Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
82-04-06
MOUND CITY COUNCIL April 6, 1982 City Hall - 7:30 P.M. CITY OF MOUND AGENDA Mound, Minnesota o ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Minutes of the March 22, 1982 joint Meeting with Minnetrista March 23, 1982 meeting March 29, 1982 meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS Lost Lake Addition Preliminary Plat Approval - Bartlett Blvd. B. Condition Use Permit - Mr. Tom Watson 5558 Auditor's Road - Lot 2 & W. 45' from rear of Lot 3, Auditor's Subdivision 170 Transient Merchants License Policy Call for Bids for 1982 Street Seal Coating Program Open Bids 10:00 A.M. - April 27, 1982 Approve Bids 8:00 P.M. on April 27, 1982 Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present (please limit to 3 minutes) Request for Cancellation of Street Assessment - James G. Thompson - 4856 Island ~liew Drive Approval of Option Agreement with Steve Posthumus Call for Bids for Used (1974 or older) Vac-All (see attached description and copy of specifications) Open Bids 9:30 A.M. - April 27, 1982 Approve Bids 8:30 P.M. - April 27, 1982 Prepare City of Mound Maps Approval of Minnetonka Bass Club Fishing Contest - June 12, 1982 Lease of City Land for a Garden Palm Reader's License - Renewal Cigarette License Renewal - Martin & Son Boat Rental Appointment of City Representative to Senior Citizen Housing Project - Russ Peterson Resolution Authorizing Wire Transfers Westonka Volunteer Fair - City Booth? Report from Cable T.V. Committee - Work Plan and Budget Request Payment of Bills ' Information/Miscellaneous A. Status of Public Works Building B. Hennepin County Mill Rates for 1982 C. Memorandum of Law - Curt Pearson Anderson & Smith vs. City of Mound Pg. 613-614 615-620 621 Pg. 622-631 Pg. 632-641 Pg. 642-644 Pg. 645-648 Pg. 649-651 Pg. 652-653 Pg. 654-659 Pg. 660-661 Pg. 662-664 Pg. 665-666 Pg. 667-669 Pg. 670 P%. Pg. 671 Pg. 672-673 Pg. 674-691 Pg. 692 Pg. 693-694 Pg. 695-702 Page 612 D. Letter from Tad Jude E. LMCD Packet (Remember we scheduled a joint municipal meeting on LMCD for April 20th. Thus we need to again change our 2nd Council Meeting in April) F. April Calendar G. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Letter on Tonka H. Note from League of Cities - Mound's Loss $17,5OO. I. AMM Bulletin J. Letter from Bill Schreiber (Tax Forfeited Lands Law for Mound recently enacted) K. Letter from William F. Kelley on Wetlands Ordinance Letter from Hennepin County Commissioner Richard E. Kremer M. Downtown Advisory Committee Report Pg. 703 Pg. 704-708 Pg. 709 Pg. 710-711 Pg. 712-713 Pg. 714-716 Pg. 717-719 Pg. 720-723 Pg. 724-729 Pg. 730-734 20. Adjournment Page 612-a JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL'S OF HINNETRISTA AND ~OUND l;a rch 22. 1982 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a special joint meeting of the City Council's of Minnetrista and Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341Maywood Road in the City of Mound on March 22, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. Those present were from Mound: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Counciimembers Pinky Charon, Robert Poiston, Gordon Swenson, City Manager Jon Elam, and City Clerk Fran Clark; from Minnetrlsta: Mayor Gert Olson, Councilmembers Walton Clevenger, Frank deMonchaux, Alan Fasching, W. G. Gregg and Clerk Administrator Charlotte Paterson. Councilmember Donald Ulrick from Mound was absent and excused. Mayor Lindlan opened the meeting, welcomed Minnetrista's representatives and went over the Agenda for the evening. CABLE T.V. The Minnetrista Council asked about Mound pulling out of the Westonka Cable T.V. Committee and not joining the South Shore as Minnetrista did. Mound City Manager, Jon Elam, explained that Mound felt that pulling 15 cities together is a more difficult task than pulling one together and Mound felt they could put a package together faster alone. After a package is put together other cities will be contacted to see if they want to join Mound. Expediency was the cable T.V. question and by the fourth Mound Cable meeting there will be framework for putting the RFP together. Westonka School Dist. #277 has a representative, Harold Pellett, on the Mound Cable Committee so the school district is keeping abreast of all developments. Mr. Pellett is also a resident of Minnetrista. L.M.C.D. Discussion by the two Councils brought up the following points: 1. Seeing if the L.M.C.D. is cost effective. 2. The cities belonging to the L.M.C.D. should have strong input and look to the L.M.C.D. for responsiveness. 3. Amending legislation for specific improvements in the L.M.C.D. a. Basing dues on needs rather than assessed valuation of each city. DEVELOPMENT ALONG MUTUAL CITY BOUNDARIES - WESTEDGE BLVD A policy statement should be developed by both cities on sharing utilities, zoning, etc. and a comparison of comp plans. There should be a joint city approach on the railroad abandonment. Minnetrista and Mound Councils could set up an Ad Hoc Committee to study boundary changes to square up each City. This would have to be done with trade offs on the part of.both cities. IMPROVING COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN BOTH CITIES An annual joint meeting between the Councils of the two cities should be set up. 22, 1982 SPRIN?; CLEA~'I UP CAMPAIGN Mound is setting up a city wide clean up campaign for downtown, parks, streets and neighborhoods and asked if Minnetrista would like to participate in a clean up of their community. Minnetrista replied that they have not budgeted for this and have no developed parks or commons lakeshore. LAKE MINNETONKA BOAT ACCESS Mayor Oison explained the background of the proposed King's Point Access that the DNR would like to construct. Minnetrista would like the DNR to consider alternative sites. Lost Lake came up as an alternative site and the Mound Council would be willing to discuss, study and consider this area as a DNR access. COUNTY ROAD ilO BUILDING The City Manager explained that Mound is currently negotiating for purchase of a building on County Road IlO near the Minnetrista boundary line for cold storage by Mound Public Works. It would be more feasible and less costly to tie intooMinnetrista sewer and water because of geographics. Minnetrista would like the two cities to develop a clear policy on reciprocity for assessments and user charges before committing themselves. Also briefly discussed were the following items: 1. Fire false alarms 2. The widening of County Road 15 3. Mound's fight against Continental Telephone's proposed higher rates. Adjournment came at 10:30 P.M. Fran Clark, City Clerk Jon Elam, City Manager REGUL:q ,~EFT I OF T:r CITY COUI;~,iL March 23, 1982 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the City Council of the £ity of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on March 23, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Robert Pol- ston and Gordon Swenson. Counciimember Donald Ulrick was absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, Assistant City Attorney Jim Larson, Police Chief Bruce Wold, Finance Director Sharon Legg, City Building Inspector Jan Bertrand, City Planner Rob Chelseth, Acting City Clerk Marjorie Stutsman and the following interested persons: Mayor Jan Olson of Minnetrista; Wetlands Com- mittee Phyllis Jessen- Chair, Margaret Hanson, Gary Paulsen and Roy O'Donnell; Steve Codden, Robert B. Hanson, Russ Falness, Harvey Berquist, John Wagman, Mark W. Kelly on behalf of Priscilla Anderson, David Felland, Elmer J. Cartier, Michael Banicki, Paul A. Skjervole, Richard Lee, ~ Wold, Chairman Paul Pond of the DA£, Dorothy Netka and Bill Netka. Commissioner Joe Alexander of tNe DNR, Gary Botzek from the Governor's ~ffice and Minnesota Senator George Pillsbury arrived later in the meeting. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed ~Olson, Mayor of ~innetrista, and all the people in attendance. MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of March 9, 1982 Regular Council Meeting were presented for consideration. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approved the min- utes of the March 9, 1982 Council Meeting as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. WETLANDS ORDINANCE The Mayor reported that the proposed ordinance was what had been worked on and sub- mitted by the ad hoc committee of Chair Phyllis Jessen, Margaret Hanson, Gary Paul- sen and Roy O'Donnell. The City Manager outlined what he perceived the ordinance is trying to do; basically performance zoning; anyone can do anything with the wet- lands they own as long as they meet certain required standards. All wetlands under 2½ acres have been excluded from the provisions of this ordinance; also type 1 and 2 wetlands are not included; confining the ordinance to those areas that are con- tinually wet. The wetlands permits will work similarly to a conditional use permit and go through the Planning Commission and the Council. Specific performance stan- dards cover 1) filling, 2) dredging, 3) sewer discharge, 4) building requirements and 5) vegetation. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The Wetlands Committee reviewed the background of how the work was started and how the map was developed with the very good help from Joel Settles of the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District. The follow- ing persons had questions or comments: 'David Felland, Roy O'Donnell, Paul Skjervole of Bermel Smaby, Bob Hanson and Joan Wold. The Mayor then closed the public hearing. Polston moved and Charon seconded a motion to adopt the ordinance herein quoted by title: ORDINANCE # 429 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE WETLANDS OVERLAY DISTRICT AND OFFICIAL WETLANDS MAP AS SECTION 23.650 OF THE CITY OF MOUND ZONING CODE March 23, 1982 Roll call vote was four in favor. Hotion carried. Councilmember Polston complimented the Wetland Committee on their work. The Mayor advised that anyone stil! concerned or with a question should come in the City Offic and see the City Manager or City Inspector · PUBLIC HEARING ON DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Mayor Lindlan opened the public hearing and asked for any comments or objections from the public on the delinquent utility.bills. Hearing none, the Mayor closed the public hearing. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-75 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,952.53 AND AUTHORIZING THE SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE FOR THOSE ACCOUNTS. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT Paul Pond, Chairman of the DAC, reviewed the progress of the DAC and requested the Council for authorization of funds in the amount of $10,245 to be spent proceeding with the RFP to solicit architects.to.establish a theme~r Downtown and to pursue objectives as outlined in the Action Plans for Revitalization of Downtown Mound. The City Manager explained that the Committee is trying to develop some financial guidelines for the future. The Committee would go ahead with the objectives, develop themeand send out proposal to get bids for architect to develop theme; then committee would make a recommendation on the architect and the Council would enter into a contract. Mayor Lindlan thought three primary objectives were: l) Encourage new business, 2) Develop landscaping and streetscaping especially along County Road llO and 3) Store front renovation with theme. List now up to 5 groups of objectives. Items 2 and 3 need professional help. It was discussed that the request is for up to $4,000 to send out RFP and get architect to develop store front theme and street scaping; the remainder would be for matching loans to carry out the theme; City Planner stated there are also CDBG funds available. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-76 A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST AND ACCEPT THE PLAN EARMARKING $10,245 FOR THE FIVE GROUPS OUTLINED IN THE ACTION PLAN FOR REVITALIZATION OF DOWNTOWN MOUND The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. LAKE ACCESS ON LAKE MINNETONKA - DNR Mayor Lindlan welcomed Joel Alexander, Commissioner of the DNR, and Gary Botzek, Special Assistant to the Governor, and Senator Pillsbury. The Mayor stated that Governor Quie had called him this morning regarding having this item on the agenda. Commissioner Alexander explained that Minnesota Statutes spell out the responsi- bilities of his department to acquire public accesses to bodies of water in the State. As the State does not have a public access on Lake Minnetonka, acquiring ~rch 23, such an access is a top priority on their list. In the last few months, they have made 8n extensive search for an access site. T~ey h~ve ~n opLion on siL¢ in ~inne- trista, bu~ ~here are drawbacks. They ~[sh ~o enter [n~o ~ cooperative ~gree~en~, buying or leasin§, grant an~ ai~ (not necessary to own t~e land) for an access on ~hJs side of ~e l~ke with a local government unit. Mound's site see~s to be the only new ground. City Manager asked the minimum space requirements. Reply was that parking space is critical and screening parking from adjoining land owners; Hinnetrista site had a maximum for 50 cars and trailers. Some of the criteria for selecting a particular site are: I) Depth of water, 2) Availability of controls, 3) Adequate parking, ~) Impact on environment where access is put in, 5) Amount of time required to launch a boat---try to balance all impacts on lakeshore and use of lake conflicts. Mayor Lindlan explained that a marina has been one concept, with a segment designated for boat access and the parking that would go along with it, of going through the Downtown Revitalization process. So far, no planning has been done on a marina. The Commissioner stated that a marina was not inconsistent with their plan. Councilmember Polston questioned if this were designated a protected wetlands area? Councilmember Swenson asked about ownership of area involved. DIOR wants to get into a cooperative agreement. They could drop the Halstead site option if they are getting into a meaningful way to solve getting access to the Lake. The Commissioner not in favor of condemnation for recreational purposes; prefer to enter into purchase agreement with a willing seller. He is here to talk about options and solicit the City's input. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-77 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY STAFF TO WORK WITH THE DNR ON EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITY OF INVENTORYING OF A PUBLIC ACCESS SITE ON LOST LAKE Roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Several residents of Mound, John Wagman, Margaret Hanson and Gary Paulsen spoke against having the proposed public access site on Lost Lake and expressed concern about the impact on wetlands; that there are alternatives area such as Mound Bay Park. Phyllis Jessen asked Staff and DNR to consider it very hard before taking away wet- lands. REPEAL OF SECTION 55.50 City Manager said this was self explanatory and street excavation sections repealed as we have passed the new Underground Ordinance. Charon moved and Polston seconded a motion to adopt the ordinance herein quoted by title. ORDINANCE # 430 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 55.50 OF CHAPTER 55 OF THE CITY CODE - RELATING TO THE EXCAVATION OF STREETS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 53 March 23, 1982 SPRING CLEAN-UP REPORT Mayor Lind]an reported that they are bringing together all communities in the West Minnetonka area for the Spring clean-up. This year, besides the individual clean up of.individual yards, are expanding to include a citizen working committee that would clean up the downtown area, parks and roadsides. We have two vice- chairman and are looking for a chairman for the project. The tentative date has been set for April 24th. COUNTY ROAD 15 STATUS Mayor Lindlan reported'County Road 15 is undersized and is one of the County's highest priorties. The amount of cars on road has been increasing at abnormal rates--even a 4 lane highway might not be adequate. County has to adhere to cer- tain prescribed standards (have 4 lane highway) to get State Aid funding. Mound and Spring Park have encourage 4 lane highway for Mound/Navarre portion and create safer walking paths and outside lanes. Road has failed, is worn out with no storm sewer capabilities. Orono has resisted change and does not want a 4 lane road for their portion of road east of Navarre; want to hold down traffic. Councilmember asked to have Attorney check how can State condemn land for a lake access, but not for County highway? COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT Mayor Lindlan asked for any comments and suggestions from citizens present. Gary Paulsen questioned if the City were going to change election district bounda- ries? City Manager responded, "No, all of the Council is elected at large." BUILDING SAFETY WEEK Building Inspector Jan Bertrand explained that building safety is achieved through proper use of building codes with minimum standards set forth in the State Building Code and asked the City Council to support "Building Safety Week" Films on safety are available if any groups are interested. Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-78 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 82-78 PROCLAIMING APRIL 12 THROUGH APRIL 16 "BUILDING SAFETY WEEK" The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REQUEST TO PURCHASE CITY LAND City Manager explained that we have a request to purchase 5 feet of Lot 1, Block Wychwood, so that a proposed addition to a home would meet setbacks and the fact that we could sell the whole lot retaining right-of-way. Both lots are undersized. Street assessments may be factor in petitioner not wanting whole lot. Councilmember Polston questioned if lot should have been assessed as undersized and could some- thing be worked out. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-79 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE SALE OF THE WHOLE LOT LESS RIGHT-OF-WAY, LOT 1, BLOCK 38, WYCHWOOD The vote was unanimously in favor. Hotior~ c.~rried. March 23, 1982 PURCHASE AGREEMENT ON COUNTY ROAD 110 BUILDII;' City Manager explained that terms have been worked out on a purchase agreement for the parcel of land off of County Road llO for a new maintenance building. Terms include a trade off in land of the 3 acre site along Westedge Boulevard. City Engineer stated only feasible route is to connect sewer and watermains in Minnetrista and their utility department seemed receptive. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-80 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO SIGN PURCHASE AGREEMENT ON 5~ ACRE SITE ON COMMERCE BOULEVARD ON THE N.E. CORNER OF THE CITY OF MOUND The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. STATUS OF CONTINENTAL PHONE INTERVENTION Jim Larson updated the:Council on the status of the telephone case; had a pre- hearing conference; case schedule is set; Company witnesses will sit for cross examination on April 19; City testimony is to be filed on May 21st; will be meeting with consultant and should know more next week. City Manager reported that funds are.coming in steady; suggested sending out a newsletter updating contributors and fund raisers. Fund raising dinner is sched- uled at St. John's Church on April 18th. The President of Continental Phone is attending the Maple Plain Council meeting of April 13th. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to change the 2nd Tuesday regular Council meeting (April t3th) to the 3rd Tuesday (April 2Oth) to allow attend- ance at the Maple Plain meeting. The vote was unanimously in favor. HENNEPIN COUNTY DISPATCH POLICY UPDATE Police Chief Bruce Wold reported on the two memorandums in the packet. First basically gives outline of resolution contained in packet and voted on March 16. Minneapolis voted with the outer suburbs--split came because of Item 3. Hardware and softwear costs would be paid for by County; costs are tremendous. Basically came up with providing emergency service to suburbs at no cost;.but don't have definition of emergency communications. After talking with Phil Eckert, feel that 75-90% of all calls would be emergency service. Rest of calls could be handled through pager service which would probably cost $1OO per month. This is significant decrease in costs for Mound. SHOREWOOD LANE PARKING PLAN Police Chief reviewed the parking situation on Shorewood Lane and recommended changing the ordinance and making some changes in the signing. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to adopt the following ordinance. ORDINANCE # 431 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 46.29 SUBSECTION 61(c) SUBDIVISION 9 BY ADDING, "NO PARKING ANYTIME" ON THE EAST SIDE OF SHOREWOOD LANE FROM LAKESIDE LANE TO QUAIL ROAD. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 55 M~rch 23~ CIGARETTE LICENSE RE,;E.,.,~ Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-81 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CIGARETTE LICENSES FOR HOUND LANES AND RAGER'S PIT STOP PUB AS SUBMITTED. The vote was three in favor with Councilmember Charon voting no. Motion carried. GAMBLING PERMIT - N.W, TONKA LIONS Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-82 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE GAMBLING PERMIT FOR THE N.W. TONKA LIONS AS SUBMITTED FOR THE YEAR ENDING JANUARY 31, 1983 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS Charon moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve the payment of bills as presented on the prelist in the amount of $96,790.09 when funds are available. Roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REVENUE SHARING PUBLIC HEARING Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-83 RESOLUTION SETTING THE DATE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ALLOCATION OF THE 1982 REVENUE SHARING FUNDS FOR APRIL 20, lgR2 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The followin9 items were discussed: The City Manager and Police Chief will be attending Basic Emergency Management Workshop in Grand Rapids, April 21-23. 1981 Liquor Store's Financial Report - Net income is greater than anticipated and the overhead has really been cut. Mayor Lindlan reported that at the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Meeting they deferred action on the new policy for control of the Lake level for further study. Resolution 81-350 authorizing the sale of land to Koosman. Adjournment Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to adjourn at 11:00 P.M. was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The vote Acting City Clerk City Manager March 29, 1~82 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on March 29, 1982, at 4:00 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Counciimembers Pinky Charon, Gordon Swenson, and Donald Ulrick. Councilmember Robert Polston was absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, Police Chief Bruce Wold and City Clerk Fran Clark. The Mayor opened the meeting. LOST LAKE ACCESS SITE The City Manager was asking for direction from the Council on what they feel is feasible and what direction they would like to take on this access issue. The Council would like the following clarified: I. Will the State pay for all costs of the access? a. The Council wants the access to be a benefit not a burden to Mound. 