Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
82-05-11
CITY OF MOUND AGENDA Mound, Minnesota MOUND CITY COUNCIL May Il, 1982 Regular Meeting City Hall - 7:30 P.M. Minutes of May 4, 1982 Regular Meeting PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the issuance of "On & Off Sale Beer Licenses" and miscellaneous other Licenses to "Three Points Tavern" (formerly Rager's Pub) PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: ~ Special Purpose Fence Request Map 8 Case #82-108: Duane Schaller 4967 Wilshire Blvd. Lot 8, Block 18 - Wychwood ~. Variance Request Map 2 Case #82-110: Thomas Stephenson 17'17 Finch Lane Parts of Lots 5,6,7 & 8, Block 13 - Dreamwood Presentation by Ann Thomas on Downtown Pedestrian Safety Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present (please limit to 3 minutes) Application for a Charitable Organization 3.2 Beer Permit - waive fee and bond - Mound Volunteer Fire Dept. Drainage Plans for Block 10 - Woodland Point - Between Eagle Lane and Dove Lane (a loose end from 1974 Street Project) Approval of Comprehensive Plan as approved by the Metropolitan Council and Planning Commission Parking Lot Light Installation by Medical Clinic Payment of Bills INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Request for Endorsement - Jan Haugen, City of Shorewood B. Westonka Senior Citizen Task Force C. Letter from Frank d. Buysse (Representative for Fritz Widmer) D. Letter from Donald Shipman E. Letter from the City of Wayzata F. L.M.C.D. May Meeting Schedule G. Annual Mound City Wide Trash Pick-Up Schedule H. Hennepin County Letter on Police Communications I. Suburban Rate Authority Minutes & Materials Pg. 954-960 Pg. 961-964 Pg. 965 Pg. 966-970 Pg. 971-978 Pg. 979 Pg. 980-985 Pg. 986-997' Pg. 998~10021 Pg. 1003 Pg. I004 Pg. lO05-1011 Pg. 1012 Pg. lO13 Pg. lO14 Pg. 1015 Pg. 1016-1017 Pg. 1018-1019 Pg. 1020-1031 Page 953 89 May 4, 1982 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on May 4,' 1982 at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Robert Polston and Gordon Swanson. Councilmember Donald Ulrick arrived at 7:55 P.M. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Attorney Curt Pearson, Police Chief Bruce Wold, Dock Inspector Don Rother, City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: Gary Gasperlnl, Bryan Clem, Clinton Gables, Donald Harris, Mike Lugauer, Donna Lugauer, Antoinette Case, Dave Griffin, Tom Roden, Ron Johnson, Frank Buysse, Gary Freund, Vivian Massuch, Verna Hasse, Dan Christianson, Gary Paulsen. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed.the people in attendance. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting on April 27, 1982 were presented for consideration. Councllmember Swenson asked that on page 85, under the heading Part-Time Plumbing Inspector the following be added "Of the permit fees collected85% will go to pay the inspector and 15~ will go for administration." Councilmember Polston asked to have page 81, paragraph 3 corrected to read, "Councilmember Polston stated that it was budgeted, .... ". Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the April 27, 1982 regular meeting, as corrected. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. WESTONKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE The Mayor introduced the new Manager Of the Westonka Chamber of Commerce Mr. Don Harris. Mr. Harris'stated that he is excited about this new job challenge and looks forward to working with everyone along CoUnty Road 15. AVALON BEACH - DOCKS The City Manager explained the background of the Avalon Park area to the Council. 1. An Easement was given to the City from the Avalon Park Improvement Association in 1977 for park purposes. 2. A letter from some of the residents in the area to the Park Commission, dated 7-20-77 recommending the following: "a. Keep the park usage limited to a picnic and swimming area. b. Do not allow boat docking, or docks, or boat launching from the park property. Boat traffic can be a hazard to swimmers, and an unsuper- vised dock could be a potential danger to young children. c. Restrict vehicular traffic thru the park - during both summer and winter months. This not only destroys the lawn, but the parking area and road access is very limited. We ask this not only for the park members and persons in the immediate area who will be using the park but also out of consideration for the immediate neighbors to the pa~ 3; Resolution #77-368 - The Council concurring with the Park Commission limiting Avalon Park use to swimming and picnicing. 90 May 4, 1982 4. June 23, 1978 - Conveyance of Tax Forfeited Lands - Avalon Park to the City of Mound because some $8,000.00 in taxes were not paid. 5. Resolution #81-3~ dated 1Z-22-81 - The Council concurring with the Park Commission decision to allow up to 8 dock sites at Avalon P~rk. The reasons for putting docks in Avalon Park are as follows: I. The L.M.C.D. allowed the City to increase thelr dock sites on Commons and Parks from 380 to 400 in 1982. 2. A heavy demand from people on the Island for close-in dockage. 3. This is one of the most underused beaches and parks in the City. 4. It ls only a short walk to Pembrook Beach. The Manager explained that this item is on the Agenda to enable persons from the neighborhood to give their opinions on allowing docks at Avalon Park. The Mayor asked for'a show of hands of the people present interested in this item. Approximately 10 to 15 people raised their hand. He then asked for comments from these people. 6 persons spoke against assigning docks to the Avalon Beach. stated that: 1. 2. They They didn't feel. there was enough room for 8 docks.. They felt the neighborhood should have been notified before a decision was made to allow docks in this area. They presented a 3 page petition, signed by approximately 100 people living in the area, stating "We the undersigned oppose Resolution No. 81-399 with moral reliance to the original Resolution No. 77-368; accepted policy of limiting Avalon Park use to swimming and picnicing; no boat docks or launching". Councilmember Ulrlck arrived. The Park is used extensively by the neighborhood. Traveling to Pembrook Beach, because of the narrow streets and having no sldewalks, is hazardous to children's safety. 6. Parking on these narrow streets will .cause problems. 7. Dock will destroy the Park. The Mayor brought this item back to the Council for discussion. Four Councilmembers voiced reasons the docks should be at Avalon Park. 1. There is no conflict between using the Park area and having the docks in the lake. 2. Avalon Park is only ½ mile from Pembrook Beach. 3. There are 3 other beaches on the Island. 4. The Council's actions are in the interest of everyone in the community not just some. 5. The Dock Ordinance is fair and works very well in other areas and will work well in this one also. 6. The docks will be rented to people from the Island area. Councilmember Polston felt that since he was a member of the Council in 1977 when Resolution #77-368 was passed that he had an obligation to stand for that Resolution. 91 May 4, 1982 Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-130 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION #81-399 PARAGRAPH 3 - AREA 1 - ALLOWING A MAXIMUM OF 6 DOCKS IN AVALON PARK Roll call vote was 4 in favor with CouncJlmember Polston voting nay. Motion carried. The Council explained to the persons present that the Park Commission will review the Avalon Park docks at the end of the season and make adjustments if necessary. REVIEW OF ADS A. 3 ACRES BY SEWER PLANT The City Manager presented the ad he has worked up for the 3 acre site near the sewer plant and asked for the Council's comments and suggestions. The Council discussed advertlsing the price of $37,500 as maybe being unrealistic. It was decided to just put "make offer" in the ad. The ad will be run in the next three Sunday Mpls. Tribunes, the next two issues of the Sun and The ~ E~R~ .~" '. ..... B. ANDERSON BUILDING The City Manager presented the ad h~ has worked up for the Anderson Building redevelopment. Mayor Lindlan suggested that"strategic high traffic corner" be added to the location. This ad will be run in the next three Mpls. Sunday Tribunes, the next two Issues of the Construction Bulletin and will be sent to all the people who expressed and interest in the building. DRAINAGE PROBLEM BETWEEN BALSAM AND SPRUCE The City Manager explained that the 1974-75 Street Improvement was done without storm sewer and curb and thus this area between Balsam and Spruce is a perpetual problem. He presented a letter from the City Engineer explaining what will have to be done to rectify this drainage problem and the cost estimate of $4,150.O0. This could be charged to the 1979 Street Improvement. Councllmembers Polston and Swenson stated that they thought this problem was taken care of when the streets went in and if it wasn't, It should have been done. Ulrick moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-131 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO GO AHEAD AND IMPLEMENT THE DESIGN PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER TO RESOLVE THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM BETWEEN BALSAM AND SPRUCE The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MOUND V. MILLER - 1980 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONDEMNATION The City Attorney reported that the Commissioners determined that the damages are only in the amount of $950.00 instead of the $7,000.00 requested by the owners of the property. He is requesting that a check in the amount of $950.00 be sent to his office and they will transmit to the proper persons. 