The council shall have the power to regulate its own pro- cedures.'' e Robert~ Rules of Order Revised speaks directly to this question on page 191 - Voting ~ Section 46, which reads as follows: "When a quorum is present, a majority vote, that is a majority of the votes cast, ignoring blanks, is sufficient for the adoption of any motion that is in order, except those mentioned in Section 48 which require a 2/3rds vote." Mr. Jon ElAm Page 2 October 29, 1981 ~/VURST, CARROLL & PEARSON It is the responsibility of the chair to announce whether the motion carried or lost and you advised me that the chair ruled that it carried. He was correct. You further indicated that one member did not vote because the question affected his employer, not in a pecuniary sense, but rather that it affected a program of his employer. Robert's Rules again indicates that it is a general rule that no one can vote on a question in which he has a direct personal or pecuniary interest. On the other hand, we must realize that each council member votes on many things which affect themselves, including taxes, salaries for council members, establishing meetings, etc. Robert~ Rules point out that if a member could not vote on a question affecting himself, it would be impossible for the council to vote to hold a meeting or to establish their salaries, or to prevent one or two members from expelling or suspending all the other members. I thought I should point this out so that all members would understand that they are not legally prohibited from voting in those kinds of situations. e In Section 48 regarding "More than a Majority Vote", page 202 of Robert's Rules reads as follows: "Majority Vote. Any legitimate motion not included among those mentioned below as requiring more than a majority vote, requires for its adoption only a majority; that is, more than half of the votes cast, ignoring blanks, at a legal meeting where a quorum is present, unless a larger vote for its adoption is required by the rules of the assembly." Jon, I hope this answers the question and will be helpful to the council. I have one other item which came up as I was reviewing the ordinance and I suggest you review 5A.05 of the city code relating to the position of clerk-treasurer. I am not sure, but I believe that our current arrangement may be in conflict with that ordinance. CAP:ms Very. truly yours, l,~ ?, ~rtis A. Pearson City Attorney STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Priscilla Smith Anderson, and Charles P. Smith, Petitioners, V. The City of Mound, Minnesota, Respondent. SUMMONS THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED RESPONDENT: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Petitioners' Attorney an answer to the Complaint and Petition for Writ of Mandamus which is herewith served upon you within 20 days after service of this Summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint and Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Dated: October 28, 1981 wi LL IAM~~~ND AS SOC IATES W~l'/i~m F~ ~elly '' - Attorneys for Petitioners 351 Second Street Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 474-5977 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Priscilla Smith Anderson, and Charles P. Smith, Petitioners, v. The City of Mound, Minnesota, Kespondent. COMPLAINT AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO: The District Court of Minnesota for the Fourth Judicial District, Hennepin County, Minnesota: As and for their Petition herein Petitionersstate and allege as follows: COUNT ONE 1. Petitioner, Priscilla Smith Anderson, resides at 5938 Idlewood Roa~, 'Mound, Minnesota 55364. 2. Petitioner, Charles P. Smith, resides at 1541 Jasper Street, Medford, Oregon 97501. ~ 3. At all times material herein Petitioners have been and are the owners of the following described real property in the City of Mound, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota: The West 460 feet of Lot 59, Auditor's Subdivision No. 168; Also: Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 5; and that part of Block 7, lying North of a line parallel with the South line of said Block from a point in the East line thereof, distant 96 feet Northerly from the Southwest corner thereof in Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly. (hereinafter called "Petitioners' property"). 4. A large portion of Petitioners' property encompasses a natural basin. The lowest point thereof rests some ten feet below street level. 5. Petitioners' property supports large stands of estab- lished elm, poplar, oak, maple and tamarack trees as well as naturally occuring brush and grasses. The trees grow through- out the lowland in thick stands, and ring the upper slopes of the property. 6. The depression is not a swamp or marsh. Although subject to natural spring runoff, the property has not been subject in recent years to the presence of continuous stand- ing. water or intermittent flooding. 