2. The Council would like a small neat package (exposing but not destroying the wildlife that is there). 3. Limited parking not to conflict with the downtown businesses. 4. A plan from the DNR would have to be presented before any final negotiations would be undertaken. 5. The entire area could be cleaned up and made presentable by this access. 6. Could another channel be put in off the existing channel to accomodate an area near the proposed elderly housing. CATCH BASIN CLEANER The City Manager told the Council about a demonstration of a vac-all machine to clean catch basins in the City. The machine is something the City really needs with our 300 plus catch basins to clean and our limited personnel. It would require only 2 people to operate and could also be used to sweep and vacuum the gutters along the streets. We could purchase a used one with ½ the money coming from Capital Equipment Outlay and ½ from Revenue Sharing Funds. The Council indicated that the Staff should go ahead and prepare specifications for a bid. Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to adjourn at 5:15 P.M. .The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Fran Clark, City Clerk Jon Elam, City Manager CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota will meet at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on April 6, 1982 to consider the subdivision of land described as: Property Identification Number 24-117-24 22 0018 - Part of Lot B, Shirley Hills Unit D; Part of Lot 34, Auditor's Subdivision 170; and Part of Lots 19 and 20, Auditor's Subdivision 170; and also Lots 28, 29, 30 and 31 of The Bartlett Place Upper Lake Minnetonka and Part of Lot 32, The Bartlett Place Upper Lake Minnetonka. (Full legal on file at City Hall) Property to be known as the LOst Lake Addition. 0ral or written testimony may be given in reference to the above and all persons appearing at said hearing will be given an opportunity to be heard. Fr~r~c[ene C. Clark, City Clerk - Publish in The Laker March 16, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 April 5, 1982 Jan Bertrand TO: Jon Elam, City Manager FROM: Jan Bertrand, B~ilding Official SUBJECT: Lost Lake Addition!- Preliminary Plat Approval lhis memorandum is to confirm that the resolution that has beento-date drafted conditions. (See page 131) contains all the pertinent up- The previous correspond nC~ from the Engineer is not valid. JB/ms C!T\' ( March 31, 1982 TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL dON ELAM, CITY MANAG M(')UND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA (612) 472-t155 Enclosed is the basic package Lake Addition. This package, I to use in matters such as these. For example, I wouldn't even lel plat until John Cameron, that all the questions the deve listed as conditions to be met I think we have a good package It meets all the requirements o all the conditions be met, I'm JE:fc the Preliminary Pla' reflects the approm package come as a pr~ iseth and Jan felt ca posed were dealt wi a final plat could b, ~::an administrative stan, tY zoning, other than r, ¥ not sure how we can for the Lost I am trying ~liminary ~fortable :h and approved. Joint. ~quiring ~urn it down. CITY Of ;ND TO: City Council and FROM: Jan Bertrand, Bu SUBJECT: Lost Lake Addlti DATE: March 25, 1.9R2 On February 22, 1982, the Pi to the City Council to a lation that it is to meet John Cameron, City Engineer; have drafted a resolution to to be adhered to by the applicant will return, at a listed items at the time of posed resolution was sent t( review. Since our meeting o our requirements to a new indicated for a full cul-de. developed by the completion being developed, The propo~ main sizes. An overlay of cept of the possible future Manager jng Official pFellminary Plat Approv. ,ni,ng & Zoning Commission preliminary plat, w itions of the subdivi 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA ~.,£) 472-1 ,.~ ~nded the stipu- ,n ordinance. Chelseth, City Plannei ~nd myself lJ out the remaining i~em~ which need ~for a final plat approval. The ~ date, to prove comp' ,ce with the Jplat approval. A coI if the pro- ,~Veit of Beachside De IP!ers to 'ch 2nd, Mr. Veit has I; A temporary roadwa be installed if Out five lots and stree' grades have been ;A has been submitted and street ext, ~d!some of sement is A:.is not rrently led and the give a con- on. I would recommend the prell public hearing of April 6, hensive Plan for the City o iiplat resolution be a, $ it is consistent wi d. ed at the ~e Compre- Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms Attachment FEE OWNER APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Sec. 22.03-a VILLAGE OF MOUND PLAT /,./. ~,. Location end complete legal description of property to be divided: ZONING (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dirnensio~ of prqx~ building sites, square foot area of each new parcel de$ig~atsd by nu~r) A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REOUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Square feet TO ReasOn: T~i'i Ippliclti~ must be signed by III ~e OWNERS of t~ pr~e~, or In e~lln- ., COUNCIL ACTION DATE ResolutiOn No. APPROVAL OF THIS DIVISION IS DEPENDENT ON THE LEVYING OF ANY DEFICIENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS BY WAIVER, THE FILING OF THE DIVISION AS APPROVED AND THE NECESSARY PAYMENTOF: TAXESBY THE FEE OWNER WITHIN 1 YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE RESOLUTION OR IT BECOMES NULL AND VOID. A list of residents and owners of property within'"~'&"g::)feet must be attached. 7~? 3~t¥9 ± SO"l t ~ ~-kI £ ,LO1 ~ I-U z .,l.O"l nONl~ I.-U I lO'l Z N30'18 ldl30 K-W Z .I. 03 i"l~lS I-U I 1o-I I ){3o'1[I 107 O]$OdO~d 53~J3 I $~I33NIDN] '3NI '03 NI '3NI 'SW3dC . nil ts pres.~:n~ ..... ':;r;: ,p'~ split into two legal sized ',.,ti ~ar:a movec~ and ~tannara secondtcCl a motion to recommend approval of tn( _.: .... i'_-,ior~/ itt s;;i ~t as request__. ]ne vote was unanimously in favo: . Mot ion carrie:J. Case 82-105 Preliminary Plat - Lost Lake Addition Metes and Bounds Description - PID 24-117-24 22 0018 Vern Veit of Beachside DeveloDment, Inc. was present. Veit stated they have not worked out an agreement with the Archdiocese on Outlot A/may possibly put in singie family homes with a cul-de-sac closer to Maywood and get an easement to Maywood for sewer and water hookups. Now they wish to get just the approval to develop the 5 sites shown on plat. Discussed project. Need street specifications, curbing, grade of street, etc. worked out. Stannard moved and Weiland seconded a motion to recommend the approval of the preliminary plat as long as it meets all conditions of the subdivision ordi- nance with the stipulation that, if it is not clear whether road will be extended, then a temporary cul-de-sac should be included. The vote was un- animously in favor. Motion carried. City Manager requested that package be complete before coming to the Council. New Business The Planning Commission is interested in a zoning training session with Curtis Pearson, City Attorney. It was agreed to try to schedule for the next Discussion Meeting, March 8th. Discussed proposed change of forms for variances, etc. Planning Commission would like the applicants to write more legibly or print. Chairman suggested Staff re- view the forms and bring back with their recommendation. Zoning Ordinance Planning Commission requested wording of ordinance on Page 16 (3b) and Page 17 (3c) be checked and set aside for correction at a later date. It was thought 3b should be "at grade level" (not height of ground floor) and 3c should be "above height of ground level" (not ground floor elevation). Old Business Discussed approval of the Comprehensive Plan as required by Metro Council; it was suggested Commission may want to approve what the Metro Council has approved and then make any changes City wishes later after more study. Adjournment Stannard moved and Weiland seconded a motion to adjourn at 9:20 p.m. so meeting adjourned to the next Discussion meeting, March 8, 1982. All in favor, Attest: McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS I~ LAND SURVEYORS ~ PLANNERS March 9, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Oon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound Lost Lake Addition Preliminary Plat File #6383 Dear 3on: We have received a revised copy of the above proposed subdivision dated 3-04-82. An overlay showing how single family lots could be designed for Outlot A has been forwarded to the City. After reviewing both of these, we feel at least two items are left unanswered. NO. i Temporary Cul-de-sac - A temporary cul-de-sac as shown on the preliminary plat is acceptable if the street is to be extended at a later date. If Outlot A is planned for future use other than single family, such as elderly housing where this street would not be extended, then this cul-de-sac should be permanent with platted R/W and concrete curb and gutter. This problem could be addressed at a later date, before final plat approval, since the future use of Outlot A is questionable at this time. NO. 2 Sanitary Sewer - From the information received, it is not possible to determine if all the proposed single family lots in Outlot A could be served from the main in Maywood Road. As stated in our previous letter of 2-19-82, any development in Outlot A would have to be served by that main. Also, as stated in our previous letter, final plans will need to be submitted and approved before action is taken on the final plat. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours very truly, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron JC:lr Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled par)¢~r LOST LAKE ADDITIOI~ Preliminary Cost Estimate Grading & Street Construction Watermain (includes loop to Maywood Road) Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Total $14,000.O0 17,935.00 8,650.00 3,390.00 $43,975.00 plus City Engineer, Planning and Legal Assistance Fees. RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOST LAKE ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Lost Lake Addition has been submitted in the manner required for platting under Section 22 of the City Code of the City of Mound and under Section 462 of the Minnesota Statutes, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Mound has reviewed said plat and found it to be consistent with the City plan and ordinances of the City of Mound, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: Preliminary Plat Approval Request Application, Case # 82-105, Lost Lake Addi- tion is approved contingent upon compliance with the following requirements: 1. The filing of a revised plat with the City Building Official's office exhibiting a full cul-de-sac, with a radius of 50 feet. 2. The filing of a revised plat indicating surface water drainage patterns and proposed street grades. Also before final plat approval by the City Council, the petitioner shall submit to the City Engineer for approval, construction plans which will include grading, streets and utilities. 3. Submission to the City Building Official of a letter from the Hennepin County Highway Department documenting the approval of the proposed road access on County Road 125. 4. Submission to the City Building Official of results from soil boring tests conducted on the site. 5. Submission to the City Building Official of evidence of approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for the proposed surface water drainage plan and systems. 6. Furnishing a duly completed and executed performance bond, certified by the City Attorney as valid and enforceable, in the amount of $50,O00. to cover (a) installation of grading, gravel and base for streets, (b) paving of streets, (c) installation of concrete curb and gutters, (d) installation of water systems, (e) installation of sanitary sewer systems, (f) installation of storm sewer systems; all in conformance with City approved plans and specifications at the sole expense of the subdivider in conformance with Chapter 22.00 of the City Code. 7. The provision of a ten (10) foot utility and drainage easement along the front,'sides of corner lots, rear of all lots, and ten (10) feet equally divided between each lot on interior side lot lines. 8. Before building permits for any homes constructed in said subdivision are issued, a certificate signed by a register engineer must be provided. This certificate will state that all final lot and building grades are in conformance to the drainage development plan and minimum floor elevation plans approved by the City Engineer.. Pursuant to :City of Mound Resolution No. 79-433, the park dedication and open space requirements for the subdivision are satisfied. Approval of.Title by the City Attorney. Failure on the part of the petitioner to submit a final plat within one year from the date of this approval shall deem the preliminary approval to be null and void (Section 22.13). Submission to the Building Official of evidence of approval by PCA and Minnesota Department of Health for sanitary sewer and watermain. Submit street name for proposed plat. An escrow fund of $1,500. (Minus Filing Fees) be established to cover City Engineering, Legal and Administrative Expense. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. i March 31, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 553~,,4 (612,1 472-115.'~ TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL JON'ELAM, CITY MANAGER Tonight is the evening for the consideration and public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit for Mr. Tom Watson, who is relocating his Arcade from the building at 5571 Auditor's Road to what was the Ms. Print shop behind the House of Moy at 5558 Auditor's Road. The procedures used to implement this Conditional Use Permit versus the previous one are significantly different (which shows I am learning). First, we inspected the proposed site and drew up a list of what needed to be done in the building. Next, Mr. Watson agreed to these points and Moy's contracted for the work to be done. He got all building permits, and regular inspections have .been undertaken, which continually has recon- firmed Moy's and Watson's intent to comply with all City Codes. On March 29th the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Conditional Use Permit. With a better location, improved facilities and correct zoning, I really think we have a good proposal that will really be a credit to the city. Thus, I recommend Council approval. JE:fc CITY OF Mound, Minnesot~ Planning Commission Agenda of March 29, 1982: Board of Appeals Case 82-106 5558 Auditor's Road Part of House of Moy 5555 Shoreline Drive Conditional Use Permit B-1 Zoning District Legal Description - Plat 61290 Parcel 0500; Lot 2 & W. 45' front & rear of Lot 3, Auditor's Subd. 170 Applicant: Tom Watson 3013 Bluffs Drive Phone: 472-3440 Pursuant to the. B-i zoning district requirements, a commercial recreation business is permitted by a conditional use. Mr. Tom Watson received conditional permission to operate an arcade across the street until the building inspector could review the applicant's building. A letter from Jon Elam is attached to explain the history of 5571 Auditor's Road. The City Council on March 9, 1982 revoked his license to operate. The building owner, Mr. Nolan, did not want to improve the building. Now, Mr. Watson is requesting to relocate the Arcade to 5558 Auditor's Road. The City Council, Mr. Watson and Mr. & Mrs. Moy were given a copy of the Inspection Report for this new location. Work has commenced and permits have been issued to improve the property and allow Mr. Watson occupancy of the building by the April 6, 1982 City Council meeting. The law does not allow a conditional use to be transferred to another location, so Mr. Watson had to reapply, and another public hearing had to be published and notices mailed to property owners within 350 feet. I did not require the usual site plan for this location, due to the fact that this rental area is a small portion of a building used mainly for permitted uses of the B-1 zoning district. Recommend: A motion to approve the Conditional Use with the stipulation that the items listed in the Inspection Report be completed. Refer to City Council for Public Hearing - April 6, 1982. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms At>PI.,ICAT] ON l"O]l t.~,ll)7'l'] 0:21~3,"~-' ' I;.,,.' ......... ~ ; .... FEE OWNER C/~ ~ ~.~_.~ PLAT PARCEL Street Address ,!ii-¢/..) /.y-.,, ~- ..z ,,, ~.~ o o o ...¢'_ CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTED Applicant's Interest in Property State why this use, if 9ranted, would not be contrary to the general purpose and intent of ~he ordinance to secure p~lic health, safety, general welfare, and substantial justice. List Residents and C~,;ners of all property within 350 feet of tile proposed use: PLANNIN(; COi. E4ISSION RE£.O..,.,.,]'.,,.DAFI(,,.. DATE 377 Cc~.r':..~.;r 13, 13~1 Cou;~ci/member Charon moved the followin9 resolution. RESOLUTION NO. B1-338 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR 60 DAYS, FROM THE DATE OF OPENING, TO TOM WATSON FOR A YOUTH CENTER/ARCADE WITH THE CONDITIONS AS STATED. WHEREAS, an application has been made to this Council, by Tom Watson, for a Special Use Permit to operate a Youth Center/Arcade at 5571 Auditor's Road (Part of Lots 6 and 7, McNaught's Addition to Mound, Lake Minnetonka PID #13-117-24 33 0049, and WHEREAS, the matter was reviewed by the Planning Commission which has recommended approval with conditions, and WHEREAS, pursuant to due.and proper notice according to law and Chapter 23 of the City Code, a public hearing was held by the City Council at the City Hall in the City of Mound, on the 29th day of September, 1981, and continued to the 13th day of October, 1981. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: The application for a special use permit to operate a Youth Center/Arcade at 5571Additor's Road (Part of Lots 6 and 7, McNaught's Addition to Mound, Lake Minnetonka PID #13-117-24 33 0049) is approved subject to the following conditions. 1. Hours: 2:30 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. - Sunday thru Friday 2:30 P.M. to 10:OO P.M. - Saturday 2. Keep area around the building policed and all trash picked up, including the City parking lot to the east of the facility. 3.Provide handicap {3ar~ing space and necessary bike racks in front of building for all Arcade users. 4. Control noise by fully insulating the Arcade portion of the building and by having adult supervision. 5. There will be an adult supervisor on the premises at all times the Arcade is open. 6. License fees will be paid on all video machines, pool tables, etc. The City Police will be responsible for conducting quarterly inspections of the premises to insure all machines are licensed and the facility is clean and well maintained. 7. The Licensee will submit a report to the City every three months outlining any problems they are having with parking and Arcade operations. The City will also keep a log of all complaints and ask the Arcade owner to respond to each to the best of his ability. 8. Owner will do everything within his power to prevent loitering around the outside of the building and the parking area. October 13, 1981 This special use permit is approved ~'or 60 d~,,,s from th~ date of opening at which time thc p~rz',it will be reviewed and a decision will be made on granting an extension of this permit for another period of tim~. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon and Swenson; the following voted against the same: Polston; with the following being absent: Ulrick and Lindlan; whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the Acting City Clerk. Attest: Acting City Clerk 379 · October 13, 1931 Councilmember Charon moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 81-339 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE YOUTH CENTER/ARCADE LICENSE FOR 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF OPENING WHEREAS, a special use permit has been granted to Tom Watson for a Youth Center/Arcade at 5571 Auditor's Road for 60 days from the date of opening. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City Council approves the issuance of a 60 day license for'a Youth Center/Arcade at 5571 Auditor's Road to Tom Watson. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon and Swenson; the following voted against the same: Polston; with the following being absent: Ulrick and Lindlan; whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the Acting City Clerk. Attest~/ Acting City Clerk January 12, Councilmember Ulrick moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 82-16 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ARCADE (TOM WATSON) WITH STIPULATIONS WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, a Special Use Permit was granted to Tom Watson to operate an Arcade, and at the time said Special Use Permit was granted a list of conditions were imposed including a provision that the License be granted for only 60 days, and the sixty days has passed and it appears that the operation of the Arcade is serving a community punpose by providing a healthful activity for the youth of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: 1. The Special Use Permit granted on October 13, 1981, is hereby extended for one year to January 1, 1983. 2. This permit is granted upon the condition that all provisions contained in the original approval and in -Chapter 36 of the City Code relating to Arcade Licenses and the following required modifications to the building: a. A one hour rated door, self-closing device, proper hardware and rated frame be installed in the common wall. b. Fire extinguishers shall be placed in each rental area. c. Two useable exits to be provided for each rental area. d. A one hour fire rated separation be maintained between the boiler/heating/cooling equipment and the exit way in the upstairs with make-up outside air provided to the heating equipment. e. Insure each rental area shall have accessibility to rest room facilities. f. The walls between rental areas be finished with a minimum of ½ inch sheetrock and the installing of sound proofing material, such as sound board, insulation batts or equivalent. g. The building must meet energy code requirements for walls and ceilings and the heating zoned for each rental area. Heat loss and energy calculations will be submitted at the time of completion. h. A survey of the property showing adjoining structures will be required at the time it is remodeled and a building permit granted.' 