92 May 4, 1982 Also three checks in the amount of $400.00 each should be made out to each of the Commissioners and sent to them directly. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the payment of $950.00 payable to David O. Miller and Barbara J. Miller, husband and wife, as ]olnt tenants, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development of Washington, D.C. Also payment of $400.00 (total of $1200.00) to each of the following Commissioners: James E. Ford, Joel A. Seltz and John Janske. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INDEMNIFICATION RESOLUTION The City Manager explained that during the insurance review, it was recommended by William Husbands that the Council pass a resolution authorizing indemnlfication of deductible amounts for public officers. The City Attorney has drawn this up for Council approval. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-132 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INDEMNIFICATION OF DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CDBG RESOLUTION The City Manager explained that Hennepin County needs a resolution to accomplish the following: 1. locally adopt the Procedual Guides - Urban Hennepin County Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program, July, 1981; 2. designate Hennepln County as the program administrator for the City of Mound; 3. authorize Hennepin County to retain 7% of Year VII allocation of CDBG funds for housing rehabilitation as an administrative fee. This fee will remain about the same as it was last year, $1,400.00. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-133 RESOLUTION REGARDING URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY HOUSING REHABILITATION ADMINISTRATION FOR 1982 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked for any comments or suggestions from the citizens present. The City Manager explained that he had advised Mr. Gary Freund to appear at this time on the Agenda and discuss the house located at 6639 Halstead Avenue. Mr. Freund was present and submitted a letter dated May 4, 1982 and signed by himself, Ms. Vivlan A. Massuch, Cklair A. Hasseo and Verna Hasse asking for removal of this structure or complete reconstruction and conformance with proper inspection and construction standards and in compliance with City of Mound Ordinances and State of Minnesota Codes. The City Attorney reported to the Council and persons present what has been done stating that we are on top of this situation but we have to go thru the legal court system which can move slow. 93 May 4, 1982 The City Manager stated that the City will follow the Attorney's instructions and have the Building Inspector reinspect the structure and write up a detailed report to be submitted to both the City Attorney and the City Prose- cuting Attorney for their recommendations. The Staff will keep the Council up to date on this matter. BUILDING PERMIT REFUND The Building Inspector has requested a refund of permit fees - 6639 Halstead Lane because they were issued in error and the owner of the property would be required to file for a variance. The owner has failed to apply for the variance so the permits issued are being voided and a refund should be given. Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to refund $78.50 for Building Permit #5920 and $30.50 for Plumbing Permit #82-15 to West Suburban Properties, 4363 Wiishire Blvd., Mound, MN. 55364. The vote was unanimously In favor. Motion carried. PURCHASE AGREEMENT - NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING The City Manager reported that a soil report done before the building was erected showed soft material and that it looks like the slab under the building is only a 6" slab. He would llke to have Twin City Testing come out and check the soll and the slab to be sure this property and building will meet the needs of the City. The Council opinion was not to sign any purchase agreement on the property until Twin City Testing has given a report. The Attorney advised that an option could be entered into contingent on the test results. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to enter'into an option agreement for 30 days, giving $1OO.00 down and getting a report on the soil conditions and having the slab checked out to be sure the building will fit the City needs. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF REVENUE SHARING BUDGET The City Manager explained that some of the items in the Budget may be high and will come in lower in price, but at least it is a Budget to work within. He explained that he lowered #16 (downpayment toward publlc works building) to $15,O00 because the Building Fund does have $28,000 in it. He also reduced #17 (handicapped access) to $10,OOO because he will have Jan, the Buildlng Inspector work on this and she feels it won't cost over this amount. The Mayor asked the Council if there were any objections to the items on the list. Councilmember Ulrlck~ asked if they could add #18 (Tennis Courts in Brookton Park). It was added. Councilmember Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-134 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1982 REVENUE SHARING BUDGET WITH THE ADDITION OF ITEM #18 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 94 May 4, 1982 SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PDQ STORE Swenson moved and Ulrlck seconded a motion to set the date for a public hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for the PDQ Store to construct 2 gasoline pump islands for May 25, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING - ON & OFF SALE BEER LICENSES - THREE POINTS TAVERN Swanson moved and Polston seconded a motion to set the date for a public hearing for On & Off Sales Beer Licenses for Three Points Tavern for May I1, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMUNITY SERVICES APPRECIATION DAY The Mayor presented the Proclamation #82-96 that was passed on April 6, 1982 to Donald Ulrick. This proclaimed May 4, 1982 as Community Services Appreciati'on Day in the City of Mound. The Council all congratulated Mr. Ulrick on the fine work Community Services does. MOUND-WESTONKA POP 'SINGER'S DAY Polston moved and Swanson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-135 RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING MAY 16, 1982 AS MOUND- WESTONKA POP SINGER'S DAY IN THE CITY OF MOUND The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS The City Manager submitted information on the following items: A. LETTER FROM DNR ON LOST LAKE - Outlining why the DNR found the Lost Lake site not an acceptable alternative for an access. B. LETTER FROM THE U.S. POST OFFICE - notifying the City that they will be looking for other quarters and will be forced to vacate their present quarters by September 30, 1982. C. L.M.C.D. MINUTES AND AGENDA - the March 24, 1982 Meeting Minutes and the Agenda for the April 28, 1982 Meeting. D. LETTER TO DON DAVID INSURANCE - A certified letter that the City Attorney wrote placing him/her on notice of the City's intent to look to that agent for reimbursement should any claim arise as a result of the 41 day gap in the Liquor Liability Policy. E. EHLERS & ASSOCIATES FINANCIAL NEWS - a newsletter on government finances. F. LETTER TO THE PCA - The City's answer to the PCA letter regarding dump sites in Mound that may have been used by Tonka Toys. 95 May 4, 1982 LETTER FROM PLANNING AREA 4 ABOUT CDBG FUNDS - finding the City of Mound's Community Development program as proposed for Year VIII is consistent with the Urban Hennepin County Statement of Objectives. URBAN CORPS - The City Manager reported that in order to get interns to work for the City during the summer, the Urban Corps required a contract be signed between themselves and the City of Mound. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution· RESOLUTION #82-136 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT WITH THE URBAN CORPS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CITY/POLICE RADIOS - The City Manager reported that the Auction on May 1, 1982 brought $2825.00. He explained that for some time the City has been in need of communication equipment to be able to contact the Police cars direct and he is proposing the purchase of 4 radios (3 to be installed in the squad cars and 1 to be set up in the office) for this purpose. The cost of these radios is approximately $395.00 each and could be paid for out of the money received from the Auction. Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve the purchase of radios out of the Auction fund. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to adjourn. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF "ON AND OFF SALE BEER LICENSES" NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, May ll, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, a public hearing will be held to consider the issuance of "On and Off Sale Beer Licenses" to Richard G. Amundson DBA Amundson's Main St. Inc. The business at 5098 Three Points Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota (presently Rager's Pub) will be known as "Three Points Tavern". Property described as: Lots 12, 13, 14 and 15, Block 2, Dreamwood; Property Identifi- cation Numbers ]3-117-24 12 0020, 13-117-24 ]2-0021 and 13-117-24 12 0022 All persons appearing at said hearing will be given an oppor- tunity to be heard. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk Published in The Laker April 27, 19~2 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Licensing Department Public Hearing to consider issuance of "On and Off Sale Beer Licenses" to Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Boulevard (Rager's Pub) Richard G. Amundson is purchasing Rager's Pub and has made appli- cation for various licenses for the business. A public hearing is required on the "On and Off Sale Beer Licenses" and this has been set for May llth. The Police Department has con- cluded a background investigation and reported "have found nothing as a result of the investigation to preclude the applicants from obtaining the requested license". If the Council grants the licenses for the sale of beer, the following licenses should also be considered: Restaurant Cigarette Entertainment Permit Pool Tables - Two Juke Boxes - Two Games of Skill - Five M~s~an ms INTEROFFICE MEMO FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam., City Mmnager Bruce Wold, Chief of Police Three Points Tavern DATE ~ay 6, 19 _L The background investigation is complete and no irregularities were found. The new owner appears to be a responsible person. He was questioned about his reason for purchasing the tavern and there seems to be the desire to own a food and liquor establishment. He eventually hopes to upgrade the tavern to a restaurant with liquor. When questioned about how he hoped to make the tavern profitable when Rager's had failed, he didn't have any firm ideas. He seems somewhat naive about what market he is serving. ~ recomnendation to you would be to require finishing of the rear parking lot. Further,'that no parking be allowed on that asphalt strip in front of the building. My efforts to keep cars from parking in front and blocking sight lines have proved futilef ~!mking it a license .condition would bring about immediate compliance. Bruce H. Wold, Chief Mound Police Dept. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 NOTE Before we grant the license, the two things we should probably insist upon are: 1. That parking be prohibited on the part.of his lot that abuts Eagle Lane, because it blocks the view from Three Points Blvd. 2. That a specific timetable be submitted showing when Mr. Asmundson will complete and gravel the real parking area. Other than those, let's hope he service as fine a meal as Dee Ponder did. AGENDA FOR THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 26, 1982 City Hall 7:30 P.M. Minutes of the Planning Cormmlss~on Meeting of April 12, 1982 BOARD OF APPEALS Case 82-108 - Duane Schaller, 4967 Wilshire Boulevard Lot 8, Block 18, Wychwood Map 8 Special Purpose Fence Request e Case 82-109 - PDQ Food Store, 5550 Three Points Boulevard Part of Lots 26 & 27,.Lafayette Park, Lake Minnetonka - Map 2 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct 2 Gasoline Pump Islands Case 82-110 - Thomas Stephenson, 1717 Finch Lane Part of Lots 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block 13, Dreamwood - Variance Request - Side Yard Map 2 Change ~ate of May Board Of Appeals Meeting to May 24, 1982. CITY OF MOUND 5341Maywood Rood Mound, MN 55364 NORTH APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF MOUND ~-I0~ FEE ZONING NAME OF APPLICANT Address PROPERTY ..-.. - PLAT 3773'~ PARCEL 3/ qD ~. LOT ~F Tele Ph°~De~-; ~ [ Z Nurnber 2_' ' ff ADDITION BLOCK INTEREST IN PROPERTY FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Address q ~ ~ ~ W~ Telephone Number VARIANCE REQUESTED: FRONTI I ACCESSORY I YARD FT~ BUILDING NOTE: FT,] SIDE YARD FT. LOT SIZE LOT SQ. FOOTAGE ! FTJ 1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement in relation to lot lines, other buildings on property and abutting streets. Z. Give ownership and dimensions of adjoining property. Show approximate locations of all buildings, driveways, and streets pertinent to the application by extending survey or drawing. 3. Attach letters from adjoining affected property owners showing attitude toward request. A building permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the council resolution or variance granted becomes null and void. Variances are not transferable. ~ ~ ~/ APPLICANT., ~'~ ~ ,~ DATE ~ Signature PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION DATE COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. DATE :',:r~,-m _t-nr~fcvt'rn'in~' use (Q / / PLAT .... 45788 .... .- 465.11. ./ CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of April 26, 19~2: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-108 Lot 8, Block 18, Wychwood Request - Special Purpose Fence Zoning District R-1 Applicant: Duane Schaller 4967 Wilshire Boulevard Mound, Minnesota Phone: 472-6129 The applicant is requesting a special purpose chain link fence of (5) five foot height to be constructed along an extended portion of his property. His lot on the lakeside across Wilshire Boulevard is a non-buildable site. It is an extension of the site his home is. on which is. part of Lots 1.1, 12 and 13, Block 26, Wychwood, on the south side of Wilshire. He has stated he has a number of lake users which trespass on his property and leave debris for him to clean 'up. By the zoning definition of a front yard - "A yard extending along the full width of the front lot line between side lot lines and extending from the abutting street right-of-way to depth required, in the setback regulations for the zoning district in which such lot is located". The fencing regulations of the City Code, Section 55.17, states "fencing in the front yard is limited in height to 42 inches" Recommend: I would recommend that the requested fence variance be granted to allow a five (5) foot high chain link fence construction; recognizing that the lot topography and shape of his site is a hardship, in that it is split by right-of-way; also the lot grade slopes toward the lake, thereby, not causing a visibility problem from Wilshire Boule- vard due to the fence height or type. Refer to City Council - May 4, 1982. O. .,. I I I I I I I ! I / I ,..,';:C .... 457.88 .... --. 465,11 .- BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Fence Hei'ght Variance Reques't Lot 8, Block 18, Wychwood Applicant Duane Schaller was present. Applicant explained that he would like a 5 foot high chain link fence to begin a little to the right of Brighton Boulevard on lake side of Wilshlre Boulevard to keep fishermen off his.property. Before construction of the new bridge, bank was steeper and they were not as much of a problem. Veiland moved and Hlerzejewski seconded a motion to recommend that a variance be granted for a 5 foot high fence as under the topography and conditions, a $ foot height fence would not Interfere with line of sight, Applicant asked about Oslng a Commercial grade fence with barbs on top. The Planning Commission did not. put any restrictions on the type of chain llnk fence use. The vote was' unaimously in favor of granting the variance. APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF MOUND NAME OF ~'/ APPLICANT 7/q~ rr~ o_% Address /~/V ~'~k ~~_ , Telephone, PROPER T~__~ ADDRESS ~ PLAT ~ / ~"Y~/ PARCEL ,.LOT . &.~' ~ BLOCK INTEREST IN PROPERTY FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Addre s s Telephone Number VARIANCE REQUESTED: FRONT YARD FT.i ACCESSORYI ,, BUILDING YARD FT LOT SIZE ~AAR [ LOT SQ. RD FT. FOOTAGE N. C.U.* or OTHER (describe) REASON FOR REQUEST: NOTE: 1, Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement in relation to lot lines, other buildings FT: on property and abutting streets. 2, Give ownership and dimensions of I- adjoining property. Show approximate FT. locations of all buildings, driveways, and streets pertinent to the application by extending survey or drawing, 3, Attach letters from adjoining affected property owners showing attitude toward request. See attached letter permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the )lution or variance granted becomes null and void, [ - Signature PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION DATE COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO.,, DATE '."