7. During the summer of 1980, the Respondent caused to have designed and built a storm sewer system of curb and gut- ter, catch basins, and conduit in the area immediately sur- rounding Petitioners' property. Specifically, the streets of Oaklawn Lane, Idlewood Road, and Glenwood Road of the City of Mound were improved to collect surface water and eventually dispose of such into Lake Minnetonka. 8. The aforementioned storm sewer system was designed and, as built, does drain, direct and concentrate surface water generated in the private property and public streets lying westerly of and southerly of Petitioners' property toward and into two catch basins. Specifically, portions of Blocks 1, 5, 10, and 11 of "the Highlands" addition to the City of Mound are drained into two catch basins attached to conduits which empty directly onto the southwest corner of Petitioners' Lot 59, Auditor's Subdivision No. 168, Hennepin County, State of Minne- sota. 9. Respondent has effectively incorporated Petitioners' property into the storm sewer system of the City of Mound. 10. Respondent has taken Petitioners' property without compensation for p6blic purpose~. Specifically, the storm sewer system as built utilizes the Petitioners' property as a link and substitution for municipally laid storm sewer pipe. 11. In addition to its employment as a conduit, Petitioners' property, by said incorporation, acts as a depository and serves as a (1) settling pond, (2) filter, (3) percolating drain, (4) overflow control, (5) rate control, and (6) a sump for the storm water runoff of Respondent City of Mound. 12. Respondent did trespass and construct directly upon Petitioners' property a storm sewer outlet pipe in the north- east corner of Lot 59, Auditor's Subdivision No. 168, Fennepin County, State of Minnesota. 13. The outlet pipe encroaches approximately 60 feet onto the Petitioners' property arid provides for the draining off of. excess waters deposited upon Petitioners' property via the conduits described in paragraph 8 above. -2- 14. The outlet pipe is placed at a point approximately two feet above the low point of. the Petitioners' property. The outlet pipe will only remove waters desposited by the system which raise the level of the standing water to a height in excess of the set level of flooding as determined by the · elevation of the outlet pipe. 15. By design Respondent has thereby intentionally imposed an artificial water level on Petitioners' property and have assured permanent ponding and standing waters throughout the basin. 16. No drainage easement, license or other consent has been obtained by Respondent from Petitioners for the purposes and uses of Petitioners' property above described. 17. NO storm sewer easement, license or other consent has been obtained by Respondent from Petitioners for the purposes and uses of Petitioners' property above described. 18. No ponding or sumpeasement, license or other consent has been obtained by Respondent from Petitioners for the purposes and uses of Petitioners' property above described. 19. No construction easement nor permanent easement, license or other consent was obtained by Respondent from Petitioners for construction and emplacement of the above described outlet pipe. 20. Petitioners and Petitioners' property were intention- ally omitted from any eminent domain proceeding conducted by Respondents for the acquisition of appropriate rights necessary to the storm sewer construction. 21. Construction on and incorporation of Petitioners' property into Respondents' storm sewer system constitutes the taking of private property for the public purpose of control and disposal of surface waters. ~ 22. Respondent is enjoined by Article 1, §13 of the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States, that private property shall not be taken, destroyed or damaged for public use without just compensation there- fore, first paid or secured. 23. Petitioners are the parties beneficially interested in the issuance of a writ of mandamus herein and have no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy against Respondents in the ordi- nary course of law. -3- COUNT TWO 24. Petitioners incorporate herein by reference the allega- tions contained in Paragraphs 1 through 22 of Count One. 25. The surface waters cellected and deposited upon Peti- tioners' property by Respondents' storm sewer system carry ~ollutants in the form of particulate, suspended solids and other debris, as well as solutions of'salts, acids, hydrocar- bon compounds, nitrates, phosphates and other nutrients. 26. Respondent makes no attempt to filter the waters wrongfully cast upon Petitioners' property. Respondents' sewer system effectively by-passes all natural filtering systems. 