3. The City Manager is to report to the City Council on February 1, 1982, as to the compliance with these conditions. If all provisions and conditions are not completed by February 1, 1982, this Council will immediately commence proceedings to revoke thelicenses and Special Use Permit. Councilmember Swenson moved the following amendment to the resolution. Junuary 12, 1982 7nat the date of compliance in item #3 be changed from February 1, 19~2, to March ], ]982. The City Manager to report on March 2, 1982, on compliance. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing amendment to the resolution was duly seconded by Mayor Lindlan and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon, Swenson and Lindlan; the following voted against the same: Polston and Ulrick; whereupon said amendment to the resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest: City Clerk ss/Leighton Lindlan Mayor A motion for the adoption of the original resolution as amended was duly seconded by Councilmember Polston and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon, Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan; the following voted against the same: Polston; whereupon said resolution as amended was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest: City Clerk ss/Leighton Lindlan Mayor CotJncilmemDer Ulrick moved the following resolution. WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, RESOLUTION NO. R2-5~ A RESOLUTION DIRECTING A TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF TOM WATSON'S SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND ORDERING A DUE PROCESS HEARING TO PERMANENTLY REVOKE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT this City Council did on January 12, 1982 adopt Resolution No. 82-16 issuing a Special Use Permit to Mr. Tom Watson to operate an arcade subject to the applicant completing certain work and meeting certain conditions by March !, 1982, and the Building Inspector has submitted written reports to this Council dated February 19 and March 2, 1982 indicating that the conditions have not been met and further reporting that the rear door has been unbarred but that the door swings in rather than out and that outside the second exit there are pipes, a ladder anda pipe rack obstructing the door and that there is wiring strung under the door to the inside, ali of which create a hazard to the public health, safety and general welfare, and paragraph 3 of Resolution No. 82-16 provides that if the applicant is not in compliance with the conditions by March I, 1982 "this Council will immediately commence proceedings to revoke the licenses and Special Use Permit". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: I. The licenses and Special Use Permit granted to Tom Watson by Resolution No. 82-16 on January 12, 1982 are hereby temporarily suspended as of this date because of the fire and safety hazards pointed out by the Building Inspector in her reports of February 19 and March 2, 1982. The Building Inspector shall so notify Mr. Watson of this suspension on March 3, 1982. 2. The City Manager shall give notice to Mr. Tom Watson that his licenses and Special Use Permit will be permanently revoked unless the applicant (Tom Watson) can show cause before this Council why the conditions contained in Resolution No. 82-16 have not been met and further that all safety and fire hazards have been corrected. Said hearing shall be held April 6, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Charon and upon voted being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon, Polston, Ulrick and Lindlan; the following voted against the same: Swenson; whereupon said resolution was deJcared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest: City Clerk ~0 March 9, 1982 Councilmember UlricW moved the followino resolution. WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, RESOLUTION NO. 82-70 RESOLUTION TO SET THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ARCADE TO BE LOCATED AT 5558 AUDITOR'S ROAD FOR APRIL 6, 1982 since the March 2, 1982 Council Meeting when Resolution #82-58 was passed, Mr. Watson has met with the Building Inspector and is planning to move the Arcade to 5558 Auditor's Road, and a Special Use Permit cannot be transferred from one property to another according to the City Code which means a new application will have to be filed for the proposed new site and a publid hearing held, and Mr. Watson asked the Building Inspector to go to this proposed new location and itemize what would be required to open and operate the Arcade, and the Building Inspector submitted the following items to bring 5558 AuditorIs Road up to Code: 1. Landing a rear door. 2. Place 3 foot exit door more than 1/2 distance from rear entry. 3. Place ABC#2A size extinguisher and wall mount. 4. Remove one electric circuit and cap as pointed out during inspection. 5. Provide two (2) bathrooms - minimum code. 6. Concrete block up rear door to garage or replace with one hour rated door, frame, threshold, self-closing device. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City Council does hereby set the date for a public hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for 5558 Auditor's Road for April 6, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. in the City Hall. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Polston and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan; the following voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Mayor Attest: City Clerk March 31, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL J0N ELAM, CITY MANAGER Enclosed is the type of license we grant to people who hold "Sample Sales" at either the Legion or at the Depot. We charge $100.00 for these and the downtown merchants have asked the price be increased to as much as $500. OOas a way to drive them out of Mound. The practical facts are that these sales, when held at the Depot, basically make the Depot self-supporting over the course of the Summer. Another fact is that alot of Mound people actively patronize them and have reacted strongly when I've suggested maybe we shouldn't allow this type of sale in Mound. Thus we have a situation which serves Mound residents and makes money for the City. The challenge is to get our local merchants to do some merchandising the same way, but they look down upon it with great disdain. I really think we have to be as practical about these kinds of permits as possible. Thus, I'll let yoq figure out what we should do. P.S. This permit was approved administratively. Thus, this is a discussion item rather than an action item as such. JE:fc 5341 MAYWCOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA: (612) 472-I~: DATE: March 11, 1582 and March 12, 1982 INDIVIDUAL: Lynette O. McCullough and Diane Froslan TYPE OF LICENSE: Transient Merchants License PURPOSE: Clothing Sale at American Legion Hall Authorized by: Licensing Department Police Department Approval: Police Chief cc: City Manager CITY 09' NOUI'TD Mound, Minnesota 5. 6. 7. TRANSIENT MERCHANT, HAWKERS, PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS LICENSE First Initial or Middle Name NAMES OF PERSONS ASSOCIATED ~r ° ~i I PLACE BUSINESs IS ~0 BE O~iRRI'~T~ ON ~'FzC~ LENGTH OF TII4E FOR WHICE LICENSE IS DESIRED BUSINESS ADDRESS OF APPLICANT Xast Name ~ATE OF BIRTH Mo. I~y PLACES OF RESIDENCE OF THE APPLICANT Foa LAST (5) ~, Phone No. 5341 Ma YWOO[) M C', '. I1'~ D MINNE~QT/~ (C:~ :'t 472-1 March 31, 1982 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: JON ELAM, CITY MANAGERI I think it is time to call for bids~for the 1982 Seal Coating Program. Ail of you have previously rece|ved a copy of the Plans and Specifications for this Program. Enclosed, for the record, is a NotiCe of Advertisement for Bids, a list of streets to be sealed and a map sh~Wing their location. The cost is approximated at $75,000 Which will be paid for out of the Reserves from the Liquor Store, except any State-Aid Streets which will be paid from State-Aid Maintenance Fands. o I think engineering involvement and c st can be kept to the very minimum with the plan and approach we~are following. JE:fc Advertisement For Bids Mound, Minnesota YEAR ON£ & FIVE YEAR SEAL COAT SCHEDULE File ~6173 Sealed bids will be received, publicly opened, and read aloud at the Hound Clty Hall at 10:00 AN., Tuesday, ~../~;L ~ ~ , 1982 for application of approximately 36,000 gallons or bitOminous ~aterial and 1550 tons of seal coat aggregate. The bids will be considered by the ;ity Council at their meeting All proposals shall be addressed to Francene Clark, City Clerk City of Mound 5341 Haywood Road Mound, MN. 55364 And shall Be securely sealed, shall be ~endor~ed on the outs&de with the statement "Proposal for Year One Of F~v8 Yea~ Seal Coat Schedule, City of Mound" and shall be on the Proposal FOTM inciuded in the specifications for the project. ',Ii Copies of the plans, specifications and ether proposed contract documents are on file with the City Clerk and at tihe of'fices of McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc., Consulting Engineers a~d S~,rveyors, 12800 Industrial Rark Boulevard, Plymouth, Minnesota ~5441. ~ans and specifications for use in preparing bids may be obtained at the of/lice of the Engineer upon deposit of $20.00. The full amount of the depositkill be refunded to each bidder who has made a deposit and has filed a bid wlth the Owner upon return of the plans and specifications within ten (10) days after the bids are opened. Each bidder shall file with his bid a certified check, or bid bond in an amount not less than ten (~) percent of the total amount of the bid. No bid may be withdrawn within sixty (60) days after the bids are opened. The City of Mound reserves the right to reject any or all bids and waive any informalities or irregularities therein. CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA ATTEST: Francene Clark, City Clerk By: Leighton Lindlan, Mayor 1982 PLAN HOUND, HINNESOTA FIVE YEAR SEAL COAT PLAN #6173 Year One of the five years, 1982, plan shall include the following streets for patching and seal coating, which total up to 6.8 miles of street. 1982 SEAL COAT Eagle Lane Finch Lane Woodland Road Smaber Lane Jones Lane Sherwood Lane Maywood Road Hidden Vale Road Eden Road Fairview Road Chateau Lane Woodbridge Road Bayport Road Cypress Lane i Fernside Lane Avon Drive Granger Lane Beachwood Road Auditor's Road Diessner Lane Based upon the medium applicaticn ra gallons of emulsion would be used in Additional work will be needed Priest Lane, overlay Rustic Ridge Road, overlay Halstead Lane Otter Road Acorn Road Deerwood Drive Pine Lane Pheasant Circle Setter Circle Ridgewood Road Bay Ridge Road Bluffs Lane Bluffs Drive Highview Lane Piper Road Charles Lane Donald Drive Franklin Road Tuxedo Blvd. Clyde Road Layfayette Lane Ce, 1532 tons of aggregate and 30,650 1982. on the following streets: Langdon Lane and Gumwood Road, repaved These streets are in poor shape ~nd should be done as soon as possible. 0 fl: March 31, 1982 TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL JON ELAM, CITY MANAGER I believe Mr. Thompson wishes to appear before the Council to seek cancellation of his street assessment that abuts his property on Drummond.' He says that he was promised by the old Council and Mayor that he would not be assessed. His defense is that his driveway does not abut on Drummond and he gains no use or benefit from this street, thus §houldn't have to pay. Actually, he was only assessed for frontage (40' x $11.70 = $468.00) and not a unit charge or square footage charge. It's'hard for me to know what was or was not said in regard to the street project, but I think we have been consistent in our assessment policies where property that abuts a lot is improved it is assessed. In the end, I don't know how we could cancel this assessment without opening up a nightmare of change possibilities. JE:fc March 16, 1982 CITY Of: MOUND Ms. Marjorie I. Thompson 4856 Island View Drive Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Ms. Thompson: I have gone back to the assessment roles and reviewed it as it affects your property. You were assessed a total of 40 feet of frontage on Drummond. This is the minimum people were assessed who had frontage on an improved street. Thus, even if you would have had|only l0 feet you would have been assessed for 40 feet. This was done evidently back in 1978, and comes about because of a wide range of lot sizes and d~mensions in the City. / In your specific case, it looks li~e your footage of improved street is awfully close to the 40 foot min|m~m. The cost of your assessment was 40 enclosed your survey for your use. assessment came about. Sincerely, City Manager JE:fc feet x $11.70 per foot or.$468.00. Hope this helps explain how your I've enc. for 'Jams 0.- Thompson ' .of. Lots 5- 7, ~!ock 15, Devon f .-~'~ _ I- here~y certify thst tMs-is'~a '.t~e an~ ~~ [~een~tion of.a s~ey OPTION AGREE}~ZNT Dated: ...... , 1982 IN CO~SIDE~TION of the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) cash in hand paid, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the C~=y of Mound hereby grants to Steven R. Posthumus an option for three months from the date hereof to purchase for Thirty Ihousand and no/100 Dollars ($30,000.00) the property known as the Anderson Building, Mound, }[innesota, legally described as follows:: That part of Lots 44 and 45, Koehler's Addition to [{ott~d, described as comencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 44, thence East 120 feet, thence Set, th 78-1/2 feet, thence West 9 feet, thence South 1-1/2 feet, thence West 11 feet, thence North 24 feet, thence West 100 feet, thence North 56 feet to the. point of beginning. In consideration o~ the option money above stated, Steven R. Posthu~us is hereby given a further option for an additional three mo;lth period for a total option period of six months from the date 'hereof upon payment of an additional Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) option money on or before the end of the first three month option ~eriod .... This option may be exercised by written notice any time withi~ the option period. Upon receipt of notice of exercise of this option, .the City of Mound will promptly furnish to Steven R. Posthumus 0r his attorney an abstract of title certified to date.. Closkng shall occur thirty days thereafter. A Warranty Deed conveying title free and clear of all encumbrances shall be delivered u~on payment of said $30,000.00. Option money already paid shall be credited toward said $30,000.00. If the title to said property is not marketable, the City of Mound (h',I.qON &O AZID · ua~.~ta.oqe ~s~ :ea~ pus ~ep aq~ pa~axa aq o~ s:luasaad aSa~l:3 pasm~:) au:I punoI4 .Io ,{:151) aq:~ ,:IO:~clltllfl SS~iLLIM III · ~suadxa a:l$ :Ir alq~a~i;zem apet~ aq o:1 ames aq~l asne~ II'~ ? April 5, 1982 From: To: City of Mound ~ 5341 Maywood Road~ Mound, Minnesota ~536 The Hub Association 2848 Highland Blvd. ~ Mound, Minnesota 5t36 1. The Hub Association Mound property, known identification number 2. Our intent is the pul an offer being prese~ of April 12th, 1982. i 3. The Association is of a shopping center in the renovated And~r is to create a pace Se will be proud to have Sincerely, ~sently making a study of the Anderson Building, property 13-117-24-33-0045. le the Anderson Building with tO the City of Mound the week .y studying the establishment ~estaurant to be established $on. Building. Our concern ~t,erlfor Mound, one its citizens ~nd patronize. The Hub Association George A. Kinser ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: USED VACUUM SWEEPER FOR CATCH BASINS AND STREETS The City of Mound hereby solicits bids for the purchase of a Used Vacuum Sweeper for catch basins and streets. Specifications require that it have a cab and chassis; 13 yard vac-all; and power sweeper assembly. A complete set of specifications is available from the City Clerk, City of Mound, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364 or call 6.2/472-1155. Sealed bids will be opened at ll:OO A.M., April 26, 1982, by the City Clerk, City of Mound in the City Hall. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk Publish in The Laker April 13, 1982 :JJ.l$ '1'9'$0d$1(] O,L Sd~lJ. M~]:I · ONI633~A$ SNC,qNIJ.,"JOD ONO1 · [~ASIN CLEAN LEAF COLLECTOR BODfr-L l~Ul :'(d., Floor 7 Ga., Sides & Roof 11 Ga., Body Taper 3". DISCHARGE DOOR--Double Wall, Box Type 3" Thick, Body Drain 6" Dia. FILTI:R $CRI:ENS - 6 Removable Filter Assemblies. FRONT AIR CHAMBER -- 92" x 68" -- 8" Deep. BODY PORTS -- Four 12" Dia. BODY HOIST--One 8" Dia., 50,000 Lbs. Double Acting, 50 Degrees Max. Angle. ENGINE -- 330 Cu. In. Gasoline 159 HP at 2800 RPM. BLOWER- 12,000 CFM, Max. Vacuum 48" Max. Multiple 8 V-belt Cushioned Drive. Blower Housing 1/4" Thick. POWER BOOM- Lift Capacity 1000 Lbs. Vertical Lift 11 Ft., Lift Cylinder -- 4" Dia. INTAKE HOSE- 12" Dia. Flexible Rubber Hose Assembly. JETTING SYSTEM -- 120 GPM Pump., 75 PSI, 15 Ft. of 3/4" Hose, Nozzle and Valve. WATER TANK -- 350 Gal. With Sight Gauge. SCREEN WASHER -- Copper Tubing with Jetting Orifices. BLOWER SILENCER--26" Dia., Acoustically Lined with Central Diffuser. SWEEPER- Hydraulically Driven by Blower Engine. BROOM--30" Dia., Flat Double Wire Steel Variable Broom Speed Control. VACUUM NOZZLE -- 42" Wide, 400 Sq. In. Area, Two 10" Dia. Caster Wheels. SUCTION HOSE--Internal Dia. 12". BREAKAWAY CONNECTION--12" Internal Dia. With Removable Seal Plate. SWEEPER CONTROLS- Cab Console, Finger Tip Controls Including Indicator Lights. Broom & Nozzle Hydraulically Operated. DUST CONTROL--Spray Bar With Nozzles, Scrubber Manifold with 6 Orifices and Dual Headers on Vacuum Nozzle. Automatic Control Valves, Cab Operated. Addi- tional Regulating Valves in Water Lines. SHIPPING WEIGHT--(Less Truck) 13,500 Lbs. (approx.) OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT 391 Cu. In. Gasoline Engine 193 HP at 2800 RPM Diesel Engine Dual Sweeper Assemblies Swivel Ball Joint Catch Basin Tube 12" Dia. Power Take Off Street Flusher Rear Engine Throttle, Tube Rack, Extension Tubes, Rotating Beacon Light, Fenders TRUCK SPECIFICATIONS--Contact factory for recom- mended Truck Specifications. SPECIFICATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE DISTRIBUTED BY: INTENT: It is the intent of these s~)ecii ic:~tions to descl'ibt, a 1974 or newer Cab over Cab and Chassis x,'ith :i 15 Yard Vac-:\ll. These specifications are to be construed as minimum. CAB AND CHASSIS: G.V.W.: 32,000 minimum C.A.: 126" minimum Cab: Tilt Cab Engine Displacement: 404 minimum Front Axle: 12,000 lbs. minimum Rear Axle: 23,000 lbs. minimum Tires: 10:00 X 20 Transmission: 5 speed with 2 speed rear axle Power Steering: Hydraulic right side mounted Heater: Fresh air heater and defroster Mirrors: West Coast type - Both sides Tow Hooks: Front Paint: Orange 13 YARD VAC-ALL BODY CAPACITY: 13 cubic yards minimum. BODY CONSTRUCTION: Welded steel. Floor, 7 gauge minimum. Sides and roof 11 gauge minimum. Inside shall be smooth and crevice free and have a taper from front to rear of 3" minimum. The body frame shall be 9" structural channel, and have lateral and longitudinal locating stops. Top of the body shall have a track 76" wide for supporting the power boom. DISCHARGE DOOR: One piece, double wall, fully enclosed box type construction not less than 3" thick with internal reinforcing channels between two formed outer shells. The discharge door shall be raised and lowered by a hydraulic power boom. An adjustable door lock mechanism shall be provided. A heavy duty continuous rubber seal with adjustment shall be furnished to keep the body air and water tight. A safety prop to hold door open for cleaning or inspection of the body to be provided. DRAIN SUMP: A removable pin mounted sump chamber with 6" dia. dra~n, and drain hose, shall be provided in the discharge door for draining body liquids. FILTER SCREENS: Six (6) easily removable High Capacity filter screens shall be provided in a sliding track near top of body. FRONT AIR CHAMBER: A secondary filtration chamber 8" deep minimum and extending thb entire width and height of body shall be provided. The top of the chamber shall have an internal baffle and at the .bottom of the chamber there shall be one sealed cleanout port on each side of the body. BODY HOSE CONi;~CTIONS· A total o 12" dia. shall be provided, one on each side and tx,,'o in the rear door. Hose attachment shall be by means of quick overcenter clamp fasteners. BODY HOIST: Class 50 minimum with one (1) 8" dia. double acting hydraulic cylinder, power up and power down, with maximum dumping angle of 50 degrees. Hydraulic pump 16 GPM at 1000 RPM. Cab mounted cable control. INTAKE HOSE ASSEMBLY: 12" inside dia. x 8 ft. lon~ flexible rubber, steel wxre reinforced intake hose, support collars, 12" long nozzle, quick adjusting dircular handle, 24" long nozzle extension Ail tubes and hoses attached by means of quick coupler type overcenter clamps. ENGINE: . Engine shall be a heavy duty industrial Diesel enFine. It shall have 12 volt electric starting equipment, 45 amp. m~n. alternator, voltage regulator, 70 amp./hr, battery, mechanical tachometer, ammeter, oil pressure gauge, temperature g~uge, residen- tial exhaust silencer 10" dia. x 34" long min., heavy duty air cleaner and controls mounted conveniently on fron~ of engine. A heavy duty clutch shall be provided for disengaging engine from blower. . DRIVE' A cushioned multiple V-belt drive shall be provided between the engine and blower. Means for maintaining proper belt tension shall ~ provided. BLOWER: The blower shall be of the high prssure type and shall have a capacity of not less than 12,000 CFM. It shall develop a maximum vacuum of not less than 48" of water negative pressure. The entire blower housing and connecting ducts shall be 1/4" steel minimum. The blower wheel shall be statically and dynamically balanced. The blower assembly shall be mounted on an independent self-supporting base having two self-aligning ball bearings 2-15/16" dia. min. POWER LIFT BOOM ASSEMBLY: A hydraulically operated, rotating, power boom shall be provided. It shall be of the low headroom type and shall operate on tow 29" long rollers o~ top of the body. The boom shall be powered by an electric hydraulic pump and 4" dia. hydraulic cylinder. The boom capacity shall be 1000 lbs. minimum, vertical lift 11 feet minimum and horizontal working arc 300 degrees to position pick up hose on either side and rear of body. The boom shall have a 3½" dia. compression spring to provide resilient suspension for pickup hose movement independent of hydraulic cylinder. A remote control push button station shall be provided for operating the intake hose assembly. SWIVEL BALL JOINT' A swivel ball joint fabricated of heavy gauge z~nc plated steel permitting 20 degree arc of movement in any direction shall be provided for hose connection .to the body. 1VATEE JETTIN~ SYSTE~I: Pumn shall be slurry service ce~trifugal type having maximum capacity oF 120 GPbl and a maximum discharge pressure of 75 PSI. Suction pipin~ to auxiliary water tank to be 1-1/2" min., discharge 1" min. Pump to be belt driven from blower engine complete with clutch, suction strainer, 15 feet of 3/4" high pressure discharge hose, and jetting nozzle. 