-non- conforming use O '71 Case 82-110 RE: 1717 Finch Lane Reason for Variance: To bring structure within our property line. This portion of building was built in 1896-1898, and has been re- novated since that time, so it is structurally sound. It was a screen porch to a cabin when built in 1896, and has since been made part of the living room space of the house. It is approxi- mately 8 feet deep. I don't know the exact date the "commons" were surveyed and the num- ber of feet taken for them, but it was after the house was built. In 1958, the kitchen was added and the upstairs bedrooms were also added by raising the roof. In.1976, the kitchen was enlarged and a bedroom and 1/2 bath were added to the main floor with a basement below. Approximately 6 inches to 1 foot of one corner of the "porch" are now on the Commons - with about 80 feet of Commons to the shoreline. The house is built on a hill. Sharon Stephenson CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of Board of Appeals Case 82-110 1717 Finch Lane Variance Request R-2 Zoning District Part of Lots 5,6,7 & 8, Block 13, Dreamwood Addition ~pplicant: Thomas Stephenson 1717 Finch Lane Phone: 472-1377 Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance 23.302(65) "Lot Line Front - That boundary of a lot which abuts an existing or dedicated public street". The property owner requesting an appeal and a maintenance permit has a front yard of 7.6 feet; the required setback is 20 feet for the house and also for the detached garage in the R-2 district. The garage is presently 12 feet± from the front property line. The side yard on the south side should be 6 feet; at the present time, the structure is 1.6 feet ~ onto the Wiota Commons. On December 23, 1975, the City Council passed a Resolution 75-437 con- curring with the Planning and Zoning Commission to allow a 16' X 20' addition to the home, but requiring the eight foot former porch be removed from the side of the house. The applicant is requesting an appeal of this former requirement. Mr. Stephenson is asking that a maintenance permit be granted pursuant to City Code Section 26.9302 Sub. 3 which reads as follows: "Subdivision 3. Public land maintenance permits. The City requires special maintenance permits, for maintaining presently constructed boat- houses or other structures on public lands. Applications for maintaining existing boathouses or other structures may be obtained from the Bui-lding Inspector at the City offices. All applications for special maintenance permits shall be reviewed by the City Council.' The Council shall deter- mine if the maintenance permit shall be granted or denied, and may order any structure to be removed. Special permits are required for any mainte- nance such as maintaining retaining walls, stonework, concrete or other types of improvements on public lands. The Council shall have the right to impose any reasonable conditions they may deem advisable to protect the public's use of the public shoreline. All structures, retaining walls, stonework, concrete or other improvements on publicilands which are in existence at the time this ordinance becommes effective shall be required to obtain a public land maintenance permit from this Council on or before April 1, 1976." The owner would like to replace the roof structure of the former porch and replace the windows to make them an openable type; presently they are stationary windows. Planning Commission Agenda Case 82-llO Page 2 Recommend: I refer to the area as a former porch, due to the fact that there is now a full basement under it, the wall is open to the living- room, and it is a heated area. Due to the fact that the City does have special provisions for structures on Commons property and does not totally disallow the .maintenance of an existing structure, I would recommend allowing Mr. Stephenson to obtain a permit to repair the former porch area. If the Commission disallows the maintenance permit, I would recom- mend that the entire former porch be removed and thereby a 6 foot sldeyard would be in compliance with the present zoning ordinance. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms Side Yard Variance · Part of Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 13, Orean~vood Hr. and Hrs~ Stephenson were present. Hr. Stephenson explalned the background of.how the screened porch was built- as part of the house in the late'1890~s whlle the Commons came Into being in the'1~2Ots. The State Surveyor has adml. tted a mistake wag made In the plan- ning of'the Commons. To correct mistake would be an expensive Court action. In 1975, he applled for a building permit for an addition .to house'because they needed more room; the permit was denied because a portion of the build- lng was on the commons. A variance.was then applled for and .received for the addition conditioned that encroachment be removed from Commons. Addl- tion was built--there Was a hazzle about amount & type of bond to be posted for removal of encroachment.. Hr. Stephenson wants to get this issue resolved; wants to clear the title to his property which cannot be done with the 1.6 foot portion over the lot line; has a non-saleable piece of land. Plannlng Commission discussed the optlons' Including maintenance permit. The Planning Commission felt.that the Commons portion of porch should be removed especiall.y'since applicant needs to put money Into house for new roof, wln/ows, etc. Applicant stated that he would be willing to bring house back to within his property line.' Paulsen moved and 0tOonnell seconded a motion to recommend that a 6 foot vari- ance be granted to allow applicant's house on his property (granted a zero lot line). The vote was Weiland against; all others in favor. 'Hotion carried. / RESC~UTION NO. 75 - 437 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE FLANNINO CCPIMISSIC~ RECO~MESq)ATION AND ALLC~4 THE NON-CX)NFORMING USE VARIANCE CONDITIONED ON THE REMOVAL OF THE FRONT PORCH. (Lot 5-8, Block 13, Dreamwood) WHEREAS, the owners of Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Block 13, Dreamwood have requested a "non-conformin~ use variance", and WHEPdEAS, the Plannin9 Commission has recommended that the permit for the addition be 9ranted providing: the eight foot porch across the front of the house be eliminated. (8) this is an encroachment of 3 feet 7 inches on the Co:~ons. any other variances be waived. WHEREFORE, BE IT RESO_VED BY THE CITY COtU~CIL'OF MO3ND, MO3ND, ESOTA: That the Plannin9 Commission recommendation to allow ~he non-conforming use variance conditioned on the r~moval of the front porch be approved providin9 all other variances are waived. Adopted by the Council this 23rd day of December, 1975 ?77 Preston% were: Chaiz~ Lou Ober~ecLr~ Co=missioners Helen He~.'e', 1, Frank ~eiland~ Ureter Hesse, C~rald Smi$.b, Council P~pre~e~tative Gordon Swensom, Oity Manager Leon&rd Eopp, inspector R~ury T.-amlsen ~nd Secretary Merge Stutsmam. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Oo..~.iesion meeting of October 30, 197~ were presented. C~rrec~ spellinff, of ~."oc~_y~.rd on prge 3. Hesse moved and ~eiland seconded- ~- motion that ~'~o ~ut-:s ~ corrected be ~pproved. The vote w~s unanimously in favor. BOARD OF Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 13.. ~on-conforming use variance ~r. end Mrs. Stephenson were prese=t. They wish to add onto house as more bedroom epace is needed. Corner of house (original cabin) is croachtng about 3 foot 7 inches on ~o~on¢. · Newell moved and ,w. eiland-seconded a motion that permit for~ addition be allowed prcviding that the eight foot porch across front of house be eliminated and any other variances waive, Discussed. The vc. tecn motion was unanimoue!y in f&vor.': .AI.~ down road are non-corz~orming uses, 6~marence Olsen, 6355 Bay Ridge Road Part of Lot 5 (E & B) Section ~.'enty Three Division of I~nd Mr. Koenig~ Attorney for fee owners, Catherine Olsen and Donald Ols~n, c~mld not be present. Requested that City Manager present information to Planning Commission. Mrs. O!een lives in house on South part of land and Donald O!sen has North part. Sewer line runs on lake side. They are r.i!!ing to d~Jicate land for cul-de-sac to the City, Newell moved that application for divioicn of land as requested be · granted prov!dinE land. ne:d-~d for cul--de~se~ is d~icat~d to City ~t this time, Saith seconded the ~r,.n~., d!,-i~i6n of th~sa tr;o ~.:,artD prcbab!e in the ~ut:-'re~ .-- ~:" ~"' - requestc-d. .rune vote r. as unanLzou;~!y in favor of FEE: $10.00 - 3 Days + 2.00 Per Day For each additlonai day. APPLICATION FOR CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 3.2 BEER PERMIT 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Name of Person Applying for Permit ~[D~~ organization Title' of Person Applying for Permit Dates Permit Will Be Used: From~ 19 Address at which Permit will be used Does the Organization carry Liquor Liability Insurance.~ If answer to No. 7 is'YES, please list: (b) ~ount of Coverage --'9. --If this application to sell 3.2 Beer is on property owned by a public agency other than the City of Mound, written notice from the public agency giving permission for such sales must accompany this application· (a) Is such written permission attached? 10. If this application is a request to sell 3.2 Beer on City property, the City requires Liquor Liability Insurance with limits of $300, 0. McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, CONSULTING ENGINEERS []LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS INC. Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 April 30, 1982 Mr. Oon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55564 Subject: Drainage Problems Block 10, Woodland Point Between Eagle Lane & Dove Lane File #6456 Dear Oon: As requested, we have reviewed the drainage problems in Block 10, Woodland Roint, between Eagle and Dove, with emphasis on Lots 4 and 5. As shown on the attached drawing, a culvert under Eagle Lane empties into a small ditch which wanders through a number of lots before it reaches a culvert under Dove Lane. When Eagle Lane was improved in 1975, the minimum storm sewers were constructed to save costs, since only a few scattered streets were included in the project and it was not possible to provide areawide storm sewers. For this reason, the culvert under Eagle Lane at the lot line between Lots 3 and 4 remained in place, with openings left in the new curb to direct the water through this culvert. The small ditch which flows through Block 10 is evidently a waterway that has existed for many years. The paving and curb and gutter on Eagle added very little additional water to this natural drainage way. We have looked at three different alternatives for rerouting the water to make Lots 4 and 5 buildable. Alternate No. 1 would consist of extending the culvert under Eagle to the rear lot line of Lot 4 and redoing the ditch from that point to the south until it intersects the existing ditch. A new catch basin would also have to be built in the gutter line at the west end of the existing culvert in Eagle. Alternate No. 2 would carry Alternate No. 1 a step further. The storm sewer pipe would be extended along the rear lot lines to approximately the line between 17 and 18 and then angle southwest and connect to the existing culvert under Dove Lane. A catch basin would have to be built at this location also. This would make not only Lots 4 and 5 buildable, but also the remaining lots in 8lock l0 usable with fill added in the low area. There are a number of large trees that would have to be removed in order to construct either Alternates No. i or No. 2, the cost of which is not included in the attached estimate. Easements would also have to be obtained for both of these alternatives. Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled paper Mr. Oon Elam April 30, 1982 Page Two Alternate No. 3 involves constructing a storm sewer in the street south to Oennings Road and connecting to the existing storm sewer at that point. This method would be costly because of the restoration of the street. SUGARY Even though Alternate No. 1 is by far the least expensive, we do not feel it would be the most economical in the long run. In order to make the remaining vacant lots buildable, the storm sewer would have to be extended to Dove Lane as suggested in Alternate No. 2. This would require additional expense and more easements. We do not feel that the City of Mound should bear the full cost of improving the drainage through this area since this has always Oeen a natural drainage way and the property owners will receive substantial financial benefits by obtaining some buildable lots. Traditionally, this type of work is done by the property owners themselves. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~amero~ OC:lr Enclosure COST ESTIMATES STORM SEWER - BLOCK 10, WOODLAND POINT ALTERNATE NO. I QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST Catch Basin I Each $800.OOAEA Curb Repair LUMP SUM 15" R.C.R. 70 L.F. 20. O0/LF 15" 90° Bend i Each 200. O0/EA 15" Reinforced Concrete Apron i Each 250.O0/EA Ditching LUMP SUM * TOTAL ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. i 800.00 300.00 1,400.00 200.00 250.00 ...250.00 $ 3,200.00 ALTERNATE NO. 2 Catch Basin 2 Each $800.O0/EA $ 1,600.00 Manhole 2 Each 900.O0/EA 1,800.00 Curb Repair LUMR SUM 300.00 15" R.C.P. 280 L.F. 20.O0/LF 5,600.00 Restoration LUMR SUM 400.00 * TOTAL ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. 2 $ 9,700.00 ALTERNATE NO. 3 Catch Basin Manhole 15" R.C.P. Curb Repair Street Restoration Bit. 1 Each 2 Each ~20 L.F. 125 TON TOTAL ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. 3 $800.O0/EA 900.O0/EA 20.O0/LF LUMP SUM 30.O0/TN $ 800.00 1,800.00 7,800.00 300.00 '3,750.00 $14,450.00 * Tree Removal Not Included C2'~ 0 '~ · C2 tnl '~ "1 C2 0 0/X/X (2~ 0'~ C~O~ May 6, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL JON ELAM, CITY MANAGER It has been suggested that we approve the Comprehensive Plan as previously approved by the Metropolitan Council and the Planning Commission in order to finalize the process that started two years ago. By law, the City has nine months to approve the plan approved by the Metro Council. They completed their approvals last December. I had hoped that perhaps we could update the plan, but it looks to me, at this point, that won't happen until later this fall or winter. Thus, I recommend approval of the plan as submitted, as general as it is. JE:fc Suite 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 MEMORANDUM November 10, 1981 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Physical Development Committee Comprehensive Planning Division (Vic Ward) City of Mound Comprehensive Plan Review Metropolitan Council District 16 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 8562-2 INTRODUCTION AND SUlt4ARY. A. Abstract Mound is located in the Council's area of planned urbanization. The Plan reflects three high priority issues: housiDg, preservation of the environment and d~al. The Plan addresses all the m"~tters requ~r~ by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. This review raises po serious issues, and no Plan modifications are required. B. ~ to Review The City of Mound's Comprehensive Plan has. been prepared and is being reviewed pursuant to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, Minn. Stat. Sec. 473.175 and Sec. 473.851 to 473.872. This review is being conducted in accordance with the Council's local plan and school program review procedures, see particularly sections 2.7 through 2.19. Generally, the Council's responsibility is to review and adopt findings and determinations with regard to the local plans: 1. Conformity with metropolitan system plans; 2. Compatibility with plans of adjacent local governmental units; and 3' Apparent consistency with other adopted Metropolitan Development Guide chapters. The Council may provide advisory comments with regard to other aspects such as technical adequacy, completeness, and its internal consistency. ~.;~,,, :.:. ~'~r~'re~W~ith~ :~:-'~ :- .:. As r° °lita" "may require a local governmental unit to modify a comprehensive plan or part thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans." Mound's Comprehensive Plan Review commenced January 23, 1981. After a preliminary review this Plan was suspended on February 17, 1981. The City completed submitting the information requested in the suspension letter and the Plan recommenced on September 28, 198i. The review of the City of Mound Comprehensive Plan must be completed by December 30, 1981. -2- · . ,. ~,- The Plan adequately addresses all the issues required in the · - sl.... :,: :.~: .-~-~:.:=-~, ..... etropolitan Land Planning' Act;' II. DESCRIPTION OF HOUND Mound is located on the west side of Lake Minnetonka in Hennepin County. 'The City borders on the Cities of Orono and Spring Park on the east and Minnetrista on the south, west and north. Its total land area is just over four square'miles and is over 80 percent developed. Mound should be fully developed by 1990. It contains over 150 acres of local parks, four lakes and two bays of Lake Minnetonka. Mound is primarily a residential community. Seventy-nine percent of the housing units are single-family. Most of its multiple family homes were built in the middle to late 1960s. Less than one percent of either type of units is in need of repair. Tonka Toys employs the most workers of any firm in the City. III. DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mound's original Plan was suspended because it lacked enough information to complete the review. The Plan actually reviewed in this document includes the document entitled City of Mound Comprehensive Plan and the following letters dated February 17, 1981, April 4, 1981, April 13, 1981, April 27, 1981 and September 15, 1981. In addition the following maps were reviewed as part of the Plan; the Wetland Map and the Sanitary Sewer Location Map. The Mound Comprehensive Plan deals with all the elements of community development policy. It is the first comprehensive update since 1961. The inventory covers Mound's population, housing, roads, local parks and capital improvements planning. Mound's Plan's Update Program placed special emphasis on issues and opportunities. It resulted in a list of development factors ranked by their importance. The three top items were housing, environmental quality and downtown revitalization. The Plan reflects these priorities. IV. ANALYSIS A. Conformity with Metropolitan Systems Plans 1. Transportation (Connie Kozlak) The Metropolitan Transit Commission furnishes bus service to Mound but there are no metropolitan highways within the City. It is connected to neighborhing communities by County Roads 15 and 110 and by Trunk Highway 12. The Plan advocates improvement of CR 15, a road where volumes currently exceed the capacity. The county_ _ has secured right-of-way for widening but the improvements are not proqrammed. The Plan does not propose any development which will affect the metropolitan highway system. The~B~--a~h~d:e_t. retention of, and improvements to, the existing(MTC routes 51N~nd 51S. It also analyzes local issues. The Plan uses the Council's roadway functional classification system although it shows an additional class of minor collectors between collectors and local streets. This class does not affect the metropolitan highway system and may be-of some local benefit. 