27. Specifically, the natural environment within Peti- tioners' property will suffer immediate destruction of the established stands of elm, poplar, Oak, maple, tamaYack and other woods through saturation of their root systems and sub- sequent rotting thereof precipitated by Respondents'flooding. The basin's soil will be permeated by salts and other chemicals hostile to plant and wildlife. Deposits of silt, sands, and gravel will kill grasses and vegetation in the bottom of the basin. Alteration of the plant life will change permanently the character of wildlife inhabitants through destruction of the present habitat. 28. The above-described effects of Respondents' storm sewer have and will continue to cause and constitute permanent damage to the ae.~thetic value of Petitoners' property. 29. Respondent has and do continue to injure and destroy Petitioners' personal property consisting of the above-described woods, timber, shrubs and grasses without lawful authority by trespass to Petitioners's property. 30. The taking and incorporation by Respondent of the low land has caused consequential damages to the extent of depriving Petitioners the reasonable use and enjoyment of their property. Permanent use of the basin as a pon~ing area and drain will deny any and all reasonable future development thereof by the Petitioners. 31. The Respondents' construction and inTorporation of Petitioners' property constitutes the breaking of Petitioners' close. 32. Respondent knowingly, willfully and in open disre- gard of Petitioners' assertion of right, did cause to have built a storm sewer that physically encroaches and deposits extraneous surface waters upon Petitioners' property. -4- /o. 0 33. Respondents' storm sewer system is the direct cause of damages to Petitioners' property in the form described above. 34. Respondent has committed a trespass against Peti- tioners' property. WHEREFORE, Petitioners pray this Court for the following relief: 1. As to Count One: (a) For a writ of mandamus compelling Respondent to immediately initiate eminent domain pro- ceedings for the acquisition of a drainage easement, sump easement and storm sewer pipe easement. (b) For just compensation for the taking of PetS- tioners' property herein described. 2. As to Count Two: (a) For treble compensatory damages in the amount of three times $50,000.00, or the fair market value of Petitioners' property, without the storm sewer encumbrances herein described, whichever sum is greater, as provided for in Minn. St. ~548.05.and ~561.04. 3. For Petitioners costs, disbursements and reasonable attorneys' fees as to both counts. WILLIAM F. KELLY & ASSOCIATES William F Kelly Attorneys for Petitioners 351 Second Street Excelsior, MN 55331 474-5977 Dated: October 28, 1981 -5- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Priscilla Smith Anderson, and Charles P. Smith, Petitioners, The City of Mound, Minnesota, PETITIONERS' INTERROGATORIES TO RESPONDENT Respondent. TO: The City of Mound, Minnesota and to Wurst, Carroll and Pearson, 1512 First Bank Place West, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, its attorneys. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE That you are requested and required to furnish answers to the following interrogatories to Peti- tioners' attorney within thirty (30) days from the date of service hereof pursuant to Rule 33 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure. The following described property is the area to which the following Interrogatories refer: Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 and 11 of the Highlands Addition to the city of Mdund; Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of "Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly"; and Lots 51, 56, 57, 58, 59, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, and 82, Auditor's Subdivision No. 168 all within the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Hereafter referred to as the "area in question".) 1. Do you have access to or knowledge of any topographic maps made, surveyors topographic notes taken, or other similar engineering record of the area in question made by the City of Mound, City Engineer, City Surveyor, or by any other agents or contractors of the City of Mound, Minnesota, 1970 to date? 2. If yes to 1, give an abstract, location, and custodian of each item. 3. Do you have, have access to, or have knowledge of any drainage maps made, or projections considered and/or relied on for the area in question by the City of Mound, City Engineer, City Surveyor, or by any other agents or contrac- tors of the City of Mound, Minnesota, 1970 to date? 4. If yes to 3, give an abstract, location and custodian of each item. 5. Do you have, have access to, or have knowledge of, descrip- tions and/or diagrams of storm sewer or drainage prgjects made contemporaneously with the construction of such pro- jects during the period 1960 to date, for the area in question? 