350 GALLON WATER TANK: A water tank having 350 g~llon capacity shall be supplied. It shall be constructed of 10 gauge steel complete with baffles, 1-1/2" filling and discharge connections, and 3" overflow outlet. It shall be cushioned mounted on a structural steel frame above the engine-blower assembly. AUTOMATIC SCREEN WASHER: A water spray system shall be provided to power wash the entire surface of the filter screens from the top down. It shall consist fo series of non-corrosive pipes with jetting orifices installed above the screens. Water supply through an external feeder pipe with connection for 1-1/2" fire hose. A 12 foot length of fire hose shall be supplied to pressurize the system from fire .hydrant. CATCH BASIN TUBE: 12" diameter, 7'-8" long, steel. Will clean 11 ft. deep basins when coupled to standard intake hose assembly. BLOWER SILENCER: The blower shall be equipped with a silencer to reduce the noise level. The silencer shall be linedd with 2" thick acoustical material and shall have a removable centrally mounted sound diffuser. The silencer shall be not less than 26" diameter and 35" long. It shall be connected to the blower discharge by means of a duct having a flange mounting. The sound level at 50 feet from the body shall not exceed 85 decibels (dba) and inside the cab, with the windows closed, the sound level shall not exceed 75 decibels (dba). POWER TAKE OFF: A heavy duty truck power take off with cab controls shall be furnished for operating the body hoist hydraulic pump. INSTALLATION: The entire unit shall be installed on a truck chassis furnished by the buyer. PAINTING: The Vacuum Street Cleaner shall be painted safety orange. LIGHTS: Clearance lights and reflectors shall be furnished in accordance with Department of Transportation requirements. POWER SWEEPER ASSEMBLY SWEEPER BROOM: The broom assembly shall be mounted on the right hand side of the vacuum street cleaner in front of the vacuum body. The broom shall be hydraulically driven and shall be positioned for sweeping and retracted automatically using remote hydraulic controls from the operator's position in the truck cab. In the raised position, the sweeper broom shall be within the overall width of the vacuum body. BROOM CONSTRUCTION: The broom shall be not less than 30" diameter and shall be of flat, double wire construction. The broom shall be mounted on a retractable hinged frame assembly and shall include a dual mechanism for adjusting the broom sweeping position forward,/~ backward, in and out. ~!,~)(!;,1 DRJVE' The broom shall be driven hydraulically. The hydraulic syste~ shall be provided with a float positioning device for the protection of the sweeper broom against external damage while sweeping. PICK UP NOZZLE: The material shall be picked up by a rectanular, vacuum nozzle having an inlet opening 42" wide. The nozzle assembly shall be supported by two adjustable caster wheels for adjusting the nozzle opening for various types of material. The front of the nozzle shall be equipped with dual deflectors to.direct the material into the nozzle. The nozzle shall be connected to the underside of the hopper body by a flexible rubber suction hose having an internal diameter of not less than 12" The connection between the body and the 12" diameter suction hose shall be of the breakaway type equipped with a positive seal. The breakway connection shall also be equipped with a removable seal plate for closing the body inlet connection when the vacuum street cleaner is used for application other than sweeping. A duct and deflector shall be provided inside the vacuum body to assure a uniform distribution of material. HYDRAULIC'CONTROLS: Hydraulic controls shall be provided for raising and lowering the sweeper broom and the vacuuh pick up nozzle. The broom and the nozzle shall operate from the truck cab and be controlled independently. DUST CONTROL: The sweeper assembly shall be equipped with a dual system of dust control The broom shall be equipped with a spray bar having multiple nozzles and the vacuum pick up nozzle shall be equipped with a scrubber manifold having six (6) injection orifices. Water, under pressure, shall be supplied from a water tank to the spray bar and scrubber manifold for positive dust control. The water supply, spray bar and scrubber manifold shall be independently controlled by means of solenoid valves from the truck cab. MANUALS: Included with unit delivery shall be: 1. 2 Operator's Manuals 2. 1 Repair Manual 3. 1 Engine Manual 4. I Engine Repair Manual 5. 1 Parts List REJECTION OF BIDS: The City of Mound reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any minor informalities in the bid. LOCAL MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE: The unit shall be furnished by or through a local authorized company or representative. The supplier shall provide full time repair service. Local is defined as being in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. Any deviation in detailed requirements must be noted on separate sheet. WARRANTY: Successful bidder shall warranty complete machine for 6 months from the date of delivery at the rate of 50% parts and labor, INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS: 1. Each bid must have descriptive literature:. 2. Bid Security: A cashier's check or certified check in the amount of 5% of the total bid or a bidder's bond in the amount of 10~ of the total bid, made out to the City of :-~ound, must accompany each bid. 3. Sealed bids should be clearly marked in the lower left hand corner of the envelope and will be opened at 9:30 A.M., April 27, 1982, at the City of Mound, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, MN. 55364. March 31, 1982 52-11 MAYW©OD R(,,' , I (',12 ~ 472-'1 li,L TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL dON ELAM, CITY MANAGER Recently I called John Cameron and asked for up-to-date copies of the City Street System and Sanitary Sewer System. Something you would think a city of 9400 people should have, right? Wrong. As John Cameron's letter points out both are out of date and the Sanitary Sewer System is woefully in bad shape. Thus I recommend approval of the expenditure of $1,900.00 to bring both up-to-date. JE:fc COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. iL. CO/ $ULTIN'aENaINI:[ S I LANDSU V£YO $ PLANN£RS March 25, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Hr. Oon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, HN 55364 Subject: Mound City Maps Dear Oon: I have reviewed the existing Street Map and Sanitary Sewer Map and have estimated the time required to update both of these. The following is a summary of what should be done to each and the cost involved. Street Map - The last revision was made in May of 1976. A number of changes have taken place, mostly due to the street construction over the past four years. Also, a few streets have been vacated. We estimate it would cost about $400.00 to bring this map up to date. Sanitary Sewer Map - The existing map was last revised about the same time as the Street Map. It is at a small scale and shows only the sewer lines (no manholes) and has numerous errors. We think it should be completely redone using the street map as a base, which would give you a much more legible map. We estimate it would cost about $1,500.00 for a completely new up to date Sanitary Sewer Map. This map would also fulfill the reouest by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission for a map as part of Mounds' Comprehensive Rlan. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, ( MoCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. "~~~ Oohn Cameron~';'~t~ JC:lr Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled papt;r March 25, 1982 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 53hl-Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: Re: Written council approval Fishin$ contest The Minnetonka Bass Club will again host its annual Minuetonka Classic fishing contest on June 12, 1982 out of the Surf side Restaurant in yourcomraunityo V~e have a~plied for and received the permit from the D.~.R. and are completing the forms for the Hennepin County Sheriffs Depsrtmento The Sheriffs Office requires written permission from your community to authorize the permit. I would ~atlv appreciate it if you could bring this to your councils attention and forward to me written aporoval. Earl L~ Reply: Earl L. Johnson 13401-Maywood Lane Minnet onka, Minn. presents the 3rd Annual in Cash TWO PERSON TEAM' and Prizes TOURNAMENT 1st ... $2500 2nd .. $1000 3rd ..... $600 4th ..... $500 5th ..... $400 $$ PRIZE MONEY $$ 6th ..... $300 Ilth ...$125 16th ...$100 7th ..... $250 12th ...$125 17th ...$100 8th ..... $200 13th ...$125 18th ...$100 9th ..... $150 14th ...$125 19th ...$100 10th ...$150 15th ...$125 20th ...$100 TROPHIES TO THE TOP 10 TEAMS (2 TROPHIES PER TEAM) PRIZES BASED ON gO TEAMS $50/LB. LARGEST BASS ($350 MAX.) *TROPHY *Free Mount if over 5# 2nd - $100 3rd - $50 4-PERSON (2 BOAT) TEAM COMPETITION ENTRY FEE: $257TEAM 100% PAYBACK MINNESOTA B.A.S.S. FEDERATION SANCTIONED RULES SIMILAR TO B.A.S.S. ! 2" Minimum - ! 2 Fish Per Boat Limit TOURNAMENT HEADQUARTERS: Surfside Supper Club Lake Minnetonka TOURNAMENT DATES: Pre-Tournamen t Meeting (Required) June I 1, 1982 - 7:00 P.M, Tournament Ease-Off (By Draw) June 12, 1982 - 5:30 A.M. ENTRY FEE: $60 Per Person. $120 Per Boat. Tournament Sponsors MAIL ENTRY FORM AND CHECK TO: Minnetonka Bass Classic c/o Terry Spaeth, Sec./Treas. 94T (;arden View Drive Apple Valley, MN 55124 TOURNAMENT INFORMATION: Terry Spaeth .............. 612-432-8064 Steve Soukup .............. 612-364-5149 Total Sports ............... 612435-8944 or 612-938-8233 ENTRY FORMS CAN BE PICKED UP AT TOTAL SPORTS STORES. TWIN CITIES: Northtown Center, Knoliwood Mall, Burnhaven Mall, Southdale Center ROCHESTER: Crossro~ds Center (TEAR AND SEND WITH ENTRY FEE) TOURNAMENT - ENTRY FORM NAME NAME ADDRESS Al)DRESS CITY ..' ST ATE CITY/ST ATE ~ ~ O! o o ° 10. 11. MINNETONKA BASS CLASSIC 1982 TOURNAMENT RULES PARTICIPANTS AND ELIGIBILITY: Any person 10 years of al4c' or older tony participate. A $120 per tc'4m ($60 ix'r person) entry fee must be paid in full by June 11. 1982. PRE-TOURNAMENT PRACTICE: Unlimited, up to 3:00 P.M., June 11, 1982.. REGISTRATION: Each team must return a completed entry form with full payment before 9:00 P.M., June ! 1, 1982. The rules will be reviewed and interpreted and boat positions will be drawn at thc pre-tourney meeting at 7:00 P.M., June 11, 1982. SAFETY: All contestants are required to wear Coast (;uard approved chest-type lift' preservers any time the main combustion engine is operating. All boats are required to be equipped with an OPERATING SAFETY TETHER (KILL) SWITCH. Any boat 16 ft. in length or longer: and/or has a built-in fuel tank is required to have a fire extinguisher, horn or whistle, and throwable lift' preserver. SPORTSMANSHIP: Maximum courtesy should bc shown at all times. Any boating rules broken are cause immediate disqualification ... (Slx'eding in slow zones). No alcoholic beverages arc allowed in contesting boats. No alcoholic beveral~es are to be consumed by contestants until alter they h'.lvc weighed in their fish. TACKLE: Only artificial baits are allowed. No trolling of lures i.~ allox, cd. HORSEPOWER REGULATIONS: Engine horsepower must not exceed the maximum horsepower rating plate attached to the boat by the manufacturer. LIVEWELLS: All boats are required to have operating livewells--either re-circulating or flow-through. OFF-LIMIT FISHING LOCATIONS: Contestants will not fish any marked spawning grounds. Contestants will not fish within 150 yards of the tournament ease-off and weigh-in location. Courtesy will be observed while fishing same shorelines. A 50 yard minimun~ distance will bc anmintaincd while fishing near another tournament boat which may be a,~chored and tlr using a marker. OFFICIAL CHECKPOINT: EASE-OFF and WEIGH-IN will bc held :it the .qurfsidc Supper C'lub and Lounge on Lake Minnetonka. 1st ease-off will be nt 5:30 A.M., June 12, 1982. SCORING: Only large-mouth and small-mouth bass will be weighed, with twelve ( 12 ) fish limit per boat. There will be a 12 inch minimum length (common Bass Pro ruler) per fish. Any short fish weighed will be deducted a penalty of one ( 1 ) pound from the remaining catch. Two bonus ounces will be awarded for each fish weighed in and released alive. All measured fish will be closed-mouth and fanned-tailed for measuring. Teams will be disqualified if over limit. 12. LATE PENALTY: Anyone arriving late for ease-off will be allowed to fish after boat inspection. Any contestant or team not in for weigh-in on time will be disqualified. 13. TIES: Three levels of tie-breakers will be used. I st ... total number of fish weighed in by each team. 2nd ... largest fish. 3rd ... coin flip. 14. GRIEVANCES, RULE INTERPRETATION AND CHAN( ;ES: All grievances must be brought before the tournament director before the awards ceremony. The rules of ~his tournament will be changed only by the tournament Board of Directors. Interpretation of these rules ar,. up to thc Minnctonka Bass Classic Board of Directors and will be final m all matters. TOURNAMENT SPONSORS: Minnetonka Bass Club, Total Sports, Lindy-Little Joe 5341 MAYWOOD RQ,'LD MOUND, iVIINL~E~'~ -,'" f',h; ' (612) 472-i I:~C 30 March 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Marjorie Stutsman Lease of City Land for a Garden For several years the Ray Kramer's, 2373 Chateau Lane, have been leasing the City Land by Well # 3 for garden space. Attached is a copy of the letter requesting the land for the 1982 summer. Also attached is a copy of the lease agreement used in previous years. The token fee has been $l.00. If the Council wishes to lease this garden space again this year, we will need authorization for the Mayor and Manager to enter into the lease agreement. ~ts 10, 11 and 12, Block 4, ~.p. Crevier'a S~ivision Part of ~t 36 ~fayette Park, City of ~und, Hennepin ~unty, ~nnesota ~eJt~Ju~o[._~e._~llar { $1 ,.OQ)_ ~ n ~._.~he ~ _~_ ~...~&~._~n s i~ex &~a~ It' is s~cifically underst~d and agreed by and between the parties that the lessee shall only ha~e a right to ~se a ~rtion of the aforede~cribed ~an~s and that the only use that the~ maF put this pro~rty to is to plant a garden. ~t is further un~erst~d and a~reed that the lessor retains all wights to use and mai~ain the property ~or a municipal well ~ite and that the gardening shall Pot in any way interfere with the lessor's mai~ purpose for this land. The lessee further agrees that in addition to the afore- mentione~ consideration, they ~ill ~intain the site, ~win9 the grass, ~uttin9 the weeds and keepin9 the well site c]ear of litter ~urin9 the te~ of this lease. The only pur~e for which ~e lessee may use this ground ~ to plant a ~egetable garden and there shall be no storage, parkfn9 or other use of this ~roperty by the lessee. ................................................................... for ~nd d~r~nd t~ l~I~ ~r~ of tM~ ~. ~ /ul~L an~ of t;~ coue~;:ts ~crcin ~ni~ned, tI~n r~n~r a~d ~kc ~ss~qs~on oI t~ a~Le rzn~ prc~s, ~ ho~ G~ gnjop l~ $an~ ~oit~ut *~h rg-c~grin~ ,uorI~in~ a /or/clturc of th~ rents ~ bc ~i~ ~ 17~c said ~ssec ..... al~ ~v:,ant...... ~r~ a~r~..._. ~ ant~ w~h t~ $ai~ ~eor...... ~ to ~s~n this ~3c, or ~tn~zlct tlc aboL'e r~nt~ prcr,~Jmo o; a~L~ ~r~ ~gr~/, Zvlt~;Li flrat o~talnin~ l;~ ~n ~n~ent o/ lhc ~a~ ~Or ..., a~ that .... wil~, at l~ exp~a~on of t)~ ~)]~ a~ ;~ere~n r~ited, ~ctl~ ltiz~ a nd surrender the a/orcst~i(l prclni$~ to lh~ ~a~ ~zzor ...., ....... ~%~ in ns ~ co~it~n and tel~ir a~ u,hcn ...... took them. r~zonab~ ~v~r and ~r u~ ~ma~a b~ th~ e~me~t$ alot~ ~pled. for the terra afore~aid. above ~tien Cl~ 0}' ~'i~r. cd, .$eu 'lexl find Delivere~l in Presence of (czzt,) ~ 472-11!75 March 30, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Licensing Department Palm Reader's License Renewal We have received application for the license renewal for Palm Readiqg. The present license was for one year and expires April 7th. Attached is a copy of the application. The City Code of Ordinance provides that the amount of the fee for such license be fixed by the Council. The last three years, the Council set the annual fee at $15.00. The ordinance states that "the clerk shall thereafter issue such license upon payment of the amount fixed by the Council." cc: Police Chief CITY OF HOUI,;D CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWCOD ROAD MOUND, MINN. 55364 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE - SECTION 38.01 OF THE MOUND CODE OF ORDINANCES e J 1. Name of Applicant How long at ~is address 7 Phone No. ' ~ , .'~¢, ~.~.% ¢%,. -~ (Home) ~ *.-¢~ ~ (Business) Date of Birth /~. //.~ ~ / Ad. ess of where art or business will be practiced 8. Check or write specific areas covered by your business: e 10. 11. 12. A. Clairvoyant B. Palm Reader ' C. Phrenologist D. Fortune Teller E. Mind Reader F. Astrologer G. Other Length of time for which license desired Last location of business HOw long (past history) in this business Have you ever been denied a license? / ''-~ 13. Have you ever been convicted of a crime as a result of practice of this business? , '~ Note: License is required for each person. If more space needed for answers, use other side of this form. Signature of Applicant PART A FORTUNE TELLr..RS S~RVICF. S SECq~ION 38. 01 License Required That it shall be ur~alx~ul for any p-.rso,~ to practice within the village tl%e art-or business of clairvoyant, palm rea_der, . phrenologist, fortune tellers, mind read~rs, astrologers or any simila~' art or practice %v~thout ha.v~ng first procured a license from'the Village Council to do so, as hereinafter provided, SECTION 38.0Z Application for License .That any person desiring to pract- ice any of the arts or business hereinbefore s et.forth shall make a written -g-pPlication for ~ license to [he Village Clerk, which application shall set forth' "ghe length of time which such person shall desire to carry on such business and the-place %vithin said.v.illaga %vhere he or she ~roposes to conduct such ·-. art or business, upon receipt of such .~pplication by the Village Clerk, he Shall present such application ~o the Villag~ Council at its next meeting. Upon receipt of such application, the Village Council s~ll consider.the sam-. an-l, if satisfied that a license should be granted, the amount thereof shall be fixed by motion and the clerk shall thereafter issue such license upon payment of the a:,-~ount fi~ed by the council, if such. applies%ion shall be considered improper, a.licen~e ~hall be denied by the council, The license fee shall be commersurate with the nature of the art or business which is proposed to be carried on and the length of time such person intends to carry on such business. (Ord, 69 - 4/5/1960) PART B -SHO%YS AND ENTERTAINMENTs SECTION 38. f-'5 License 'P, equired No person sh'all give or maintain any show orpublic .entertainnuent, circus, carnival, game, or concerl, or oper- ate any meery-go-roun~l or conduct any shc{w tending .to cause an assemblage of people, whether admission be. charged or not, without securing a license therefor. Provided, no license shall be necessary for any cntertaln'ment given by z~xateurs, or in which the performers do not receive any pay, or %v},~ich is given for ~he benefit of any school, church, orbcnevol-ent institution or for any charitajb!e purpose, SECTION 38.06 Jlpp!ication Application for such licen.~e sl:~Jlbe made to thc clerk and she_Il sta~c thc nature of the entertainment, the time, and place ~hcreof. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Licensing Department March 31, 1982 Cigarette License Renewal A cigarette licens~ renewal has been received from: Martin & Son Boat Rental, 4850 Edgewater Drive Cigarette licenses are from March l, 1982 to February 28, 1983. 70 moved the following r,, solution. RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE HOUND CITY COUNCIL RELATED TO 213a REVIEW OF THE SENIOR HOUSING APPLICATION TO HUP WHEREAS, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development has requested input from the City of Mound on the application of Westonka Senior Citizens, Inc. for a housing project for the elderly and handicapped to be located in Mound, and WHEREAS, the residents of the Westonka area communities have attempted for the past ten years to find a method of providing decent housing for the elderly and the handicapped, and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has a number of times expressed support for the grant application of Westonka Senior Citizens, Inc., and WHEREAS, the City of Mound is acting as the land acquisition agent for the proposed site, using the Community Development Block Grant funds allocated to the city of Mound. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Mound urges the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to approve the 202 grant application for Westonka Senior Citizens, Inc. for elderly and handicapped housing in the City of Mound. Mayor Attest: City Clerk SECOND ANNUAL t ESTONI~ VOkUNTEER FAIR) Thursday, April 29 Theater Pod Westonka Community Center CELEBRATE volunteerism in Westonka -- SHOW what your organization is doing -- * SEE what your neighbors are doing as volunteers! SCHEDULED tours of the Westonka Community Center ~pfreshments served Westonka Senior - Citizen Community Drop In Center *Westonka volunteer organizations will have displays showing the kinds of work they do WESTONKA COi::iUNITY CENTER NEIGHBORS HELPiI~'G NEIGHBORS .Second Annual WBSTONKA VOLUNTElgR FAIR Dear Volunteer Leader, National Volunteer Week The Second Annual Westonka Volunteer Fair will be held Thursday, April 29' in the Theatre Pod of the Westonka Community Center in downtown Mound from 1:60 -7:00 p.m. The purpose is to celebrate the many volunteer activities occuring in our Westonka area where NEIGHBORS are HELPING NEIGHBORS. We want your organization, which is so actively involved in community eoneerns, to be involved in this Fair. You will have a space to display materials telling about your organization's work. Your organization may set up your display anytime after 3:00 on Wednesday April 28 and take down no later than 10:00 on Friday April 30. A representative should be present throughout the fair time to answer questions. Participants may use this space and time to: * Display posters, pictures, brochures, etc. which show the scope of the organization's activities. * Recognize their.volunteers in some appropriate way. * Demonstrate or show work done by their volunteers. * Answer questions about the organization. * Perhaps some new volunteers may be attracted. In other words, use this marvelous opportunity to let people know what your volunteer group does, while you learn what others do. Each participant will be responsible for publicizing the Fair within its own membership, encouraging all to attend. The enclosed flyer may be duplicated for your use. Community Services will coordinate newspaper advertising to make the general public aware of the Fair, inviting them to attend. The more people attending, the more successful the Fair will be in letting the community see how NEIGHBORS are HELPING NEIGHBORS: Please call and reserve your space by April 16 Daytime: Community Services, 472-1600, ext. 241 or 242 Nights: Judy Gauvin, 472-4760 It's important that your organization be represented to make a complete picture of volunteerism in Westonka. We look forward to receiving your reservation for the Second Annual Westonka Volunteer Fair. Sincerely, The Fair Planning Committee Daisy Johnson, Chairperson, 472-4447 Mae Divine 472-1739 Irene Jezorski 472-1550 Judy Gauvin 472-4760 Bettie Ketchum 472-3840 Phyllis Jessen 472-4519 Gerry Fry 472-4805 Don Ulrick 472-1600, Ext. 241 or 242 *National Volunteer Week March 31, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612} 472-1155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL JON ELAM, CITY MANAGER REPORT FROM CABLE T.V. COMMITTEE The Cable T.V. Committee, at its third meeting on March 18th, approved a Work Plan Budget and made a series of policy decisions for inclusion in the Cable Franchise or System. These documents are attached for your review and information. The Council needs to: A. Affirm the Committee's Work Plan. B. Approve the expenditure of up to $5,350.00 for the Committee's operation up through the development of a Franchise Ordinance. I am extremely pleased with the rapidity the process is moving. It seems clear that we will have a Franchise before the Council for public hearing by late Spring or early Summer. Cable could be a reality by the Spring of 1983. JE:fc MINUTES HOUND CABLE T. V. COHHITTEE HEETING March 18, 1982 A meeting of the Mound Cable T. V. Committee was held on March 18, 1982 at Mound City Hall in the Council Chambers. Those present were: Kent Borg, Chuck Champine, Harold Pellett, Marsha Smith, Bruce Wold, Don Ulrick, Consultant Tom Creighton, City Manager Jon Elam, and City Clerk Fran Clark. Larry Johnson, Helene Borg and Dr. Ken Romness were absent. Tom Creighton presented thecommitte with a tentative work plan which is as follows: Task I Task II Task III Task IV Task V Task VI Task VII Task VIII Task IX Task X Task XI Task Xll Consultants Orientation, Adoption of Work Plan Commission Orientation and Education Develop Draft of the Franchise Ordinance Develop Request for Proposal (RFP) Administer Application Process Receipt and Evaluations of Proposals Selection of a Successful Proposer Negotiate Franchise with Successful Proposer Adoption of Franchise by each City Application for State Certificate of Confirmation Construct System Administer Franchise Discussion by the Committee and the Consultant brought out the following points: 1. Needs or wants. There has to be a balance of needs with what the people in the community want. 2. The Committee needs a structured work plan or timetable but these deadlines have to be flexible. 3. Setting goals and objectives for the meetings. 4. Simplicity is essential in developing the RFP so everyone can understand it. 5. Sending a policy statement to the City Council. Tom Creighton put a timetable on his proposed budget (rough estimate). are as follows: Task I Orientation meeting (1)/Technologies $ Task II Develop RFP A. Policy decisions/meeting (2) B. Prepare RFP, Final policy decisions, priorities, meeting (3) C. Demographics/service area D. RFP forms - purchase, ~ prepare E. Public hearing - adopt RFP (4) F. Issue RFP - national notice Printing Develop Franchise meeting (5) Task III They 400.00 500.00 900.00 300.O0 75O.OO 6OO.OO 300.00 500.O0 ? 3,850.00 1,500.00 5,350.00 Page 2 CABLE T. V. HEETING March 18, 1982 Bruce W01d moved and Marsha Smith seconded a motion to recommend the Council approve the proposed budget as presented by Consultant Tom Creighton for Tasks I, II, and Ill. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried, It was decided, by the Committee, to meet the 3rd Thursday of each month. The next meeting will be April 15~ 1982 at 7:00 P.M. Mr. Creighton will prepare an informational packet for the City Council on his proposal. Adjournment came at 9:45 P.M. Fran Clark, City Clerk PROPOSED BUDGET MOUND CABLE T.V. COMMITTEE Task I. Task II. Task II I. Orientation meeting (1)/Technologies Develop RFP A. B. Policy decisions/meeting (2) (Feb. 25) Prepare RFP, Final policy decisions, priorities, meeting (3) (Mar. 18) C. Demographics/service area D. RFP forms - purchase, prepare E. Adopt RFP (4) (April 15)- & refer to City Council for a Public Hearing F. Issue RFP - national notice Printing Develope Franchise meeting (5) (May-June) 400.00 500.00 900.OO 300.00 750.00 6OO.OO 30o.0o 500.00 ? S 3,850.OO i,500.00 $ 5,350.O0 g77 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: MOUND CABLE COMMISSION MEMBERS TOM CREIGHTON, CONSULTANT/~/.~ Please find enclosed the discussion Work Plan and Policy Decisions Necessary on Cable Television Issues. Please review these documents at your earliest convenience. We will discuss these documents at our next meeting. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me. FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Tentative Work Plan for the City of Mound Cable Commission March 18, 1982 The following is an outline of a proposed work pla~ for the City of Mound Cable Commission. Task I. Task II. Consultants Orientation, Adoption of Work Plan. A. Orientation of Consultant - consultant and cable commission will exchange in- formation and ideas on work plan, issues of importance to the commission, solicit key geographic and demographic information and designate demographic contact persons in each city. B. Adoption of Work Plan - this work plan should be discussed, revised and adopted along with a timetable for its completion. Commission Orientation and Education A. Informational Sessions - Informational session(s) will be conducted covering cable technology, services, economics and franchise administration. Representatives from public and commercial institutions may be invited to participate in these sessions. Co Task III. A. Bo Co D. Task IV. A. Institutional Ascertainment - community research regarding public and commercial institutional interest and knowledge in cable usage may be conducted. Community Needs Assessments Develop Draft of the Franchise Ordinance. Overview and orientation to legal parameters of cable television franchising. Presentation, discussion and policy decisions in areas of major legal issues such as rates and rate regulation, bonds, insurance, indemnification, police powers, state and federal regulatory choices, construction standards, subscriber privacy, system review, franchise renewal and renegotiation, municipal purchase of system and franchise administration. Drafting of preliminary franchise. Refine legal policy decisions Develop Request for Proposal. Public Access Work Session - discuss public assess requirements and opportunities for the Cable Service Territory. Strategies for public access should be discussed such as establishing a not-for-profit public assess authority and involvement of education institutions, churches, etc., in cooperative use of facilities. Task V. A. Task VI. A. B. Articulate Goals and Objectives - use needa assessment to refine goals and objectives for the cable system.. C. Minimum Requirements - develop minimum technical and service requirements along with desired but not required service and standards. D. Criteria for Selection - criteria for selecting a successful proposer should be developed and adopted to ensure that the RFP solicites the proper information. E. Proposal Form - develop a proposal form addressing disclosure requirement (if any), filing fees, etc. Demographic and other pertinent information should be included in the proposal form. F. RFP - Finalize RFP and approve at a public hearing. G. Adoption of RFP by city council. H. Public Notice - provide public notices of availability of RFP. Administer Application Process. Issue RFP and Application Forms - distribute RFP and application forms to interested cable companies. B. Proper's Workshop - hold a workshop to explain content, form and purpose of the RFP and to answer any Questions concerning criteria for selection, demographics, or other items. Receipt and Evaluations of Proposals. Receipt of Proposals and Filing Fee - proposals will be formally received on application dead- line. B. Proposal Evaluation - consultants will evalute proposals. -3- ~. i~itial Report - consultant will provide a written initial report w!~ich Inay be given to the proposing companies for their response. Consultant will also present an oral report to the Committee. D. Public Hearin9 - A public hearing must be held to receive presentations from each pro- poser. A format for their hearing will be developed. , Task VII. Task VIII. Task IX. Task X. Task XI. Task XII. Selection of a Successful Proposer. Negotiate Franchise with Successful Proposer. Adoption of Franchise by each City. Application for State Certificate of Confirma- tion. Construct System. Administer Franchise. -4- TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ao MEMORANDU~.t MOUND CABLE COMMISSION MEMBERS TOM CREIGHTON, CONSULTANT MARCH 18, 1982 POLICY DECISIONS NECESSARY ON CABLE TELEVISION ISSUES PART I Construction Standards, Initial Service Area; Line Extension Policy. 1. Issue: Initial Service Area - Franchisee shall ex- tend cable television service throughout the community in areas designated on initial service area map attached to RFP. 2. Franchisee's system will meet or exceed all FCC technical standards. 3. Issue: Underground Utilities - Franchisee will con- struct the cable plant underground where all other utilities are underground and will change from aerial to underground when any other utility is so changed. Any change from aerial to under- ground shall be at franchisee's expense. Cost of underground drop to home shall be specified in proposal. 4. Preference will be given to the cable company which proposes service to the entire initial service area in the shortest period of time. 5. Line Extension. Extension of service to those areas not included in the initial service area shall be according to a plan proposed by Franchisee. Preference will be given to the proposal which presents a line extension plan to service the greatest number of people in the shortest period of time with the least expense to subscribers. 6. Construction Standards. Franchisee shall describe in its proposal the construction standards with which it ~ntends to comply. These standards shall include, but not be limited to compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, re- gulations and codes, federal, state, and local. Franchisee shall not open or disturb the surface of any streets or public or pri- vate property without first obtaining a permit from the City. Any work done shall be in a workmanlike manner and shall not en- danger the health or safety of the citizenry. Any work done shall result in the returning of the street, public property or private property to good condition at the expense of Franchisee Franchisee shall further comply with all construction standards proposed in the draft ordinance. B. Services and System Design. rules. Franchisee will carry broadcast stations per FCC 2. System will initially have the capability to de- liver at least 54 channels to subscribers. ~(Preference will be given to the most attractive channel offering to subscribers at the lowest rate. Franchisee is encouraged to program as -2- many channels as possible). 3. Franchisee will provide FM service with individually- processed signals. system. Franchisee will provide an audio emergency alert 5. Franchisee should investigate the feasibility of proposing a home-security package. If Franchisee proposed a home-security package, a mechanism or entity to reduce occurrence of false alarms will be required. Franchisee shall propose its plan for payment of the expense of false alarms. 6. Franchisee shall provide some form of programming "lockout" control. 7. Franchisee will designate an emergency channel to be operated by the city in time of emergency, as declared by an individual to be selected by the city. 8. Franchisee shall provide a system capable of passing upstream and downstream signal simultaneously, and which will accommodate interactive services upon system activation. Fran- chisee will indicate the number of channels which will be ini- tially activated to provide two-way communication. 9. System shall have standby power to support trunk amplifiers for a minimum of two hours, and head end and hubs -3- for a minimum of tour hours. 10. Franchisee should provide one free connection of basic service to the locations listed on Addendum , and to those governmentally owned or leased buildings as may be designated by the city in the future. If more than-one connection is provided per location, actual labor a~d materials for providing such wiring must be charged to the institution. Co Rates; Franchise Fee. 1. Franchisee will guarantee their rates and not seek rate increases until (2) years after construction is completed in the'initial service area or until (3) years after the Fran- chise is granted, whichever is longer. Franchise Fee. Franchisee will pay to the city an annual fee of 5% of all gross revenues derived from the cable system within the corporate boundaries of the city. The city will not consider any fee less than 5%. The annual fee may be subject to renegotiation at such time as federal or state authorities no longer regulate the amount of the fee. Rates shall be changed at the discretion of the city by an application submitted to the city by the Franchisee. The rate increase application must be supported by statistical and other proof indicatin9 that the existing rate is inadequate and unreasonable and that the proposed changes are required to enable Franchisee to render service to fulfill its obligation -4- under the Franchise and to derive a reasonable proizt. Appii- cants must acquaint themselves with rate procedures and require- ments of the preliminary franchise and agree to be bound thereby. De Franchise Term and Franchise Renewal. 1. The Franchise shall be for a term of (15) years. 2. Franchise renewal shall be for periods of not greater than 10 years or on a year-to-year basis in the sole discretion of city. mo Access and Local Origination Requirements. 1. Franchisee will provide at least four channels for access (public, educational, governmental and leased). Fran- chisee is encouraged to exceed this requirement. 2. Preference will be given to the application which best demonstrates the cable company's commitment to providing: A variety of origination programming; be Access support including color studio and lo- cation production equipment, post-production equipment, use of present video facilities; C o Plan accommodating growth of access produc- tion. Production center geographically located so that the greatest amount of residents through- out the system may be located closest to a production facility. -5- Interconnection. 1. Applicants must propose one system to serve the community. It shall be assumed that whatever system design the applicant proposes, the system will be completely inter- connected (subscribers in any part of the city will receive the same programs and services as all other subscribers). 2. The Franchisee must agree if the city requests to interconnect with other cable communications systems which may be geographically contiguous to the system or which can be reached by available technology (assuming receipt of a state- ment from Franchisee or said other system of its willingness to construct, operate, and maintain its share of the equipment to interconnect). Expense of such interconnection must be negotiated and agreed to by the city, prior to implementation. Demonstrated Financial Capability & Experience. 1. Applicant shall be required to present evidence of financial resources that assure the city of the company's ability to complete the entire construction of initial ser- vice area and the proposed line extension policy within the construction period specified in the application. 2. Information will be solicited concerning the applicant's cable television franchises in other cities. information will be used by the city to inquire into the This -6- aDp!icant'$ experience i:~ other communities in which a fran- chise is hcld. Equal opportunity. The Franchisee shall-.be re- quired to comply with all applicable laws and rules regarding equal employment opportunity and fair labor standards.- H. Rates. so Uniform rates for all residential isubscribers located within the initial service~area with (no) discounted service rates for certain classes of residential subscribers such as seniors, handicapped, etc. bo C · Separate rates for installations to homes/ businesses/industries located under~ 200 feet from the distribution system and those located 200 feet or more from the distribution system. Separate installation rates for aerial verses underground installations based on actual cost for providing the drop. Monthly service at no charge (for subscriber and any institutional network services) to public and non-public schools, libraries, and primary government facilities and that the installation and provision of any necessary converters be at cost. Programming and Services. so c o Name over the air broadcast channels you want carried on your system. The FM service be available with any tier of basic service or by itself. If home-security or medical alert services are offered they be available whether or not subscriber takes basic services. -7- Systom des~cn so that subscribers with ~ cable outlets may watch two different programs on the two scts simultaneously. Services such as Home Box Office, The Movie Channel or Show-Time as options with a low- priced service tier. f o Franchise Fee. a. The franchise fee will be used only for cable- related purposes (regulation and access). Ko Programming and Services. so bo e o Construction of the distribution system to accommodate the needs of businesses or industries providing that such accommodation does not adversely affect service or rates for service to residential subscribers. Applicants should contact representatives of businesses and industries to determine their interest in cable, and should include results of such contacts in their proposals. A low priced tier which contains the five required access channels, local broadcast channels and other services to make it an attractive subscriber alternative, plus the option of a pay-cable service such as Home Box Office, Show-Time or The Movie Channel. Carriage of broadcast channels 2, 4, 5, 9, 11 and 17 on corresponding cable channels. Special interest programming in the areas of arts, health, college courses, consumer information, national news, weather and sports, and serving the needs of special age groups, and that the services be avail- able on a lower-priced tier to make them readily available to subscribers. Automated programming carrying national and regional news, weather information and -8- f o he j o weather radar, and that these services be placed on a lower-priced tier, so as to make them readily available to subscribers. The FM service be available with any tier of basic service or by itself. The home-security or medical alert services be available whether or not subscriber takes basic services. A local news service, plus a 24-hour per day community information channel for promoting community events sponsored by non-commercial entities with no advertising. The community information channel should be available on the lowest-priced tier of service. Offering of interactive services such as video games, business communications, sub- scriber responses, utility meter reading, home computer tie-ins, and electronic news- papers. Establish a programming policy of copyright ownership of local origination and access programming produced in conjunction with local groups and institutions. Should the community groups own the copyright and at some point realize the profit from dis- tributing the program, the group will reim- burse the cable company up to the cost of actual production only. The subscriber option to purchase a converter, proposing lower monthly fees for those pro- viding their own converters. -9- Air Corem Earl F Andersen & Assoc Auto Con Industries Appl ebaums Aero Minnesota Auto Sound Holly Bostrom Business Furniture Janet Bertrand Conway Fire & Safety Curtis 1OOO Carmich|el Auto Parts Francene Clark Commiss of Revenue Davies Water Equip Dependable Services Ehlers & Assoc Good i n Company W.W. Grainger Inc. Henn Co. Treas. Eugene Hickok & Assoc Harris Whse & Canvas Shi rley Hawks Henn. Co. Sheriffs Dept Jones Chemicals Island Park Skelly L.O.G.I.S. Lakeland Envelope Sharon Legg Doris Lepsch Lutz Tree Service Iehn Electric MacQueen Equip Miller/Davis Co. Metro Fone Communications Mound Postmaster No. Star Chapt ICBO Old Dominion Brush Popham, Haik, Kaufman Scott Radek SmokeEater StateBank of Mound Title Insurance Sterne Electric State Treas. 16.44 220.75 286.70 14.50 494. O5 26.50 254. O0 318.43 · 22.44 147.56 51.9o 445.00 118.98 2,2~77.88 162. O0 33. O0 15.0o 56.71 163.62 1,170.o0 100. O0 8O. O0 ! 73.95 64.73 2O7.5O 9oo. 00 1,382.91 202.34 17.88 6O.OO 495. O0 771.34 88.46 15.45 35.40 600.00 20. O0 934. O0 1,265.10 13.35 111.00 15.80 124.00 68.9O 3O. 00 Tele Terminals Thein Well Co., Inc. Dept Weights & Measures Waterous Co. Xerox Ziegler, Inc. TOTAL BILLS 67.52 3,088.00 24O.O0 270.94 213.60 216.81 18,169.44 0 o MILL RATE IN HENNEPIN COUNTY jU2'SIi.'E O!' TfiE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Fe~R Tile T~\' PAYABLE IN 1982 Rate in 'i OW~,~S Mill s ........................... 10.063 CITIES Bloomington ...................... Brooklyn Center .................. Brooklyn Park .................... Champlin ......................... Chanhassen ....................... Corcoran ......................... Crystal .......................... Dayton ........................... Deephaven ........................ Eden Prairie ..................... Edina ............................ Excel sior ........................ Golden Valley .................... Greenfield ....................... Greenwood ........................ Hanover .......................... Hopkins .......................... Independence ..................... Long Lake ........................ Loretto .......................... Grove ...................... Plain ...................... Medicine Lake .................... Medina ........................... Minnetonka ....................... Minnetonka Beach ................. Minnetrista ...................... Mound ............................ New Hope ......................... Oro~o ...... . ..................... Osseo ............................ Plymouth ......................... Richfield ........................ Robbinsdale ...................... Rockford ......................... Rogers ........................... S~. Anthony ...................... St. Bonifacius ................... St. Louis Park ................... Shorewood .................... ' .... Spring Park ...................... Tonka Bay ........................ ~yzata .......................... Woodland ......................... ~ld Chamberlain Field ........... 15.183 16.397 16.013 20.293 / 17.558 12.941 15.123 13.128 12.739 16.660 9.065 2o. 371 / 15.724 12.219 17.468 18.657 16.917 22. 018/ 30.836/ 10.978 18.886/ 25. 966 / 3.926 23. 222 ~' 15.088 19.703" 15.329 18. 730 10.833 17.877 12.790 18.386 27 .281~' 17.745 18.534 10. 548 33 18.942~ 12.826 18.143 14.040 6.905 12. 583 (City of Minneapolis rate on reverse side) INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Rate in Mills School Vocational Non-Agri- Dist. School cultural 270 1.469 44.861 270-275 1.469 45.495 271 1.469 46.855 271-217 1.469 49.397 272 1.469 42.138 273 1.469 43.730 273-16 1.469 43.730 273-28 1.469 45.391 273-35 1.469 43.730 273-227 1.469 46.966 273-237 1.469 46.966 276 1.469 49.847 277 1.469 47.381 278 1.469 46.444 279 1.469 42.993 280 1.469 50.084 281 1.469 50.774 282 48.534 283 1.469 44.231 284 1.469 40.675 286 1.469 39.781 ANOKA 11 11-56 JOINT DISTRICTS 46.847 45.338 CAR VER 110 111 47.721 47.607 SHERBURNE 728 57.284 WRIGHT 877 879 883 50.884 44.278 45.938 AGRICULTURAL-HOMESTEAD Agricultural homestead up to 320 acres receives an 18 mill credit. All agricultural non-homestead value over 320 acres on homesteads receive a 10 mill credit. AGRICULTURAL NON-HOMESTEAD Agricultural non-homestead receives a 10 mill credit. ~.~NTY ' Rate in Count~ Revenue ..................... 11.532 County Social Services ............. 11.293 o unt~ Bonds & Interest ............ 1.369 unt~ Capital Improvement Fund ..... 192 Count~ Park Reserve District ........ 669 Countg Park - Shade Tree Disease .... 009 County Library ..................... 2.366 County Medical Center .............. 1.753 TOTAL COUNTY 29.183 MISCELLANEOUS LEVIES RATE For only. Corcoran, Dayton, Greenfield, Hanover, Independence, Loretto, Maple Plain, Medina, Minnetrista, Rockford, Rogers, St. Bonifacius and Town of Hassan . Mosquito Control .................... 207 Metropolitan Council ................ 392 Metro Council Bonds & Interest ...... 081 Park Museum ......................... 350 Metro Transit Area .................. 190 County Park B & I Suburban .......... 129 Henn. Co. Regional Railroad Auth .... 348 1.697 MISCELLANEOUS LEVIES RATE For all Cities except Corcoran, Dayton, Greenfield, Hanover, Independence, Loretto, Maple Plain, Medina, Minnetrista, Rockford, Rogers, St. Bonifacius and Town of Hassan. Mosquito Control .................... 207 Metropolitan Council ................ 392 Metro Council Bonds & Interest ...... 081 Park Museum ......................... 350 Metro Transit District ............. 2.657 Metro Transit District B & I ........ 220 County Park B & I Suburban .......... 129 Itenn. Co. Regional Railroad Auth .... 348 TOTAL 4. 384 WATERSHED District No. 1 ..................... District No. 2 ..................... District No. 3 ..................... trict No. 4 ..................... !trict No. 5 ..................... .478 .584 .068 .449 .434 TO GET THE TOTAL RATE Add the rate opposite the City or Town in which you reside, the School District in which you live to the County and Miscellaneous Levies rate as ~hown. (For properties in a Watershed District add the Watershed rate to the total.) Example City of Richfie.!d ............ School District'No. 280 ...... Vocational Scho~,l ............ County ...................... Miscellaneous Levies ......... Watershed District No. 1 .... Total tax rate per $1,000.00 Rate in Mills 18.386 50.084 1.469 29.183 4.384 .478 assessed valuation ........... 103.984 Area-Wide Mill Rate 94.106 (Applies to commercial, industrial and utilities property only as per the Fiscal Disparities Act.) GE~a, LD T. CAI~ROLL CUI~TIS A. LAW OFFICES WURST, CARROLL ~ PEARSON MINNEAPOLIS, IvIINNE3oTA 55402 March 9, 1982 (61~) 338-B~,11 Mr. William F. Kelly Attorney at Law 351 Second Street Excelsior, Mn. 55331 Re: Anderson and Smith v. City of Mound Dear Frank: We are enclosing Order filed with the CAP:ih Enclosure cc: Mr. Jon Elam herewith Memorandum of Law and proposed Court today. See you Thursday? Ye~,y trulyoy~r s , ! ~I ...._:/ C~SJ~A. ~e~a~r s oh, City Attorney City of Mound STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Priscilla Smith Anderson and Charles P. Smith, Petitioners, v. The City of Mound, Minnesota, Respondent. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT MEMORANDUM OF LAW File No. 784753 FACTS In 1979 and 1980, the City of Mound proceeded pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 to improve certain streets within the City. Improvement hearings were held, and the construction was ordered. The petitioner is a property owner in the City of Mound who owns Lots 17 through 21, Block I, The Highlands, and al~o owns a parcel of land described as Part of Lot 59, Auditor's Subdivision 168(See Exhibit A attached). The lands described as Part of Lot 59 are low in area, and water~ from the adjacent areas have run into this area since the ice age. At the intersection of Oaklawn Lane and Idlewood Road, the City replaced two culverts that run under theme streets and have carried water for many, many years and directed it to the low land in Lot 59. During the eonstruetion, it was deemed necessary to place an outlet pipe from Lot 59 and connect it to the City storm sewer which ran easterly and eventually outlet~ into Lake M|nnetonka. During the course of that construction, conversations were be]d between representatives of the City and the property owners. There is no dispute that an outlet pipe was constructed on the property owner~ ]and, and that a written easement was not executed prior to said construction, but that the construction took place w{th the full knowledge of petitioner Priscilla Smith Anderson. Petitioners later commenced an action against the City of Mound, Court Fi]e No. 784137, wherein the petitioners have asked this court for a writ of mandamus compelling the City to immediately initiate eminent domain proceedings for the aequisition of s drainage easement, sump easement, and storm sewer pipe easement and asking eom- pensation for the alleged taking. Pet}tioners have also alleged that the City has incorporated the petitioners' ]ands into the storm sewer system and has caused damage~ of "three times $50,000 or the fair market value of petltioner.~ property". The City has answered petition~r*s e°mplaint and denied the majority of the atlegations. Subsequent to that time, the City specially assessed the street improvements and gave noUee t~ petitioners that their land abutting ldlewood Road would be specially assasse~cl. Tlds assessment was carried out under the statutory procedure set forth in Chapter 49.9 of the Minnesota Statutes. Petitioners filed a notice with the City Couneil of their intent to appeal and subsequent to the assessment hearings, have filed an appeal with this eourt. The Chief ,fudge assigned this ea.~e to the Honorable Peter &. Lindberg, &udge of the Mmieipal Court, who is empowered to net as a Distriet Court ,ludge for the purpose of hen~inf the above referenced "In the Matter of the City of Mound 1980-81 Stxeet Improvemen~t l*roJeet Assessments. PriseLUa S. Anderson, appellant vs. City of Mound, a Minne$ot~ Municipal Corporation, respondent- Court File No. '/84137." NegoU- ations were earried on between the petitioners and the respondent as to acquisition of an easement for the area where the storm sewer Outlet pipe is eonstrueted, and when those negotiations failed, the defendant City Council did on l~ebruery 2, 1982, adopt Resolution 8~--34 authorizing the condemnation of an eSS :ment. A petition in condemnation has been filed and plaibtiffs have been served through their attorney, WLUinm P. KeUy, who has accepted larv!ea~ ~File No. ). Petitione have brought on a motion to be heard on Mm'eh 1~ lga~,! asking that the original ~tion commenced by plaintiffs be eonsolidated wtth tilth, al~ ul of special amessmen~, t~ ~., Court l~lle~ 78~?I~:~ and 78~I$?. Petitioners further ~sk th~! any additional proceedings commenced be consolidated ~ith the two abo~ desOribed ~ses whteh would include l[~e respondent~ latest Petitlun In Condemn~tio~ for a P~tio~ of Lot ~. In the Initial aeUon, 78~?$:!. the petitioner~ ~' to eommenc, a proee~tln~ In Inverse condemnation to in Its entirety. The :City maintains that such an easement is not necessary and if so, the City has an easement by prescription as this prope+~ty~ has eoHeeted the water from this area s~nee the lee age and further that the City~ street improvements and storm sewer outlet pipe'reduee the amount of water which affects this ]and rather than Increase lt. asking that the City be required acquire an e~sement over lot 5g Plaintiff ha~ move, Court. In addition, pl~ affecting her property, two eases now pending. Consolidation of ac no provision for e~nsoUd plaintiff's motion la prerr yet filed. LAW to eonsoUdate two cases ntiff asks the court to ~d to prospectively consoli~ Defendant opposes the eon ending in Hennepin County District ~tieipate the flung of future ea~e~ late any such future eases with the IoUdation plaintiff seeks. :ions is governed by MINN~ [ST. CT. R. 42.01. That rule make~ ~tion of actions not "pen~in~ before the court." Consequently, ature, at least to the extent it seek~ to consolidate actions not MINN. DI~. CT. ':ULE 42.01 reads as foUoWa! When[&etions involving a common ques~on of law or fact are pendir~g before the court, it may orderii aljoint bearing or Vial of any o~ allithel matters in issue in the aiti*~ns; it may order aU the aetio~ eonsdlidated; and it may maketsueh orders concerning proee/~lings therein as may tend to avc~id unnecessary costs or delay. Ii i ~ Application of the Rule is a two-step process. the actions con,dared for consolidation involve Second, if such ~a common question is present, exercise its disei'etianary power to consolidate. i present and that eOnsoUdation is permissible.. order consolidationi . ." Zoraida Arroyo v. Counsel for plaintiff states, in his affidavit ?porting consolidation, that the cases in question "arise from the same facts." The t that a single set of circumstances triggered several actions does not necessarily mean the "common question of law or fact" requirements of Rule 42 is satisfied. Holiday In~s of America~ Inc. v. Lussl, 11 F.R. Serv. 2d. 999 (N.D.N.Y. 1967) (Holding action fo~ infringement of plaintiff's trademark and action against the same party for specific ~rformanee of agreement to cease u~e of trademark didntt involve common questions of law and fact within meaning of Federal Rule 42(a)); Molever v. Levenson, 539 F.gd 996, '21 F.R. Serv. 2d 1145 (4th Cir. 1975) (Holding multiple shareholder actions involving malfeasance of the same bank and director~. st, it must be determined whether common question of law or fact. court must determine whether to fact that a common question is not mean that the court must 32 F.R. Serv. 2d 352, 353 (D.P.R. 1The federal counterpart, FED. CIV. P. R. 42(a), is identical. did not involve a eommoniquestion of law or fact under Federal Rule 42(a)); el. Huff master v. United States, 186 F. 8upp. 120, 3 F.R. 8erv. 2d ?25 (N.D. Cal. 1960) (Separate triala of issues ordered ma~s flood disaster litigation against U.S.);, U.S.v. 1~071.08 Aere~. of Land, 564 F.2g 1501 24 F.R. Serv. 2d 9:34 (gth Cir. 1977) (Affirming decision to try separately brought by owners of differenl interests in same tract of condemned the District C~urt Is the ~'aet that a ~ingle piece ot Property is Involved. This is clearly insufficient e the Rule 42.01 thresholl test. The Identity of the property . at issue in either ease. in question ora facti Had a ~omm~:~l issue of fact or law been , plaintiff would still bear the burden of establislilng tl~ll clarion would promote ~ial convenience and economy In administrati~m. S mp .~i Balka, 574 F.2d 1341, 21 lm.R. Serv. 2d 857 (10th Cir. 1978){ Prudential {~s. erica v. Marine Nat. Ex. 55 F.R.D. 436, 16 Serv. 2d 46~ ~72); 27 F.R.D. 509, 4 F.R. Serv. 764 (S.D.N.T tctors appropriately eonsi in determining whether tria] convenience ant{ eeo~omy~are served by consolidati include: { 1. The }poten}ial for confusion of facts an~ issues {particularly where a Jury may {>el demanded). International Produ v. Kix)ns, 33 F.R.D. 21, ? F.R.[ Sel'v~ 2d {tl56 (S.D.N.Y. 96 ); St Ins. Co. v. Kin~, 45 I~.R..D.~51g,. 12 F.R. Serv. 2d 1018 2. The extel11 to whieh discovery and will overlap; and 3. The possibility that separate trial of e of the cases may ternatlonal Products obviate, o/' simplify, trial of the others. Corp. v. l~oons, 7 F.R. Serv. 2d at ~9. Plaintiff has failed to address any of these factors ARGUMENT The respondent City agrees with petitioners that any consolidation which were proper and which would promote efficiency and save expense for both the petitioner and the respondent should be aUowed. The City first of an contends that the special assessment appeal under the statutory procedure set out in Chapter 429 has nothing In common in law or the fact as it relates to the dispute over the storm water and the City's construction of a storm sewer outlet pipe. The issue there relates striclly whether the City bas followed the statutory procedure set out in Chapter 429 and whether it meets the tesLs of Section 429.051 as to apportionment of cost and the provisions set out in 429.0111 to procedure and 429.081 as to the appeal. There ts no common question of ~aw fact which ties the special assessment appeal matter whieh ha~ been referred to ,lud .e Lindberg to the other actions wherein the petitioners allege a taldng and to the aetien ~Vher~ the City has petitioned for condemnation of a much smatter City% condemnation1 petition, "City of Mound, a Minnesota Munlcip~l Corporation, Peti- tioner, vs. Prbcillai 8,: Rnderson ~md Charles P. Smith, Respondent,~", C. ourt File ., it i~ very q~sti~nable. The respondent ~gre~s that there may be some common questions h~'e of:ailh~r ~.aw or fact and is not adveme to the consolidation of the two eases for disoovarylPurp~es only. There i, a threshold question as to whether there has been a ~tking I>J the ~tty of a lin-ge psrt of this parcel or If the only encroaehmont on the propet!y and th{ only taking has been where the storm sewer outlet pipe ts located. It would appear 'easonab]e and efficient that the court ~llow this eonsottdation, but for discovery purpos~ only, deferring a decision as to consolidation for trial until a future date. The pe' :loners a~egations of a taking would require expandir~ the condemnation to a larger area, and it' that is determined by the Court or Jury attar trial in file t~o. ?84?53 as a matter of ]aw, then the Court would order the City to condemn the iarg'er parcel and the damages will be assessed by eommlssioner~ rather than the court. The first question wi]] have to be decided by either the court or a Jury. The second question as to damages wiU be determined by commissioners under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117. The respondent agrees that consolidation for discovery only could avoid unnecessary eosts, duplication of diseovery, and would ~lso expedite the processing of this litigation, but to eonsolidate the two actions for tri~l is premature and proeedurely would create conflicts for the Court and the parties. Respect fuUy submitted, WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON Curtis A, Pearson City Attorney, City of Mound ll00 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 339-8911 ~ E t,l ~I E T 0 t'l K ,~ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF H£NNEPIN Priscilla Smith Anderson and Charles P. Smith, Petitioners, v. The City of Mound, Minnesota, Respondent. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ORDER File No. 784753 The above matter came on for hearing before the undersigned Judge on March 11, 1982, at 9:00 a.m. upon motion of petitioners PriselUa Smith Anderson and Charles P. Smith. WiUiam F. Kelly appeared for and on behalf of petitioners, and Curtis A. Pearson appeared on behalf of the respondent. There were no other appearances. Upon arguments of counsel, memorandum filed herein, and on the records in this action, and the Court being fuUy advised, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. The above entitled case, Court File 78475:{, and "City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation, Petitioner, vs. PrisciUa S. Anderson and Charles P. Smith, Respondents", Court File No. , be consolidated for the ~ole purpose of discovery. 2. Upon completion of discovery, the parties may either stipulate that the cases can proceed in consolidation or that the Court may at that time determine that Case No. ?84753 be tried separately to determine if there has been an adverse taking of a large portion of Lot 59, or the Court at that time may determine that the two cases do not have a common question of law or fact and should be separated for trial or for the ascertaining of damages to the petitioners. 3. The ease entitled "In the Matter of the City of Mound 1980-81 Street Improvement Project Assessments. Priscilla S. Anderson, appellant vs. City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation, respondent", Court File No. 784137, does not contain a common question of law or fact and said matter shah remain with the Honorable Peter J. Lindberg, who shah ascertain and determine whether the appeal of the specls! assessments filed against said property shah either be affirmed or set aside, and if it is set aside, then his order shall be for a reassessment as provided in Section 429.071, Subd. 2. Dated this __ day of , 1982. By the Court Tad JuO~ District 42,: Hennepin-Wright Countie: Communities: Corcoran Maple Ptai r, Dayton Minnetriste Greenfield Mound Hanover Roger~ Hassan Spring Park Independence St. Bonifacius Maple Grove Minnesota Representatives Harry A, Sieben. Jr., Speaker Committees: Judiciary, Chairman Commerce and Economic Development Energy Reapportionment and Elections March 8, 1982 Jon Elam City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Jon: Thank you for your letter and a copy of Resolution No. 82-35 and 82-39. I understand that H.F. #1609 which I have co-authored will be included in the County Auditors Tax Bill which should be enacted by the legislature before we adjourn. Concerning Dram Shop Insurance, I am aware of the compromise that has been reached - which the League of Municipalities has agreed - to that would reinstate the 120 days notice of in- cidents and a three year statute of limitations on filing a Dram Shop case. I appreciate your thoughts on these important issues, You can be assured of my support of your thoughts on tax-forfeited land and the League of Municipalities position suporting the compromise Dram Shop law. I look forward to seeing you and members of the council again soon. Sincerely, Tad Jude State Representative Reply to: Minnesota House of Representatives, State Capitol, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296-4248 LAKE MINI'IETONKA CONSERVATION~ DISTiIiCT AGENDA Regular Meeting, 8 p.m., Wednesday, March 24, 1982 TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL 4901 Manitou Road (County Road 19), Tonka Bay 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Minutes: February 24, 1982 4. Treasurer's Report A. Monthly Financial Report B. Bills C. Financial Statement 5. Committee Reports A. LAKE USE COMMITTEE (1) Committee Report (a) Sp.Event Permit: ULMYC (b) " " " Lower Lake (c) Code Amendment: Careless, etc. (d) " " Access License (e) Rules of the Road (2) Action Items (a) Sp.Event Permit: ULMYC Race Schedule (b) " " " Lower Lake Race Schedule (c) Request for 10 Replacement QW Buoys (3) Other B. WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE (1) Committee Report (a) Public Hearing Report: MYC (b) " " " Arvidson (c) 1982 Dock Licenses (d) 1982 DMA Permits (e) 1982 Deicing Permits (f) Code Amendment: Access License (2) Action Items (a) 1982 Dock Licenses (b) 1982 DMA Permits (c) Deicing Permits (d) Variance: Arvidson (3) Other Code Amendments A. Moratorium Amendment - 3rd reading B. Late Fees - 2nd reading C. Careless/Reckless Operation; Temporary Acceleration - 2nd reading D. Access Licenses - 2nd reading E. North Seton Quiet Waters - 1st reading Other Business o 8. Adjournment (f) 1982 Buoy Placement (g) Grays Bay Slow Sign (h) Water Patrol Report (i) Slow Buoy Policy (j) Other (g) Code Amendment: Careless, (h) " " Permanent Dock Pe (i) MCWD Dam Management Plan (j) Other 3-19-82 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR M~ETING TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL February 24, 1982 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was called to order by Chairman Brown at 8:05 p.m. on Wednesday, February 24, 1982 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall. Members present: Jerry Johnson (Excelsior), Robert Brown (Greenwood), Robert Pillsbury (Minnetonka), Lois Johnson (Minnetonka Beach), Alan Fasching (Minnetrista), Orval Fenstad (Mound), Jo Ellen Hurr (Orono), Robert Rascop (Shorewood), Frank Hunt (Spring Park), Ed Bauman (Tonka Bay), Richard Soderberg* (Victoria), and Robert Slocum (Woodland). Communities represented: Twelve (12). *Arrived late. Hunt Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the minutes of the January 27, 1982 meeting be approved. Motion, Ayes (11), Nays (0). Fenstad Moved, Bauman Seconded that the Treasurer's report be approved and the bills paid. Motion, Ayes (11), Nays (0). PUBLIC HEARING - MORATORIUM AMENDMENT: The public hearing was opened at 8:10 p.m. Chairman Brown reviewed the proposal which would establish Special Density Permits (1) for new facilities seeking storage on the basis of more watercraft than one for each 50 feet of shoreline, and (2) for existing facilities wishing to expand storage beyond one water- craft for each 50 feet of shoreline. John Cross (Shorewood) said the proposal is too restrictive. Jim Rivers (Windward Marine) questioned the fee amount. Ail having been heard wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed at 8:25 p.m. LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the committee reviewed a Special Event Permit application'by Dunsheath, and made recommendations. Discussion of Grays Bay Slow signs was continued to the next committee meeting subject to design and location of a larger sign to be placed on the bridge entering Grays Bay. The committee reviewed accident reports in relation to nighttime speed limits, determining not to make a recom- mendation at this time to. change the speed law but to continue this review on an annual basis. The committee was informed that dispensers at accesses for rules and information sheets are not available locally on a commercial basis, but may be custom made. The committee reviewed the Rules of the Road proposal for inclusion in the 1982 regulation folder and continued the · matter for further development and discussion. Letters were mailed to approximately 700 fishhouse owners; DNR conservation officers have provided aggressive removal cleanup service the past several years, and should handle the job well this year. Code amendments recommended by the Water Patrol (to separate careless from reckless snowmobile operation and to delete temporary acceleration) are ready for Board action now. The Water CALL TO ORDER MINUTES TREAS] REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: (SP. PERMITS) LMCD Board Minutes February 27, 1982 Page 2 Patrol presented its 1981 activity report to the committee. The com- mittee reviewed the Coffee Cove Quiet Waters temporary amendment for 1981 and determined that the District has not had enough experience to have it ordered on a permanent .basis; the committee recommended that the Board continue the Coffee Cove Quiet Waters for 1982 on a temporary basis. Fenstad Moved, Bauman Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). ~Bauman Moved, Rascop Seconded that the Special Event Permit application by D~nsheath for parasailing be approved with the following stipulations: An exception to the 85 foot tow rope length limitation be granted to 150 feet but that determination of the rope length permitted be again reviewed in January,' after further history may be established; 2. The operation be permitted only during uncongested periods in uncon- gested areas, and be coordinated with existing race schedules; 3. No more than one aloft parasailor is permitted per bay (LMCD area); No parasailing~is permitted unless, in addition to the operator of' the watercraft towing the parasailor, there be another person of suitable age in the watercraft in a position to continually observe the para- sailor being towed; 5. Evidence of adequate liability insurance be submitted; and 6. Subject to the Sheriff's supervision and requirements. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the committee reviewed 1982 dock license renewal applications and made recom- mendations. The committee reviewed a deicing permit application by Steve Curry and made a recommendation. The committee reviewed the public hearing report for the Arvidson DUA variance and made recommendations for further committee consideration. The committee reviewed a proposal for establishing a permit system for permanent docks and ordered a Code amendment draft for consideration at its next meeting. The committee reviewed a proposed Code amendment establishing late fees and recommended it to the Board for first reading. Fasching Moved, Bauman Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). Bauman Moved, Hunt Seconded that the following 1982 dock license renewal applications be approved with previous stipulations, and that the six SP. EVEr PERMIT: LMCD Board Meeting February 27, 1982 Page 3 applications in Minnetrista be held until the next regular Board meeting: A1 & Alma's Bay Point Apartment Homes Bay Shore Manor Condominium Assn. Big Island Veterans Camp Boat & Motor Mart of Excelsior,Inc. Adeline D. Johnston H. B. Kuechle Mai Tai Restaurants Inc. Martin & Son Boat Rental Meadowbrook Boat Club, Inc. Boulder Bridge Cedarhurst Association Chimo Association Clay Cliffe Curly's Minnetonka Marina, Inc. Minnetonka Portable Dredging Inc. Minnetonka Power Squadron Minnetonka Yacht Club Navarre Cove Homeowners Association Sailors World Dennis Boats Eagle Mill Restaurant Excelsior Bay Association Foxhill Association Grandview Point Association Schmitt's Marina Seahorse Condominium Association Shorewood Yacht Club, Inc. Surfside, Inc. Tonka Bay Marine Walden Tract X Property Owners Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). Fenstad Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the deicing permit application by Steve Curry be approved subject to inspection and notice to abutting neighbors. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). CODE AMENDMENTS: J. Johnson Moved, Hunt Seconded that the second reading be waived of the proposed Code amendment regarding Special Density Permits. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). Brown Moved, Fenstad Seconded that the second reading of the Code amendment regarding Special Density Permits be accepted, the third reading waived, and the amendment adopted. J. Johnson Moved, Bauman Seconded, that the motion be amended .to eliminate the waiving of the third reading and elimi- nate the adoption of the amendment. Amendment Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (3), Brown, Pillsbury and Rascop voting Nay. Main Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). The first reading was made of the proposed Code amendment regarding fees for late license and permit applications; after discussion it was clarified that in the case of deicing applications, the proposal applies to renewals only. Brown Moved, Fenstad Seconded that the first reading of the Code amendment regarding fees for late licenses and permits be accepted. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). 1982 DOCK LICENSEI DEICING PERMIT: CURRY CODE AMENDME} SPECIAL DENSITY PERMITS FEES FO! LATE APPLICA~ LMCD Board Minutes February 27, 1982 Page 4 The first reading was made of the proposed Code amendment to separate careless from reckless and to delete temporary acceleration in the operation of snowmobiles, as recommended by the Water Patrol. Brown Moved, J. Johnson Seconded that the first reading be accepted and that the Code amendment to separate careless from reckless and to delete temporary acceleration in the operation of snowmobiles be reviewed further by the committee. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). HALSTEDS BAY ACCESS: The resolution concerning the Halsteds Bay access acquisition by the DNRwas reviewed and discussed. Brown reported that because of the land use issues, which are primarily city concerns, the LMCD support of the position by the City of Minnetrista be expressed in terms of the proposed resolution. Fenstad Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that Resolution No. 40 concerning the Halsteds Bay access acquisition be adopted. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). A proposed Code amendment regarding the licensing of launching ramps was read. Brown Moved, Hunt Seconded that the first reading of a proposed Code amendment regarding licensing of launching ramps be accepted, that further readings be waived, and that the ordinance be adopted. J. Johnson Moved, Rascop Seconded that the motion be amended to eliminate the waiving of further readings, to eliminate the ordinance adoption, and that the proposal be further reviewed by committees. Amendment Motion, Ayes (11), Nays (1), Fasching voting Nay. Main Motion, Ayes (11), Nays (1), Fasching voting Nay. The Cities of Orono and. Minnetris~a requested the LMCD to impose a mora- torium on additional accesses; the attorney advised the Board that there is no legal basis to do so. ADJOURNMENT: Hunt Moved, Fenstad Seconded at 10:05 p.m. that the meeting be adjourned. Motion, Ayes (12), Nays (0). Submitted by: Robert P. Rascop, Secretary Approved by: Robert Tipton Brown, Chairman CODE AMENDMEN' (continu. SAFETY: SNOWMOBII OPERATIO~ HALSTEDS BAY DNR ACCESS (Res. 40 CODE AMENDMEN, RAMP LICENSES 0 0 0 ~ ~Z~ 0 ~-- ~ ~ o~ Minnesota Pollution Coni' 'oi &gency March 30, 1982 Mr. John Elam Administrator City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota Dear Mr. Elam: 55364 This letter references my March 29, 1982 telephone Conversation with you regarding Tonka Corporation's past disposa! of hazardous wastes at several locations in Mound, Minnesota (see enclosure). As we discussed, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is investigating former Mound dump sites for possible contamination of soils, surface and ground water in the area and the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is also sampling local municipal wells. Apparently the City of Mound operated several dumps!in the 1950's and 1960's (at least) and accepted Tonka's hazardous wastes (caustic potash, degreaser oils, solvents, and spent paint sludges) g the former is requested as related to by April 28, for disposal. As a result of MPCA concerns regardi disposal operations the City of Mound's cooperatio!n in further investigating the Mound disposal sites ~-i The following information and answering of questioin the Mound municipal dumps is requested, in writing, 1982: / Provide a background list of all known muln~cipal dump sites now or formerly in operation in the ~ity of Mound. This list should include descriptipns of the individual dumps inculding location, date Df operations, size of site, volume intake, type of wastes disposed of, method of disposal, and who disposed of wastes (generator and transporter). Were city personnel utilized at the dump sites and/or fees charged for disposal? Phone: 1935 West County Road B2, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-2785 Regional Offices · Duluth/Brainerd/Detroit Lakes/Marshall/Rochester Equal Opportunity Emp~o,,, . Mr. John Elam Page Two Who owned the properties noted in ~l when dump operations were in existence and who currently owns those properties? (Provide names/addresses and telephone numbers.) The dump sites located near the northwest corner of the intersection of County Road Numbers llOW and 44 have apparently been partially developed with some soil excavation having occurred by the developer. Provide the name of the developer along with pertinent information regarding the excavation (dates, quantity, where material removed to and how disposed of). Has the city taken any remedial actions at the dumps to date (installation of monitor wells, sampling nearby wells, check for gas seepage, etc.)? The above information can probably best be gathered by: Interviewing current/former city employees knowledgeable about the dump operations. 2. Researching city files regarding the dump sites. Reviewing County Register of Deeds files regarding property files. Interviewing local garbage transporters who have served the area for a number of years. If you have any questions regarding this request, please feel free to contact me at 612/297-3351. Sincerely, Regulatory Compliance Section Solid and Hazardous Waste Division DND:dc cc: Greg Lie, Hennepin County league of minnesota oities March 23, 1982 TO: Managers and Clerks FROM: Peggy Flicker, Legislative Counsel SUBJECT: Impact of tax bill and budget-balancing bill This memo will briefly highlight several important actions taken by the Governor and Legislature that might have an immediate effect on cities' actions. A more detailed summary will appear in the next Legislative Bulletin which you should receive by mid-April. 1) Budget cuts The most recent budget-balancing bill cuts an additional $5.5 million in state pay- ments to cities due in 1982. The local government aid payments are not cut further. The cuts will be taken instead in the homestead credit reimbursement payments. The $5.5 million translates into a 6.3% cut in each city's 1982 reimbursement. However, each city should plan on a total shortfall of 8.2%, due to the proportional cutback caused by the additional school levies allowed in January. These figures are based on Dept. of Revenue estimates. The Department will send each city a letter next week explaining exactly how to calculate the amount to be cut. No additional levy authority for 1983 has been granted to make up for any of the cuts. 2) Municipal bond interest rates; negotiated sales a. The 12% interest ceiling has been removed and replaced with a floating ceiling. The rate will vary monthly according to the Bond Buyer's Index of 20 Municipals. The maximum will be that rate plus one percent and rounded to the next highest percent. The monthly maximum will be published each month in the State Register by the Commissioner of Finance. The 12% ceiling applies to any obligations authorized by resolution before May 1. The new floating rate will apply to any obligations authorized by res-~-olution after May 1. b. Effective March 23, the public sale requirement does not apply to obligations sold by an issuer in an amount not exceeding the total sum of $300,000 (formerly $200,000) in any three month period. 300 hanover building, 4BO oedar street, saint paul. minnesota 55101 [612) 222-2£U~1 (OVER) 3) Tax increment financing Numerous changes were made to the tax increment financing law. The changes are effective,!with respect to districts for which certification is requested after: June 30, 1982. (One change relating to changes in the type of district applies any district which is changed after Narch 23.) Some of the changes make the law somewhat more restrictive and some changes im- prove the law. For example, authority is given to issue temporary g.o. bonds, which should reduce interest rate costs. If your city is in the midst of develc lng a TIF plan or project, haVe someone check these changes. You may have to modify your plans or adjust the timing of the project. If you want to receive a copy of the changes, call Peggy Flicker at the League. PF:ara municipaJit e ~arch 23, 1982 TO: Mayors, ~tanagers, Delegates FR~: AN~ Staff THERE ARE SEVERAL ITEMS I WOULDLIKE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION: - ~2~._%~ Annual Meeting - Wednesday, May 26, 1982 The AMMAnnual Meeting for the major purpose of electing officers and Board members has been set for Wednesday evening, ~A~y 26th. While a location has not yet been finalized, it will be an evening dinner meeting. A meeting notice with the meeting details will be mailed in early May. - Nominations Wanted! A Nominating Committee was appointed by the Board of Directors at the March Board meeting. Members of the Nominating Committee are: Dick Asleson, Apple Valley Administrator, Chairperson; Tim Flaherty, Legislative Liaison, Minneapolis; Jack Irving, Manager, Crystal; Don Masterson, ~iayor, Spring Lake Park; Carl Meissner, Administrator, Cottage Grove; Connie Morrison, Councilmember, Burnsville; Bill Sandberg, ~iayor, North St. Paul; and Tom Spies, Councilmember, Bloomington. The offices of President, Vice President and nine directors are to be filled. Nominations will be accepted until Monday, April 12, 1982. They should be sent to Vern Peterson, Executive Director, at the A~v~ office. - Legislative Summary of Key Items of Interest to Cities State Budget Reductions. The most recent round of budget cuts includes $5.5 ~illion ~ 6.4%) of city homestead credit reimbursement for 1982. This plus the pre-existing homestead credit payment shortfall totals a reduction of approximately 8.2% in the homestead credit payments that cities expected to receive from July through December 1982. This is in addition to the ll.l% cut in 1982 state aids passed in January. No additional levy authority for 1982 or 198~ was granted to cities to make up for either of these cuts. Levy Limits. No changes were made in the 1982 regular session tax bill. Therefore, levy limits for 1983 will be an increase of 8% over the actual 1982 general levy as per the special session tax bill. No changes were made to special levies. 300 hanover bld~. ,.tc~0 cc~ci:~r s[r¢¢~, si. paul, rninncso~a $$101 (612) 222-2861 e Municipal Bond Interest Rates. Lhxim~:~ interest rates will be based on the Bond Buyer's Index of 20 ~mnicipals plus one percent and then rounded to the next highest percent. The rate will be calculated by the 20th o£ each month for the next month and published in the state register. The maximuxn rate will be the greater of a) the rate in the month that Bond sale is authorized, b) the rate in the month that Bonds are sold, or C) ten percent (10%) per annum payable half yearly. Interest rates charged for special assessments may be one percent greater than the maximum interest rate per- mi%ted on the bond sale. As of January l, 1986, the maximum interest rates for bonds returns to 9 percent per annum unless changed prior to that date by the legislature. Negotiated bond sale limit was increased from $200,000 to $300,000. IDR Bonds and Interest. Interest rates for IDR Bond sales will remain unlimited until January l, 1986, at which time the maximum rate will be 9 percent unless changed prior to that date by the legislature. No new limitations on usage of IDR Bonds were imposed by the 1981 or 1982 legislature. IDR Bond usage was extended for 'tourism' projects (including hotels and motels) to the entire ~etropolitanArea. Coefficient of Dispersion Penalty. Imposition of a penalty (municipal aid reduction) for a less than excellent coefficient of dispersion assessment rating was delayed until 1984. Interest Rate for Delinquent Property Taxes. Interest ratecharged for delinquent property taxes and assessments will be based on the secondary market yield of one year United States Treasury bills calculated on a bank discount basis rounded to the nearest percent. It will be calculated in December for the following year and is currently ll percent. Gravel Tax. A tax passed in 1980 of 10 cents per cubic yeard or ? cents per ton collected by the county and distributed 60% to the county, 30% to to,ms, and 10% for abandoned pit restoration was significantly modified. The dis- tribution now includes cities where pits are located. The definition of gravel was extended to include almost everything except dimension material. With the exception of a few counties with very little gravel extraction, the tax is mandatory. Finally, the requirement to use the proceeds only on gravel hao_l roads was removed. Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. The control district levy authority was increased to six-tenths of one mill (approximately 2.5 times the current levy) and eastern Carver County was added. The commission governing board is still composed of county commissioners including one from Carver; two from Dakota, Scott, and Washington; and three from Anoka, Hennepin, and Ramsey. Manufactured Housing. State statutes governing zoning requirements for cities and counties were modified so that manufactured housing (commonly referred to as mobile homes) built after 1976, according to HUD standards, cannot be totally prohibited through local zoning ordinances. Width and type of founda- tion were added as items that can be regulated in zoning ordinances. This does not mean that someone can put a manufactured house anywhere. The city and county may designate a zoning class, a particular area, and/or certain conditions. Basically, any city or county that has or permits trailer parks -2- 10. 11. 12. now or provides a conditional use in certain areas for this type of housi~c~ already qualifies and therefore is not affected. 0nly cities and eountiex which have no provisions or that specifically exclude totally any type of mamauufactu_red house as defined in]~Lin/lesota Statutes 327.31 to 327.35 need to modify their zoning ordinance. Green Acres~etropolitan Agricultural Preserves. The Ag Preserves Act was modified to allow land that had been "green acred" to transfer in if the petitioner and city agreed. Special assessments, if any, would continue to be deferred and no excess back taxes would be levied. The Green Acre law was modified to allow a sale to another party of "green acred" land ~rithout loss of deferrment or assessment of additional taxes as long as the land remained in agricultural use by the new owner. Metropolitan Area Surface Water }Amnagement. A Watershed Nanagement Organization must be established by December 31, 1983 through Chapter 112 or a joint powers agreement for every watershed wholly contained in the Metropolitan Area. If none is established, the county or counties will assume jurisdiction. Each Watershed 59uaagement Organization must create a management and capital improve- ment plan by December 31, 1985. Once this plan has been reviewed by the appropriate county or counties, soil and water conservation district, towns, and cities, it will be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment on the apparent conformity to the four metropolitan systems. The plan will then be submitted to the Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Pollution Control Agency for comment on the consistency of the plan with state laws and rules relating to water and related land resources. Finally, it will be submitted to the State Water Resources Board for review and approval or disapproval per Chapter 112.46. Thereafter, the ~0 has 120 days.to adopt and implement its plan. Local units will then develop local plans, capital improvement programs, and official controls as necessary to bring local water management into conformance with the watershed plan within the time period prescribed in the implementation program of the watershed plan. Approval authority for local plans is vested with the %'~VD. Local units will also have to prepare amendments to local comprehensive plans where the watershed plan causes ~n inconsistency with one of the four systems if this occurs. Costs for planning, capital improvements, and maintenance may be recovered through special levy beyond those levies set by Chapter 275. Appointment of managers for a Chapter 112 WMO will be by the county board from lists of nominees submitted by the effected cities and towns. Any local government unit may establish a special watershed management tax district for taxing purposes. PF~W~ Changes. One change would modify the early retirement reduction provision, shifting to a factor of one quarter of one percent per month (3 percent per year) under age 65 from the current requirement of a reduction which produces an early retirement annuity which is actuarially equivalent to a retirement annuity payable at age 65. The other change would modify the unreduced early retirement ar~nuity provision, allowing a retiring member to receive an unreduced early retirement annuity when the member's combined age and service totals the sum of 90 rather than the current requirement of attaining thc age of 62 v~th 30 years of service. Witr~iam H. Schr~L Assistant Caucus District 45: Hennepin Count Committeec: Local and Urban Affairs Rules and Legislative Administratior' Taxes Transportation klou£, , Repre£entanves Harry A. Sieben, Jr., Speaker March 26, 1982 Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Jon: Earlier in the session you had written me regarding H.F. 1609, a bill dealing with an alternate sale procedure of tax forfeited lands. The language was incorporated into H.F. 1872 (Omnibus Tax Bill). The bill has been signed by the governor and will now be known as Chapter 523, Laws of 1982. The language of H.F. 1609 can be found in Article 39, Section 6. This section is effective on March 23, 1982. I'm sure your city council will be pleased to learn that the Hennepin County Auditor will be able to utilize this alternate sale procedure for any under-sized parcels located in the City of Mound. Sincerely yours, William H. Schreiber State Representative WHS :re Reply to: [] 393 State Office Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612)296-4128 ?