2. Sewer {Karl Burandt) Mound, a city of about four square miles lies along the north shore of Lake Minnetonka. The C(ty (s about 80 percent developed and has sewer service throughout the City. The City is entirely inside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area {MUSA}. Policy 30 of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) states that that the sewer policy plan should comply with requirements of Procedure 10 of the WQMP. This review is for a sewer policy plan as described in the Council's Procedure 10. l~e sewer policy plan of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act can be quite general. Procedure 10 requirements for a "comprehensive sewer plan" (CSP) are much more extensive and detailed. Mound's Plan meets the basic sanitary sewer requirements for a sewer policy plan of the MLPA but is not consistent with Policy 30 or the content requirements of Procedure 10 for a CSP. The City should refer to the attached MWCC letter dated Feb. 12, 1981 for the additional required information for a CSP. The Mound sewage system has three metropolitan interceptors which serve Spring Park and parts of Minnetrista. The local sewage system serves all or nearly all of Mound and no major imr~- merits are planned ~or the system The 1990 projected flow of 1.37 mgd of the Mound Plan is identical to the WQMP. The city has projected flow to the various metropolitan interceptors. The Plan also has described intercon~unity flow and the number of connections for this flow. There are no on-site sewage systems in Mound and no new systems are allowed. The February 12, 1981, letter of the Metropolitan Waste Control Con~nission (MWCC) on the Mound sewer plan should be addressed before submitting the Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP} for MWCC approval. 3. Parks {Arne Stefferud) There are no existing or proposed Regional Recreation Open S~ace facilities in the City. 4. Airports {Chauncey Case) The nearest metropolitan aviation facility to the City of Mound is Flying Cloud Airport. No portion of the city is within the airport's land use safety zones, airspace zones, or aircraft traffic pattern. The city is within the Region's general airspace which should be protected from obstructions to air-~ navigation. In addition, Mn/DOT has designated portions of Lake Minnetonka as a permitted seaplane use area. -4- ' ~ '-~' :, ~.- ~ B.' *Compatibility With Other Governmental Unit's Plan Mound circulated its Plan to all adjacent local governments and affected school districts. They got responses from Minnetrista, Orono and Spring Park. Additional comments were submitted by Hennepin County, the Metropolitan Transit Commission and the Metropolitan Waste Control Conmission. As mentioned in the sewer section of this review, M._ound will have to respond to the Waste Control Commission'~ letter by the time it submits its Comprehensive ~eWer- Po lic), Plan. The City of Minnet~ raises some concerns about land use and transportation. These issues appear to be local matters which the two cities can work out together. None of the comments raised issues of metropolitan concern. Most respondents found the Mound Plan compatible with their plans. C. Consistency With Other Guide Chapters 1. Metropolitan Development Framework (Vic Ward) Mound is located in the Area of Planned Urbanization and is completely within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. The Plan calls for only 96 acres of development. This compares favorably to 145 acres forcasted by the Development Framework. MOUND 1979 AND 1990 LAND USE (ACRES) 1979 1990 Residential Commercial & Industrial Parks/Open Space Institutional 935 995 65 95 152 152 50 56 Total Developed 1,202 1,298 The majority of this new development will occur on seven-sites, the only significant vacant land left in the City for development. Mound is particularly interested in encouraging redevelopment in its downtown area, but there are no areas set aside for industrial/commercial rehabilitation. COMPARISON OF COUNCIL'S FORECASTS AND ...? ;.':; i',:' .:;:.: '":i:*;THE CITY OF MOUND'S (IN PARENTHESIS) 1970 1980 Census Census 1990 Population 7,572 9,280 g,700 Households 2,355 3,364 3,300 {3,500-3,550} Employment 2,725 2,456* 4,000 *1st quarter 1980, Minnesota Department of Economic Securities. -5- Mound's household forecasts differ from t il' y the -: amount to compensate for the low 1980 forecast. The Development Framework 1980 forecasts were for 3,200 households. Mound expects to implement the Plan by use of its zoning ordinance and capital improvement p~ojects. The housing policies will be implemented by influencing the location of public housing and housing subsidyprogram monies. Even though the Plan discusses implementation and has a capital improvement program it does not mention a schedule for adoption. Based on the Land Planning Act the City has to ~mprehensive~lan with]In ni~e months followinq the Council's final aecision on this Plan. 2. Investment Framework {Norm Werner) The Comprehensive Plan capital improvement program includes three projects, an addition to the public works garage {1982), a new water storage tank and a new well {1981 and 1982). The estimated cost and timing of the projects are stated. The amounts from each funding source that will be necessary to finance the garage is unclear. The need and the financial impact that the improvements will have on the City are not included. The Comprehensive Plan contains financial information about the City including a schedule of the outstanding indebtedness by bond issue as of December 31, 1976, December 31, 1977 and June 11, 1978. There is no schedule of annual debt service payments. 3. Environmental Protection {Marcel Jouseau) The City has prepared an inventory of environmental features including wetlands, floodplains, slopes, and unsuitable soils. This inventory is adequate. While the policies and implemen- tation plan refer to "forests," the inventory has provided no information on these areas. The Plan provides some environmental goals (policies?) for shoreland, floodplain, wetland, wooded areas and development on slopes. While these policies are sketchy they are generally consistent with Council protection open space and water resources policies. The city proposes to use wetlands for ponding stormwater runoff to the extent possible. This is consistent with Council policies. . - .. ..... ,The 3mplementatlon program is extremely sketchy; It 3s spelled out in a letter dated April 22, 1981. The City has adopted ordinance~ for floodplain and shoreland management; The City p~oposes~opt provisions f6r welled preser~at3on, woodland steep slopes, regUlatOrs. The very~ef d~scriptio~ of the - intent of the three provisions seems inconsistent with the policies. For example, the policy on woodlands suggests that the intent is to minimize tree cutting, and discourage clearcutting. However, the woodland preservation provision would not prohibit clearance. Similarly, the wetland provision will -6- '~ :~i~!~'~-'~"Pr0vide~ for'review but not prohibit draining and filling. While'~. there might not be a need for totally prohibiting certain activities, the specific conditions should be described. ThJ lack of further description of the regulatory provisions hinders the determination of whether these controls are adequate. In fact, these provisions appear to conflict with the local policies and to be in conflict with Council policies. 4. Housing (Joanne Barron) Housing issues rank high in Mound's Plan. The "issues identifi- cation" section of the plan places housing as the number one priority from among many con~nunity development issues considered. Included in the broad topic of housing, these concerns were mentioned {ranked highest to lowest), quality of housing, housing mix, housing redevelopment, low-cost housing, elderly housing, and overcrowding. Mound's Plan contains a data sun, nary of housing units by type, tenure and cost; a 1979 housing condition survey; and housing need survey. The Plan compares the cost, type, and condition of Mound's housing stock with its surrounding con~nunities. No income data is included. The Plan estimates that the city is 85 percent developed, and contained about 2,500 housing units in 1977; 79 percent single- family, one percent duplexes, and 20 percent multifamily. There are also 14 mobile homes. The Comprehensive Plan retains the existing residential land-use districts. These consist of two single-family zoning districts with 10,000 and 6,000 square foot zoning requirements; a duplex district requiring 9,600 - 12,000 sq. ft. lots; a townhouse district allowing eight units per gross acre {5,000 sq. ft. per unit); and a multiple zone allowing 20 units per gross acre as a maximum {at least 2,000 square feet per unit. Actual densities may be less, depending on size of units). The densities permitted in the City's single-family townhouse, and multiple residential districts closely approximate the Council's land-use advisory standards. Mound's share of the regional need for modest-cost housing is 39. The City states its intention to meet this goal. - Mound's share of the regional need for low- and moderate-income housing opportunities to 1990 is 64 to 160. The plan states the City's intention to" ro~id.e is man low- and moderate-income ~sing opportunities within the range aspo_ssible, with the ~umeri~'aTqoa~ set at the'"Cft¥'s three-year'ir Share at 35." The City's intention, apparently, is to work toward a succession of three-year goals rather than a single 10-year goal~ The City should be aware that the three-year goal is 19 to 24, not 35; and it should keep in mind the 10-year numerical goal, as well as the three-year goal. Seven vacant land parcels are identified in the plan; these are zoned commercial or low-density residential, with one parcel zoned multifamily. There are other smaller vacant parcels, and -7- the pl~ states there are numerous Vacant lot~ ~n the'older "'..