6. If yes to 5, give an abstract, location and custodian of each item. 7. Do you have, have access to, or have knowledge of, estimate(s) of annual precipitation relied upo, by any of the following parties: City of Mound, Minnesota; City Engineer for the City of Mound, Minnesota; or the agents of those parties, for construction involving or effecting the area in question, 1975 to date? 8. If yes to 7, give estimate(s) relied upon (inches per year), source of the estimate, by whom the estimate was utilized and the project with which it was associated. 9. Provide the following estimates relied on during the planning of 1980 storm sewer construction as built for the area in question: a. Capacity in'gallons per minute of the conduit/catch basin systems installed in Lot 32 and Lot 26/27 of Block 1, the Highlands Addition to the City of Mound, Minnesota, b. Capacity in gallons per minute of the Glenwood Road conduit's western extremity, -2- C. Capacity in gallons per minute of the Glenwood Road conduit's eastern extremity at the point of final discharge into Lake Minnetonka. d. Capacity in gallons per minute of each catch basin on Glenwood Road; Fairfield Road; and Highland Boulevard. 10. Provide the original estimates, and as built percent con- tributions of each catch basin or intake pipe to the final discharge volume into Lake Minnetonka. 11. Provide the exact location of the western extremity of the Glenwood Road conduit by legal description and physical map thereof. 12. Provide the elevation: a. The western extremity of the Glenwood Road conduit; top of pipe and bottom of pipe (water level). b. The eastern extremity of the Oaklawn Lane catch basin/ conduit, Lot 32, .Block 1, The Highlands; top of pipe and bottom of pipe (water level). c. The northern extremity of the Idlewood Road catch basin/ conduit, Lot 26/27, Block 1, The Highlands; top of pipe and bottom of pipe (water level). 13. Provide the known or'estimated low point relied upon by the City of Mound, Minnesota; the City Engineer for the City of Mound, Minnesota, of Lot 59, Auditor's Subdivision No. 168, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 14. DO you have, have access to, or have knowledge of any physi- cal descriptions or analyses made by yourself, the City of Mound, Minnesota; the City Engineer for the City of Mound, Minnesota; the surveyor for the City of Mound, Minnesota,' or other agents or contractors of the City of Mound, Minne- sota, of Lot 59, Auditor's Subdivision No. 168, Hennepin County, Minnesota during the period 1970 to date? 15. If yes to 14, give an abstract of each item, its location and the custodian thereof. 16. a. State the date'and forum where the drafts and final proposal for the 1980 storm sewer construction was presented and by whom it was presented on each occasion. b. Give the names and addresses of all City Council members present at the presentation of the draft and final pro- posals. Give the results of any vote taken thereon. c. Give the final votes on the draft proposal and final proposal. -3- l?. In presenting the proposal for the construction of the storm sewer within the area in question to the City Counci! of the City of Mound, Minnesota, was the council informed as to what private lands would be impacted? 18. a. If yes to 17, what private lands within the area in question were suggested as pctentially impacted by proposad construction? b. Who ma~e the suggestions? 19. Did the City of Mound consider alternative storm sewer systems to the one finally accepted for the 1980 project within the area in question? 20. If yes to 19, give an abstract.of each alternative proposal, by whom it was presented, date and forum of presentgtion, and location and custodian of each alternative proposal. 21. What changes if any were made between the draft and final proposal as accepted which directly affected the area in question? 22. Do you have, have access to, or have knowledge of any memorandum or minutes of any City Council meetings that discussed the 1980 storm sewer construction within the area in question? a. If yes, give an abstract of each item, its location and the custodian thereof. 23. Are you aware of any eminent domain proceeding(s) brought by the City of Mound, Minnesota in conjunction with the 1980 storm sewer construction within the City of Mound? a. If yes, give the date, location and scope of each known proceeding. 24. State the names and addresses of all persons whose property was proposed to be taken, or whose property was actually condemned, or from whom an easement was taken by the City of Mound, Minnesota in conjunction with the 1980 storm sewer project within the area in question. 25. Do you know or have reason to believe that any portion of the storm sewer system within the area in question was not built in accordance with the final approved plans? -4- 26. Upon presentation of the storm sewer proposal was the City Council informed of the mechanics of its operation? 