/ [] 10001 Zane Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 (612) 425-4317 ~REV1SOR ] JCR/RK 82-3011 Introduced by Schreiber, Jud:, J~cob$, Vsnasek, Valento January l~th. Reg. to Com. on Governmental Reproduced by PHILLIPS LEGIStAI!%T SERVICE, IRC. H.P. No. 1609 Ref. to S. Com. on 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 A bill for an act relating to t~x-£orfeited lands; providing an alternate sale procedure under certain conditions; amending ~nnesc. ta Statutes ]gDO, Section 282.O1, by adding a subdivisicn. BE It ENACIED BY TilE; I.EOI~JLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. K~nner:ota Statutes 1980, Settles 2B2.01, is amended by adding a subdivision to read: Subd. 7a. [ALTERHATI~ SALE PROCEDURE. ] Land located in m home rule charter or ~tatutcry city, or in a town described in section 368.01, subdivision 1, which cannot be improved because of noncompliance with local ordinances regarding minimum area, shape, frontage, or access may be sold by the county auditor , pursuant to this subdivision if the auditor determines that a nonpublic sale will encourage t.~e approval of salelof the ~land by the city or town and promote its return to the tax rolls. The sale of land pur--unnt to this subdivision shall be subject to any conditions imF, osed by the county board pursuant to section 282.03. The governing tody of the city or town may recommend to the county board conditions to be imposed on the sal~. The,~,. county auditor may restrict the sale to owners of lands I . adjoining th_ land to be sold. He sha_l conduct the sale by sealed bid or may select F.r. other means of sale. The !and shall be sold to the hi-g))est bidder but in no event shall the land be i ? 8 9 sold for less than its appraised value. All owners of land~ adjoining the land to be sold shall be given a written notice at least 30 days prior to the sale. This subdivision sall be liberally construed to encourage the sale and utilization of tax-forfeited land, to eliminate nuisances and dangerous conditions, and to increase compliance with land use ordinances. Sec. 2. [EFFECTIVE DATE.] Section 1 is effective the day after final enactment. II March 25, 1982 Willaim F. Kelly William F. Kelly and Asso. 351 Second Street Excelsior, Mn. 55331 Dear Mr. Kelly: If you have any questions on the Wetlands Ordinance. I think it is appropriate that you call Mr. Curt Pearson, Mound City Attorney. Sincerely yours, Jon Elam City Manager JE/jcn LAW OFFICEL William F. Kelly AND ASSOCIATES WILLIAM P. KELLY JOHN C. SANDER5 DENNIS J. ORKE KENNETH N. POTTS MARK W. KELLY 351 SECOND STREET EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 5533 (6 I 2) 474-5977 March 24, 1982 Mr. Rocky Lindlan, Mayor 2561 Lakewood Lane Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Lindlan: I am enclosing a copy of a letter I have today addressed to your city manager. I am writing this letter to you because I question if you and the council were cognizant of the fact that inaccurate information had been disseminated concerning the wetlands ordinance. WFK:ln cc: Mrs. Priscilla Anderson Mr. Charles P. Smith On behalf of my clients, I request the Mound Council to take action to delay implementation of the wetlands ordinance to give the property owners an opportunity to be heard on the ordinance as presented to the council. .[! Than;~ you for your consideration. YourS' truly~/ ~i~ikm ~. ~eli~ LAW OFFICES William F. Kelly AND ASSOCIATES WILLIAM F. KELLY JOHN C. SANDERS DENNIS J. ORKE KENNETH N. POT'TS MARK W. KELLY 351 SECOND STREET EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA ~;5331 (61 2) 474-S~177 March 24, 1982 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City Hall 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Wetlands Ordinance Adopted 3/23/82 Lot 59, Aud. Subd. No. 168 Dear Mr. Ei~: The undersigned are attorneys for Mrs. Priscilla S. Anderson, 5938 Idlewood Road, Mound, Minnesota, and Mr. Charles P. Smith, 1541 Jasper Street, Medford, Oregon. The notice of hearing mailed to my clients by the City of Mound and received March 12, 1982 notifying them that the Mound Council proposed to consider and adopt a wetlands ord- inance and a wetlands map which specifically delineated wet- lands areas within the city was referred to the writer for his action. Upon receipt we requested of your office a copy of the ordinance and the map as it pertains to our clients' property. This was provided to us; however, the map as filed with your office and made available to us for review was not the map which was presented to the city council of Mound at the March 23, 1982 meeting and which the council forthwith adopted at that meeting. The wetlands map as presented to the council and which the council adopted dramatically increased the acreage of our clients' property designated as wetlands. We question who made the change, when and why the change was made and by whose authority the change was made and in particular, if the change was made in any way to affect the outcome of the pend- ing lawsuits involving our clients' property. You should be advised that official documents provided to us by your office WILLIAM F. KELLY AND A$,~OC'I^TE~, ATTORNEY'~ Mr. Jori Elam, City Manager March 24, 1982 Page 2. mislead us and obviously attempted to provide us with less than all of the information we would require to properly advise our clients as to what action they should take at the hearing. The action by the City of Mound was an attempt to t~ke this property for public use without just compensation being paid for the same. The notice which the city provided to us was no notice at all. We ask that this matter be reconsidered immed- iately by the City of Mound and that the ordinance not be published nor become effective until proper notices be given and an opportunity given to my clients to be heard on the proposal. May we have a response from you. WFK: in cc: Mrs. Priscilla Anderson Mr. Charles P. Smith Mr. Stephen C. Aldrich RICHARD E. KREMER COMMISSIONER BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 PHONE March 29, 1982 Mr. Jan Elam, Manager City of Mound 53/t I Maywood Road Mound, MN 5536zI Dear Mr. Elam: Enclosed is a news release describing Hennepin County's plan for reduction of outstanding warrants. The plan is expected to reduce significantly the backlog of warrants for traffic violations as well as bring much needed revenue to the municipalities and the county. I thought you would be interested in the details provided in the release. Sincerely, Richard E. Kremer Commissioner REK:kn Enco PUBLIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 348-3848 [B~r M~rch 25, 1982 HENNEPIN FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Hennepin County is mounting an intensive campaign April 1-15 to let citizens know that scoffing at the law by ignoring parking and minor traffic tickets will not be tolerated. The crackdown on persons who steadfastly refuse to meet their responsibilities regarding an unpaid ticket could net as much as $1.5 million. Most of that revenue will go back to the municipalities where the tickets were written, to the benefit of local taxpayers all across the county. "The theme of this effort is that tearing up a traffic or parking ticket is a rip-off people can't get away with. They are going to be held accountable," says 3rd District Hennepin County Commissioner Dick Kremer. Kremer heads a task force created by the County Board to tackle the problem of the growing backlog of unpaid parking and traffic tickets that have turned into arrest warrants. Besides the County Board others represented on the task force are the Sheriff's Department, the Municipal Court, tSe County Attorney's Office, and the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association. "From April 1 to April 15, we're looking for voluntary compliance," Kremer says. -more- rip-off/2 Radio, TV and newspaper ads will encourage people with unpaid tickets for which arrest warrants have been issued to report to the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department on their own. D~ring this voluntary compliance phase, warrants in most cases can be processed administratively without arresting, booking and jailing people. But beginning April 16, Sheriff's deputies and municipal police officers will begin a crackdown on people who scoff at their obligation regarding an unpaid ticket. The crackdown phase will be ongoing. Ignore a ticket and it turns into a warrant for your arrest. Ignore a warrant notice and you can wind up in the county jail. Over the past three years, non-compliance with the law -- and consequently the warrants backlog -- have g~own steadily. For example, in a recent month the 14 staff members in the Sheriff's Department regularly assigned to handle warrants on petty violations cleared up 7,000 ~arrants. However, that same month 7,500 new warrants were issued. Currently there are some 100,000 outstanding warrants on roughly 50,000 persons. The bulk are for parking violations. Many people, obviously, have ripped up more than one ticket. Records indicate many people have torn up 10 or more tickets, and one person has compiled close to 60 unpaid tags. On the average each ticket is worth, at the warrant stage, $30. "If you think of it a~ a businessman would," Kremer says, "there is potentially $3 million out there in accounts receivable that's not being collected." -more- rip-off/3 Even if only half of the delinquent persons can be found and half the money collected, as past experience would predict, about $1.5 million stands to be claimed. Under state law Hennepin sends the money -- minus a $5 handling fee and any court costs -- on to the municipality where the ticket orginated. According to ~ennepin County Sheriff Don Omodt, who also has served on the Warrants Task Force, "The onus is on those who have been violating the law and not paying the piper. "Why should the taxpayer who pays his debts have to put up with those who scorn the law? A segment of our society has decided it can just be contemptuous of the law. That's a situation we're going to correct with strict enforcement if people don't comply voluntarily," Omodt says. Backing up those strong words is a plan devised by task force members to enlist the help of police personnel in a~l the county's 47 municipalities. It represents a major change in the system. In addition to the Sheriff's staff, there will now be hundreds of municipal police officers working on serving the warrants. Come April 16, here's how the crackdown will work: County computers have been humming, recording on individual cards the names, current addresses and phone numbers of persons with outstanding warrants. These will be catalogued by municipality and sent out to the police departments. -more- rip-off/4 A telephone call is the first step law enforcement officials will take, advising the individual that he or she has until 4 p.m. the next business day to report in person to the Sheriff's Department or the local police department. When a person reports, there are two choices: post bail and await a hearing, or pay the fine. People who can neither post bail nor pay the fine will be held until they can or be taken to the Hennepin County Adult Detention Center (jail) in downtown Minneapolis. People who cannot be contacted by phone or who do not report after being called will be ~icked up by police where they live or work. (Also, anyone with an outstanding warrant who is stopped by police for another reason -- whether during the voluntary compliance period or during the crackdown phase -- is subject to ~rrest on the spot.) Says Kremer, "Many of these people are transient and hard to track down. We'll be using many types of public directories and every idea we can think of to catch up with scofflaws. And when we run out of leads, there's the option of going to a collection agency." Meanwhile, Hennepin will be gearing up for the expected influx of persons to 'pay their fines. -more- Where does one go to pay? Report to the Sheriff ~s Department, Warrant Division, Room 22 Courthouse,' 3rd Avenue South and 4th Street in downtown Minneapolis. The courthouse is located across 5th Street from the Government Center. Hours are 8 a'm.-3:30 p.m., Monday throuqh Friday. Most police departments also can handle the matter. (Do not go to the county's suburban service centers at Ridgedale, $out~dale or Brookdale, nor to the Government Center. ~ The deadline for reporting voluntarily is Thursday, April 15. After that, Hennepin gets tough. -30~ 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (G12) 472-1155 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Downtown Advisory Coninittee Rob Chelseth, City Planner 29 March 1982 Update on Requests for Proposals Attached please find the minutes from DAC's last meeting on March 24, 1982. Also enclosed are copies of the request for proposal sent to prospective design firms. As indicated in the RFP, proposals are due by the end of the day on Thursday, April 15th. DAC's next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 21st at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at CitS Hall. Any committee members interested in reviewing the proposals submitted prior to the meeting may stop by City Hall in advance of ~ednesday night, and ask Marge Stutsman for copies of the materials. Rob Chelseth RC/ms Attachments Minutes Mound Downtown Advisory Committee March 24, 1982 City Hall Present: Paul Pond, Dave Willette, Frank Weiland, Ron Norstrem, George Stevens, Donna Quigley (Orv Huseby and Mary Campbell said they could not attend. Also present: Rob Chelseth, Diane Arneson, Steve Posthumus, and Jori E1 am Rob Chelseth reviewed breifly the presentation of the action plan and budget proposal'to the City Council on'the preceding evening. The council approved both but want any contracts to be signed by them. Chelseth distributed a slightly revised version of the R.F.P. (Request for Proposal). He thinks we will get responses even though the budget is $4000. He expects the packets will be mailed by Tuesday, March 20. Two weeks turnaround time is important. Chelseth plans to mail packets to Planmark (a division of Super Valu), Thomas Prokrasky (sp?)-who resides in Mound, Ernst & Assoc, Bob Close (sp?) , Interdesign, Damon Farber, Ankeny, Kell, & Assoc., and James Horan - who resides on Casco Point. Pond is reluctant to open the project to the public. Pond asked what kind of problems are likely to come up. Chelseth said architects are dreamers and sometimes need to be controlled. He said architec will be honest regarding how much work the committee will g~c for the money. We have to rely on their professionalism. They also might not know what will sell in Mound. The project needs to be practical, not too far out. Chelseth expects greater detail in the landscaping plan than in the conceptual ideas for storefronts. An evening meeting on Wednesday, April 21st, will be for the purpose of looking over the applications, The applications will be available starting that Monday, April 19th, for review by committee members. Jon Elam said some of the toughest decisions for the committee may regard the loan criteria at the time subsidized loans are available to retail merchants. Elam reviewed the chain of events which ultimately brought D.N.R. Commissioner Alexander and staff members from the Governor's office to Mound the preceding evening to pursue the idea of a public access [and possible public marina) in Mound in the area of Lost Lake (now called Found Lake by some). Working on this project has implications for future cooperation between Mound and Minnetrista. Reports were.heard of various telephone conversations between Mayor Lindlan and Governor Quie, a D.N.R. staff person and Paul Pond, Commissioner Alexander and Jon Elam. The wetlands ordinance also figures in this project. ("Timing is not what we may be known for" -Jon Elam) Elam is excited to think that D.N.R. funds could conceivably help finance a public marina. Location of a proposed access is very important in terms of parking, potential parking, and the Proposed commercial development. DAC/2 Parking would have to be controlled. From 60 - 80 parking stalls would be required for car and trailer parking. Both the Governor's office and the D.N.R. are soliciting an opinion from the D.A.C. regarding this project. Elam said there must develop a constituency for the project, as there will surely be opposition. "This committee and others are going to have to slug it out in the trenches" Geerge Stevens-moved a resolution - That we investigate the need for a public marina and public boat access that meets the goals of the Action Plan for the Revitalization of Downtown Mound, based on the following consi derati ons: 1 - that the negative impact on the surrounding area be limited to the greatest extent possible 2 - that ready marine access be provided to the central business district to encourage commerce in the City. 3 - that the public access be compatible with proposed development plans in the central business district. 4 - that the Downtown Advisory Committee and the City of Mound have input to plans for the marina/access. This recommendation is to be relayed to appropri:ate officials at the Department of Natural Resources and the Governor's office. The resolution carried unanimously on a voice vote. Jon Elam ~ reviewed briefly the case of the Citizens Against Higher Rates vs, Continental Telephone. Minutes of the D.A.C. meetings are to be mailed to Ruth Wyman at Quality Childcare. i Future meetings should be scheduled sometimes in the evening and -sometimes at noon. The April 21st meeting to review applications will require an evening meeting. Adjournment was at 9:45 p.m. Diane Arneson, Secretary REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR TECH~IICAL ,\SS:..~i~,,:iZi' TO DEVELOP DESIGN PLANS FOR BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS AND A L~,,DS ,~.., ~¢.,r:_ rot, DO',':riTO!'~H NOUr'ID, IIINI4ESO-FA This request is for a proposal to provide professional architectual and land- scape architectual assistance to the Downtown Advisory Committee of the City of Mound, Minnesota. The assistance should be specifically aimed at develop- ing design concepts for the rehabilitation of store fronts, rears and signs on the principal local highway (County Road 110 - Commerce Boulevard). The fOllowing three part outline provides direction on the format and content you are requested to follow in making a proposal. As indicated, the proposal should be divided into three parts covering a work program, a schedule and budget, and general background information. Please make the proposal as con- cise as possible. The Committee welcomes suggestions or modifications you feel may improve the program. PART I: Ae PROJECT WORK PROGRAM Present a program to develop a theme and plan for the rehabilitation/modi- fication of store buildings and signs in the downtown. The plan must include suggested building improvements, and provide design and construc- tion guidelines to assist building occupants who wish to make changes in their structure. In coordination with the plan for building rehabilitation undertaken for Part IA, develop a complementary plan for landscape!and streetscape improvements on County Road 110 in the downtown area. Included within the landscaping plan should be 1) a planting plan fOr trees and shrubs; 2) suggested types and locations for street furniture including benches and trash receptables; 3) suggested location(s) for a downtown information directory, drinking fountains, telephones, and possible public restrooms. This plan should include suggested designs, cite specific equipment to be purchased, and provide associated estimated costs. On-going costs for maintenance and repair should be considered in developing the plan. PART II: BUDGET AND COMPLETION SCHEDULE Present a program budget that details the costs associated with each step out- lined in the work program developed under PART I. The total budget should not exceed $4,000. In addition, provide a time schedule for the completion of the project. The project should be completed within 60 days of its start. p,~ml~z i£Cn,~ICAL ASSISTANCE TO DEVELOP DESIGN PLANS FOR ~UILDIiiG IMPROV~ L,'~LHI~ ¢,,~D A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR DO~'~NTO~';N Page PART III: GENERAL INFORMATIOI'i Provide name, address and phone of proposer(s) including firm name and pro- ject participants. Also provide resumes of staff participating in the pro- ject, highlighting experience on projects directly related to the one pre- sented in this proposal. SUBMISSION AND SELECTION OF PROPOSALS All proposals must be submitted to the Mound City Hall, no later than 4:30 p.m., Thursday, April 15th, 1982. Please submit twelve (12) copies of the proposal. Any questions regarding the proposal should be directed to Rob Chelseth, Mound City Planner, at 332-4166 or 472-1155. The request for proposal does not commit Mound to award a contract, or pay any costs associated with the preparation of a response to this request. Mound reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received. Mound may require proposers selected to participate in negotiations, and submit such price, technical, or other revisions to their proposals as may result from negotiations. Quie vetoes DNR_proposal ,.. orH tlstead,s Ba aCeess week vet~d a Depa~ment of Nat~ R~ur~ plan ~ build a involv~ i~ gove~ment ~ the public access-on Kings Point p~ ~r-~d ~ a grater stead's ~y. '~ "' ~ke ~ke~; the DNR's water The l~on h~ ~n a ~urce acc~ ~~r,-~d none of of conflict since the D~ ~k out ~ option on ~ngs Po~t.R~ ~ g~ ~ I'm It w~ a ~r s~t for ~ a~s ~e oii envkonmen~l, l~e ~e and r~ access problem. ~rlier ti~ month, Quie ~vit- ~ Minnet~ offici~ to ~me up with all.ate sit~ for the ac- cess, and ~ ~ursday ~ey pre- sent~ hi~ with fo~. They are: the-~i~in~ Willia~ acce~ on Halstead'sJ ~y and the.Phelps ~y accesN ~th og which are in Minnetris~ and would ~ up- graded; a l~tion on ~ ~ke in Mound; and ~me undeveloped lakeshore pro~y on ~st~d's ~y.