~'"~'~:. platted areas of the City. Vacant land is estimated by the City.' at 60 acres. ~e ~ount of land, and the densities at which, it is zoned, appears to be adequate to provide opportunities for Mound's share of the regional low- and moderate-cost, and modest- cost, housing. A I979 windshield survey indicated that most of the housing in Mound is in good condition {60 percent) or fair condition (39 percent). One percent was classified as deteriorated. The City recognizes, however, that a significant segment of its older housing stock will need ongoing maintenance and perhaps major improvements. Most of those homes were built before 1940 as seasonal homes, and have been converted to year-round occupancy. Several policies in the plan address four areas: low- and moderate-income housing, modest-cost new construction, housing rehabilitation, and con~nunity-wide housing policies. In the area of low- and moderate-income housing, the Plan states the City's intention to provide for Mound's share of the regional need, for the provision of all types of housing for existing and new residents from varied lifestyles and background; to participate in the full range of federal and state programs; and to encourage participation in programs by families, elderly and handicapped. The City intends to locate subsidized units in areas with adequate urban services, and to strive for providing family subsidized units in structures of low to medium density. The Plan states that the City will establish land-use regulations on the basis of minimum standards for health, safety and welfare, in order to provide modest-cost new housing. Specifically mentioned are lot size, size of living units, and provision of garages. Policies regarding housing rehabilitation include actively seeking federal and state housing assistance programs, and coordina~habilitation efforts with other local n~i~hborhood preserVation programs and'projects. The ~itv will target, reha~'ilitation efforts to ownerLoccupied unit~in neighborhoods of homes built before 1940, .... The last category of policies address environmental protection regulations; encouraging energy-efficient housing by building code adherence and allowing innovation, and flexibility in bulk- area ratios in older platted areas of the City.: "" Mound currently participates and'will continue to participate ~n~ :'" the Section 8 Existing program through Metro HRA, and has 20 units under contract in the program, as of September 1, 1981. The Plan does not address whether there are rental units in the city that would allow further participation in the program. The rent data given is old--from the 1970 census. However, because most of the rental stock in Mound was built 15 to 20 years ago, and because there are over 600 apartments in the City, some would likely qualify for the program. :-"~'.".<,i.:i~..The City'also Will'continue to participate in the Minnesota -'-'~:'~.~" Housing Finance Agency's home improvement loan and grant program,' and will continue to use .federal Community Development Block Grant funds for rehabilitation. To date, 26 households have received rehabilitation assistance through the state program, and 15 through block grant funds, In terms of future participation in federal housing programs, the City will place highest priority on scattered site home ownership programs such as the Section 235 concept. Goals for modest-cost new construction will be implemented through zoning standards allowing small lot construction. 5. Solid Waste The City did not indicate in its Plan that it has adopted an ordinance governing solid waste collection. V. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. General Findings The City of Mound's Comprehensive Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review under Sec. 473.175 and Sec. 473.851 to 473.872 of the Minnesota Statutes. The City of Mound is located in Western Hennepin County in Metropolitan Council District 16. ® Mound has certified that its Comprehensive Plan was circulated to adjacent governmental units six months prior to submittal to the Council. B. Conformity With Metropolitan Plans 1. Transportation Metropolitan Transit Commission buses serve Mound. There are no metropolitan highways within the City. The Plan uses the Council's roadway functional classification system for its facilities. 2. Sewers Procedure 10 and Policy 30 of the Water Quality Management Plan measures compliance of the Mound sewer policy plan for this review...The Plan is consistent with Procedure 10 requirements "'for a Sewer policy plan but'not for a Comprehensive Sewer Plan. The February 12, 1981, MWCC letter on the Mound sewer plan should be addressed before submitting their CSP for approval. Three metropolitan interceptors in Mound serve Spring Park and part of Minnetrista. The local sewage system serves all or nearly all of Mound and no major improvements are planned for the system. The 1990 flow projection of 1.37 mgd of the Mound Plan -9- the various metropolitan interceptors. The Plan also describes interconmunity flow and the number of connections for this flow. There are no on-site systems in Mound and no new systems are allowed. 3. Parks Mound has no regional park facilities. 4. Airport Mound is not within the Flying Cloud Airport's land use safety zones, airspace zones or aircraft traffic pattern. The Plan adequately addresses the control of seaplane use. C. Consistency With Other Guide Chapters 1. Development Framework The Mound Plan presents a thorough description of the population employment and housing trends. The Plan locates the extent and intensity of residential, commercial and industrial development. The population, employment and household forecasts are consistent with the Development Framework. Mound's primary implementation tools will be its zoning and environmental ordinances and housing policies as described in the Plan. The Plan does not include a schedule for implementing these controls. Even though Mound is in the Area of Planned Urbanization, it has a full range of urban.services and very little remaining undeveloped vacant land. If the forecasts for the City are correct, Mound will be fully developed by 1990. Its Plan already exhibits an awareness of the need to rehabilitate its older comnercial areas. 2. Investment Framework The Comprehensive Plan contains a CIP which includes three projects to be constructed during 1981 and 1982. Some of the required information is included, but a statement on the amount expected from each funding source, the need for the project and the financial impact that each improvement will have on the City should be added. . .... ~"':~' ' 3.~ Environmental Protection Zhe Plan contains an adequate environmental inventory. If there are significant wooded areas in Mound, these should be delineated. The City has adopted environmental policies that are generally consistent with Council policies. The City has an implementation program. The provisions for wetland, woodland and slope protection appear to be inconsistent with the local policies and the Council protection open space policies. The intent of these provisions should be clarified. VI. 4.~ Houstng: :'.*. ...... :' '~ The housing element of Mound's Comprehensive Plan adequately addresses the City's housing situation through a data summary and analysis, numerical goals and policies, and an implementation plan. RECOP~IENDATIONS That Mound be advised that: A. This report constitutes the Council's official review required under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act {MLPA). B. No Plan modifications are required as authorized in Minnesota Statutes Sec. 473.175, Subd. 1. C. The Plan relates to the metropolitan system plans as follows: 1. The Plan is in conformance with metropolitan system plans for transportation, parks, airports, and sewers. The Plan meets the sanitary sewer planning requirements of the MI. PA, but not the requirements for a comprehensive sewer plan. For full conformity with the system plan requirements for comprehensive sewer plans, it should address the comments raised by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) and submit the "~ve~ewer oolic¥ plan" oortion of the Plan to the MWCC for its review. D. The Plan apppears compatible with the plans of adjacent government units and affected school districts. E. The Plan relates to other adopted Metropolitan Development Guide chapter as follows: The Plan is consistent with the Development Framework, the Investment Framework and the Housing chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide. The Plan is consistent with the Investment Framework. The capital improvement program meets the requirements of MSA 473.852,2, Subdivision 4, except that it should contain; a) clarification of the amo~nt..expected from ,a~h f,ndiqg source; ~)-a,~s~atemen~ Of need for each improvement; and c) a statement ~f the financial impact that each improvement will have on the.:~.:;~:.