27. Did the council members have an opportunity to ask questions on the system*s operation? October 28, 1981. WILLI~~ AND ASSOCIATES Excelsior, MN 55331 (612) 474-5977 Attorneys for Petitioners -5- DISTriCT COURT COUNTY OF flENI{EPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE NO. Clinton H. Voorhees ) and Cindy Voorhees, ) ) Plaintiffs,) ) VS. ) ) Ronald S. Gehring and ) l~rlene J. Gehring, ) ) Defendants and ) Third-Party Plaintiffs,) ) VSo ) ) City of Mound and ) Catherine E. Hiller, as heir ) and personal representative of) the Estate of John K. Hiller, ) aka Thomas C. Carson, aka ) Gilbert Dudley Kline, Jr., ) ) Third-Party Defendants.) SUI~YONS STATE OF MI~{ESOTA TO THE ABOVE NAMED THIRD-PARTY DEFENDAntS: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Mr. Jeffrey R. Schmidt, plaintiffs' attorney, whose address is 4200 IDS Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, M~ 55402, and upon Paul L. Pond, Attorney for Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, and whose address is 5424 Shoreline Blvd., Mound, MN 55364, an Answer to the Third-Party Complaint which is herewith served upon you within twenty (20) days after the service of this S,,mmons upon you exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the Third-Party Complaint. There is also served upon you herewith a copy of the Complaint of the plaintiffs which you may Answer. REED & POND Attorney-ior 'Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs 5424 Shoreline Blvd. P.O. Box 157 Mound, P~ 55364 (612) 472-2222 STATE OF ~INNESOTA COU~TY OF DISTRICT COURT FOUR/~! JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE NO. Clinton II. Voorhees and Cindy Voorhees, Plaintiffs, VS o P~nald S. Gehring and ~arlene J. Gehring, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, City of Mound and Catherine E. Hiller,, as heir and personal representative of) the Estate of John K. Hiller, aka ~fhomas C. Carson, aka Gilbert Dudley Kline, Jr., ~ird-Par ty Defendants. COI[PLAI[~r Third-Party Plaintiffs Ronald S. Gehrtng and Marlene J. Gehrtng, for their Complaint against the Third-Party Defendants above named, state and allege as follows: I That plaintiffs Clinton II. Voorhees and Cindy Voorhees have served upon defendants Ronald S. Gehrtng and [~rlene J. Gehring, a Complaint, a copy of which is hereto attached as Exhibit A. II ?nat 11~ird-Party Plaintiffs have denied liability to the plaintiff, all as more fully set forth in their Answer which has been attached hereto as Exhibit B. III That paragraph 4, Count I, of Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges, "Subsequent to plaintiff's purchase of said properties, the owners of property adjoining that conveyed herein -1- brought an action against plaintiffs under which said property owners made a claim to title to a permanent easement in their favor running across the said conveyed properties, which title is claimed to be paramount to that conveyed to plaintiffs by defendants herein. Subsequent thereto the City of Mound made a claim to a permanent easement over said conveyed properties pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 160.05. Said claimants allege that their claims to title are superior and paramount to those of plaintiffs herein." IV That Third-Party Plaintiffs deny they have been put on notice that Third-Party Defendants or any one else is asserting a lawful claim to the whole or any part of the property alleged in plaintiffs' Complaint. 'V That Third-Party Defendants have no lawful claim to the whole or any part of the property alleged in plaintiffs' Complaint. WHEREFORE, Third-Fatty Plaintiffs pray for Judgment as follows: 1. That Third-Party Defendants have no lawful claim to the whole or any part of the property legally described as follows to-wit: Lots 21, 22, 23, and 24, Block 14, Whipple Addition, in the City of f~und, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. That in the event Third-Party Defendants assert a lawful claim to the whole or any part of the above described property, then in that event, Third-Party Plaintiffs pray that they be given Judgment of indemnity and/or contribution in full against Third-Party Defendants for the full amount recovered by plaintiffs against Third-Party Plaintiffs together with costs and disbursements, including reasonable attorneys fees incurred herein, and interest. For such other and further relief as the Court deems Just and equitable. Ateorn~y for Th~.rd-?arty 5624 Shoreline Blvd. P.O. Box 157 ~ound, ~I~ 55364 (612) 472-2222 -3- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Clinton H. Voorhees ) and Cindy Voorhees, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) Ronald S. Gehring and ) Marlene J. Gehring, ) ) Defendants. ) EXHIBIT A DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, for their complaint against defendants state and allege as follows: COUNT I 1. By Warranty Deed dated July 17, 1980, defendants granted, conveyed, and sold to plaintiffs for the sum of $10,500 the following legally described property located in the City of Mound, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesotaz Lots 21, 22, 23, and 24, Block 14, Whipple Addition. A copy of said Warranty Deed is hereto attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. 2. Said deed warranted and convenanted to plaintiffs that defendants were then and there seized as the fee owners of said properties, that said properties were free and clear from all encumbrances, subject only to.restrictions, reservations, and easements of record, if any, that plaintiffs would enjoy the quiet and peaceful possession of the same, and furthe~ convenanted to defend plaintiffs against any and all persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part of said properties. 3. Plaintiffs duly paid defendants the sum of $10,500 for said properties and obtained the possession thereof. 4. Subsequent to plaintiff's pu.rchaae of said properties, the owners of property adjoining that conveyed herein brought an action against plaintiffs under which said property owners made a claim to title to a permanent easement in their favor running across the said conveyed properties, which title is claimed to be paramount to that conveyed to plaintiffs by defendants herein. Subsequent thereto the City of Mound made a claim to a permanent easement over said conveyed properties pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes §160.05. Said claimants allege that their claims to title are superior and paramount to those of plaintiffs herein. 5. The existence of said claims to title hereinabove referred to adverse to the plaintiffs' have restricted and prohibited plaintiff's full use, enjoyment, and possession of said properties. 6. The existence and prosecution of those adverse claims to plaintiff's title act as a breach of the various convenants and warranties made by defendants to plaintiffs in the deed hereto attached. By reason of the foregoing, defendants have caused plaintiff's damage in the sum of at least $19,365, and will continue to cause damages to plaintiffs in the future in an amount not presently determinable. COUNT II 7. Plaintiffs reallege each and every allegation, matter and thing contained in Count I, paragraphs one through six hereof as though fully set forth herein. 8. Prior to the consummation of the purchase of the properties conveyed by defendants to plaintiffs herein, defendants represented to plaintiffs that title to a driveway located across the said conveyed properties was not claimed by any other persons 2 by easement or otherwise, and further represented that said driveway was not an encumbrance against.~he full and complete title in which defendants were then siezed. 9. The aforestated representations of defendants wer~ false, and were then known or should have been known by defendants to be false, and were made by defendants to plaintiffs fraud- ulently, maliciously, wrongfully, unlawfully, and negligently with the intent to induce plaintiffs to rely thereon to their detriment. 10. Plaintiffs relied on said misrepresentations herein- above referred to and were thereby induced to purchase the said properties from defendants for the.sum of $10,500. Following consummation of the purchase, plaintiffs discovered said misrepresentations .~o have been false and fraudulent. Said wrongful and unlawful acts have caused plaintiffs damages in the sum of at least $19,365. ll. Said misrepresentations were made by defendants maliciously, intentionally, and in utter disregard of plaintiff's rights herein so as to subject defendants to both punitive damages, and a bad faith award pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §§559.20 aS 559.21, including payment of reasonable attorneys fees. WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray for Judgment against defendants in the sum of $19,365 plus any further damages caused to plaintiffs through the time of' trial, for punitive damages in the amount of $25,000, for a bad faith award for all costs, expenses, witness fees and attorneys fees expended herein, interest, costs, and disbursements, and for such and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Dated: LINDQUIST & VENNUM .~a/~ffrey ~ Schmidt Jeffrey R. Schmidt 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 371-32211 Attorneys for Plaintiffs · ' ~lli~ ]]nbenturr, · bcltt,,'en · ,l¢tde this . d.!t oI' ........ ly ..................... [{onald .5, (;ch::m.I ami Hurlcnu J~"i'l~c"i~r'imj, Ilu:;I,aml and ~/ife ............. o/the CounOio/ Hennepin ,tad et,~te o! .... I'lin~eaol:e .......................... , rer~ les. 0/tl, e/lest pa~t, emi ClinLon H. 'VOorheeu and C/ndy KoaL,.uingle persia ...... Hc~mpin nmi State o/ .~nnuaota ........ , ~rtle$ 0t f~e ~ad ~, ~itnt~r~. That the s. ld Imrt /es o/ the flr, t ~rf. in connideraflon Of t~ $u~ Of One and . no/lOOtha ($1.00) and other ~ood and Valuable cmalOerati~ t,, them in }land/mid 1,~l the ~,dd Intrtien ,~f the ~erontl ~trf, lite receipt whemo/ Il kerbg ael,'natel. eel~,'d, tin herch~l Orant, It,:r~,tin, Sell, an~ Conre~ .nt~ tcn,~.t.~ and not .,~ Ic.antk i,t co.t..,n. Iht'ir a*.~i~nn, t~ ~itrriror of n.,bl ~rt~s. and the ~ir$ anal nsd~ns of the t.n'iror, Fo,'erer, all the tract . or ~,'cet o ....... Hennepin .~d ,~t,:te of .t[inne~ta, ~letq~d at [ollotv*. to. toil: Lotu 21, 22, 23 and 2~, Block 1~; i~dpple Addition. Subject to restrictions, re~rvationa and easements or recordt Ir any. 51AIE I)£[D ]AX DUE H£I{EON $ 2~.10 1~o J/I,'.bc RUb lo ~olb I[le ~RIII~. To~.'ther with till the hert'(lit(t.~cn~s n.d upl)grtcnan~ tt~,lo b, lt,t%~it,~ or itt ,ttt~ltt'i~c ,tl,la'rttti~tin~', to the said tn.'tic~ .[ lite ~ccontt part, their ~si~n$, ri~',,r ,,/' .~,,id l,,~rllcs, ,tt, d tlc hrirs ,:nd asniLqt.¢ ,,[ the s.:'vit'm', P:t.*ct't'r, the s,dd ~tt'lirs o/lite second .'l,d fhe s, tltl . I{on:dd fi. Cehring ~d Harlene .3.. Dchr~ng, }Iu~b~d ~d ~ife ............ p.~rtjes ~,[ Ibc lirct Init't, [ur themselves( amir .... firit'~', e.vc,'ttt.r.n ,tad t~d.tinistrator$ do cour~t,tnl .itb the caid p. rfics of Ihe $ceon,~ part, their a..~i~ns, thc m~rrlt'or of ~ald ~trtiet, nnd the fielr$ ..,1 a.~;[¢~,., o[ Ih~ s.ruiror, that Lhey are u.cll ,elzed i~t fc~ nf Ihe land, a.d prrm~t,s aforesaid anti l:a VO ~t:.~d right In .e~l ,tttd t',~noc?t thc ~.mc in m,:~m'r n.,l f.,.., ttfn~cs, dd. ~tn~l that fhe tame f,'o' /,'.,. ,,ti ;..:u.,l,r..,','¢. - ........................................... 2 ~,t[,I p, trliCn Of the so'o.d i,,~rt, their assit¢n~, tl~c sttrt'iu,,r o[ said I.trlicx. and the heirs i,tctt~l, ranees, if n.,~/. ~ercinbcfura m,mlh,n,'d, fha ~,d,l l~tt'l ica o/ thc fir.et intr~ Wilt IVn~nt an~ Dc/end. ..O'larlene 3~. ~ehrin~) ..................... ,I EXHIBIT B STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HZI~EPII,! FOUR~! JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE NO. Clinton H. Voorhees ) and Cindy Voorhees, ) ) Plaintiffs,) ) vs. -' ) ~S~R ) P~nald S. Gehring and ) l~rlene J. Gehring, ) ) Defendants.) Defendants for their Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint herein, state and allege a~ follows: I Deny each and every statement and allegation contained in plaintiffs' Complaint except as specifically admitted. II Admit the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 and 3. III '~at plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. IV Allege as affirmative defenses: 1. Uaiver 2. Estoppel 3. Laches 4. Performance by Defendants. V That existence of driveway across property described in plain- tiffs' Complaint was open, visible, and obvious to all parties. Plaintiffs, or their agents, made independent investigation as to status of driveway prior to closing on said property, and did not rely upon warranties in deed attached to plaintiffs' Complaint as Exhibit A. VI That defendants have received no legally sufficient notice of any claim of paramount tigle alleged in paragraph & of plaintiffs' Complaint. VII That there are no facts in plaintiffs' Complaint alleging actual or constructive ev~¢tio~. VIII That the damages prayed for in plaintiffs' Complaint, if any there be, were due solely to the misrepresentations, and negligence of other parties over Which this defendant has no control. ~REFORE, defendants pray as follows: ~at plaintiffs take nothing by their pretended claim for relief and that defendants have Judgment for costs and disbursements incurred herein. For such other and further relief as to the Court is Just and equitable. REED & POND ' -~ -Paul-L. Attorney for Defendants 5424 Shoreline Blvd. P.O. Box 157 Mound, MN 55364 (612) 472-2222 -2- CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWO©[) ROAD MOUND, MINNE$C;T& ¢o-* (612) 472-1155 November 2, 1981 -TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Council Jon Elam, City Manager ~ RESOLUTION TO CANCEL CERTAIN ASSESSMENTS ON LOT 4, BLOCK 14, MOUND TERRACE BEING SOLD TO PALMER KOOSMANN The resolution should be as follows: The Mound City Council agrees to cancel Special Assessment Levy 3180 (1964 Sanitary Sewer) in the amount of $876.00 and Special Assessment Levy 3188 (1965 Sanitary Sewer Lateral) in the amount of $1755.26 on Lot 4, Block 14, Mound Terrace. This is an Unbuildable lot and as a condition of the sale, we agreed not to allow the wetland, which covers the entire lot, to be built upon since we have City storm drainage running into it. The purchaser does agree to pick-up the 1980 Street Improvement Assessment (Levy 8297) in the amount of $4671.97. The lot actual value is $1000.00. Thus to have the purchaser pick-up this assessment will save the City an estimated $8000.00 over the 15 year term of the assessment, if you add in accumulated interest. I think this is a reasonable thing to do, to help get the land back on the tax roles. JE:fc Hammel Green and Abrahamson, Inc. Architects & Engineers 1201 Harmon Place Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Telephone 612/332-3944 29 October 1981 Mr. John Elam City Manager 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Mound Elementary and Sports Center Bus Drop Commission Number 435.048 Dear Mr. Elam: Independent School District #277 has approved only the work for the school bus drop which is identified as Item #1 in the price quote you receivd from C. S. McCrossan dated October 19, 1981. By direction of this letter, Item #2 (sports center sidewalk) and Item #3 (District #277 bituminous overlay) are not part of this project. In addition, the scope of the work for the school bus drop has also been reduced. A revised site plan, drawing C-1R dated 10/28/81, depicts the new scope of work under the contract the City will enter into with C. S. McCrossan, Inc. Mr. Dale Sharbono of C. S. McCrossan, Inc., has reviewed the revised plan and has communicated verbally a revised quote which I have noted on C. S. McCrossan's original quote which you will find enclosed. The City's contract with McCrossan should state that C. S. McCrossan agrees to complete the work as shown on sheet C-1R, dated 10/9/81 and revised 10/28/81. The governing specifications shall be per County Highway llO improvement project. The cost of construction shall be $17,654.51, with final payment subject to a School District representative having verified the quantities stated in C. S. McCrossan's quote. Sincerely, James Husnik, P.E. cc: Donald Brandenburg, IDS #277 Dale Sharbono, C. S. McCrossan JH:la GENERAL CONTRACTOR 425-4167 Box AD · Osseo. Minnesota 55369 October 19, 1981 c/St.,-- c, City Manager City of Mound Dear Sir: We appreciate the opportunity to submit for your approval and acceptance this quote for: 1) School Bus Drop Quantity Unit Price Total 2) 3) Common Excavation 200 CY 4.49 CY Granular Borrow 500 CY 5..46 CY 5" 2331 Base 110 Ton 23.48 Ton 2" 2331 Binder 44 Ton 26.82 Ton 2" 2341 Wear 44 Ton 28.12 Ton 8" PVC 125 LF 12.00 LF Catch Basin 1 CB 1,000.00 CB B612 Curb & Gutte~r~260 LF 8.24 4" Sidewalk CI~:~i:_:~:: SF 1.56 Sod f'-~-~c-% 4~ SY 1.25 Plantings ~-~ LS 720.00 $ 898.00 2,730.00 2,582.80 1,180.08 1,237.28 1,500.00 1,000.00 LS ~ 720.00 Sport Center Co--on Excavation~OJ~~~. Granular Borrow ~.~ ~ ~ ~ {~.99 4" Sidewalk 1 District 277 2%" Bit~inous Overlay 40 SY 256.80 5" Patching I ~{31L~ .- $23,~ If you have questions please call 425-4167. Very.._~ruly yours, Dale Sharbono E s timator DS/ew CC: Jim Husnik Hammer, Green & Abrahamson, Inc. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER A.THOMAS WURST GERALD T. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD ALBERT FAULCONER JAMES D. LARSON LAW OFFICES WURST, CARROLL ~ PEARSON IIOO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 October 30, 1981 TELEPHONE J612~ 338-8911 Mr. William F. Kelly Attorney at Law 351 Second Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Priscilla Smith Anderson and Charles P. Smith vs. City of Mound Dear Frank: Your Summons and Complaint dated October 28, 1981 has been for- warded to me by the City of Mound. Attached to the Summons and Complaint is another document entitled Petitioners' Interrogatories to Respondent. These are addressed to the City and to me as City Attorney. I have informed the City Manager to immediately contact the City's insurance company and to submit the Summons and Complaint for defense by our insurer. I have also directed the City Manager to submit a copy of the interrogatories to the City Engineer so he can start working on the information which you have requested. I am assuming the insurance company will accept coverage and will defend the City, and if so I will essentially be on the sidelines during this controversy, but if for some reason the insurance company does not accept coverage I will then have to step in and answer for the City. There are other properties which may exist and defenses which may be available to the City which would then have to be in- vestigated. The purpose of this letter is to acknowledge receipt of these documents and to ask you to bear with us while the matter is submitted to the insurance company. I am sure that you would not enter a default, but I do want you to know that the insurer may take some time in determining its position. If they do not accept coverage for any reason I would have to ask you for an extension of time to answer. If this creates any kind of a problem for you, would you please give me a call. In the meantime we will get the engineers started on the interrogatories. Very truly yours, C ' : . Pearson CAP:ms cc: Mr. Jon Elam Mr. John Cameron