~'~. Ci~j6. lo ~mprove its Plan, :ne Ci[v may wish to add a ~chenule · of annual' debt service o~vments (which ~ay be summarized by type aebt) to its capital improvement program. At such time as the City amends its capital improvement program (at least biennially), it will send a copy to the Metropolitan Council for review and contnent. The Plan is consistent with the Protection Open Space chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide. The intent of the environmental regulatory controls should be clarified and made consistent with Council and local policies. In accordance wi.th' M.S.473.206, new environmental standards and environmental provisions should be submitted to the Council 'for review prior to final adoption by the City. 4. rAthough not a requirement of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, the City should indicate in its Plan that it has adopted an ordinance governing solid waste collection pursuant to the requirements of the 1978 Solid Waste Act {Minn. Statutes 473.811). The purpose of the ordinance is to assure that refuse collection services and needs are met and available to the general public, and that regulatory controls are available when necessary to control nuisances and public health problems attributable to refuse collection. VII. ADVISORY COMMENTS A. Local Park System The City's park system is slightly below the nationally recon~ended guideline of 10 acres/I,000 population. The Comprehensive Plan contains a good analysis of the existing park system, appropriate policies and implementation techniques for providing recreation services to the City. Staf~~sts that capital improvements for parks be .]~sted by priority in the 1980~83 Capital Improvement ~rogra~instead of beinq qrouped toqether. [his way, future ~mprovements that are being funded with LAWCON/LCMR grants can be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council based on the City's Comprehensive Plan. B. Solar Access fThe Omnibus Energy Act requires local governments to include of'1978 a land-use plan element for protection and development of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. This Act was passed after the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and is an amendment to the Planning Act. The Mound Plan should contain solar access provisions. It would be appropriate to cite the solar access requirement and to indicate the plan will be amended to deal with the subject when planning guidelines are available. VW:vv:emp 11.10.81 H160P2 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 May 6, 1982 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Finally after a long delay, I think we are ready to go about installing the security light in the parking lot the City and the Medical Clinic share. The cost from All-Star Electric is $1,692.00, and I think this estimate is high. Ron Roelofs contributed the light fixture (value $325.00) and the pole cost is $525.00 which is included in the $1692.00 figure. The construction costs will be shared 50-50 with the Medical Clinic as will the monthly lighting costs. This will clear up a real problem, especially in the winter when so many people use the lot at night when they attend hockey games. JE:fc T.S.R. LIGHTING (61;] 546-3018 · 9707 - 10T~_ AVE. NORTH MPLS., MN Hr, John Elam City of Hound Hound liN, 55364 Dear John The price'on the p61e we discussed for the parking'..: lot between Church St. & the Dr% Office would be $525.00 plus frei§hr, This would accon~°date the-- fixture I will give.to the City. Thank you. Very sincerely yours Ron Roel°fs. /000, Iooi Lot Lighting Site confined energy efficient high performance luminaires for parking facilities. A harmonious group of architecturally related forms with optical systems to suit all exterior lighting requirements BILLS ..... MAY 11, 1982 Acro-Minnesota Holly Bostrom Bryan Rock Prod. Jan Bertrand Curtis 1000 Fran Clark Lance Coppin Consolidated Micrographic Robert Cheney Dependable Services Jon Elam First Bank-Mpls. Flaherty Equip Corp James Ford Geffre Carpet Serv. Glenwood Inglewood Gopher Sign Eugene Hickok & Assoc George M. Hansen Co. Jones Chemicals JoHn Janske Jabco Home Improv. (HUD) Kromer Co. The Laker Doris Lepsch Lutz Tree Service MacQueen Equip Marina Auto Supply Minnegasco Mound Fire Dept MN City Mgmt Assn Mn Recreation & Park Minn Comm Maple Plain Diesel City of Mound McMaster-Carr Mound Postmaster Modern Express David & Barbara Miller Northland Elec Supply Official Reporters Planning & Develop Serv Pitney Bowes Harold Reiner Joel Seltz State Treas-Surp)us Smokeater State of MN Document Title Ins. T & T Maintenance 329.47 144.00 129.97 18.48 428.02 31.69 362.50 lO3.79 334.00 33.00 32.68 80.OO 87.10 4oo.oo 1,139.48 43.80 30.02 136.OO 3,200.00 249.00 4OO.OO 2,880.88 177.67 65.87 3O.OO 975.OO 27,O00.0O 348.34 1,O49.33 4,466.50 25.OO 9O.OO 28.50 310.24 2OO.0O 286.31 122.64 23.50 95O.OO 184.66 172.50 625.00 49.50 302.50 4OO.OO 8.00 51.00 9.oo 782.00 50.31 Univ of MN II II West Suburban Prop Wurst, Carroll, Pearson Widmer Bros. Westonka Sanitation Westonka Firestone TOTAL BI LLS LIQUOR BILLS Holly Bost rom Bradley Exterminating Real One Acquisition Regal Window Clean Nels Schernau Butch's Bar Supply City Club Distrib. Coca Cola Bottllng Day Distrib East Side Beverage Gold Medal Beverage Home Juice Jude Candy Kool Kube Ice The Liquor House Midwest Wine A.J. Ogle Co. Pepsi Cola/7 Up Pog reba Distrlb Thorpe Distrlb Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor Old Peoria Ed Phillips & Sons Johnson Paper Co. TOTAL LIQUOR BILLS GRAND TOTAL--ALL BILLS 195.00 90.00 lO9.00 6,818.97 366.00 2,485.00 15.59 59,456.81 110.00 19.00 675.00 10.75 11.99 164.40 2,670.95 347.65 3,254.55 2,994.77 117.OO 37.56 225.00 195.60 944.55 1,049.15 1,995.40 .234.75 3,675.17 4,493.65 3,088.76 3,467.99 2,401.53 1,215.57 306.31 33,707.05 93,163.86 [COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS [] LAND SURVEYORS [] PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Oon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: Street Overlay Project File #6468 Dear Son: As you requested, we have investigated the cost of installing bituminous overlays on three streets in Mouno. In preparing our estimtaes, we have made a visual inspection of the roads, but have not done any soils investigations. Each of the streets has some unique drainage problems which we will explain in this letter. I. Priest Lane is a fairly flat road, with a raised bituminous edge which serves as curb. This edge is about 3" high, and the adjacent lawns and driveways are aligned with it. Installing a 2-1/2" overlay will essentially eliminate the bituminous curb, and water could back up onto lawns. Some work will have to Oe done to match driveways to the new street surface. We estimate that the cost of this work to be $9,800, including the adjustment of manholes and water valve boxes. ~, On Rustic Ridge Road, the grades are quite critical for drainage, especially at the west end of the circle. We estimate that a l-l/2" overlay could be installed for a cost of $4,000. 3.The Gumwood Road and Langdon Lane streets are not in good condition. The surface has many transverse cracks and many areas of severe alligatoring. The edges have been worn down by washing and erosion. Grades are quite steep. One process which could De considered would be to lay a fabric mat over the entire road and construct a 2-1/2" overlay on top of that mat. This process has been advertised by a petroleum company as being very cost effective. In Minnesota it has met with mixed success, so we feel that it is experimental, as no guidelines have Oeen developed for its use in cold climates. We estimate this method of repair to cost $23,200. Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria- Eagan printed on recvcle~J Mr. Oon Elam May 7, 1982 Page Two Frankly, we are not comfortable with installing an overlay on the Gun~ood Road/Langdon Road streets. We feel there are some moisture problems in the subgrade which will continue to cause break-ups even with an overlay. We feel that these streets should be reconstructed, with subsurface drainage, curb and gutter, and 5" of bituminous surfacing. The estimated cost of this project is $96,000. We would be able to prepare a preliminary report so that the Council could hold a public hearing on this improvement. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CW:lr printed on recycled paper ,,~,, N ¥ ."1 QNrl0tN 0.L N01.LIQQ~ C1N0:)35 J- N 3 ~139 HV~I~ V J.C'I ~ L331:1 j. C~E I $ ,t.J 39H30~i C135 Od 0 ti d OFFICE OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT C-2353 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 (612) 348-6418 May 5, 1982 Mr. John Elam City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: West Tonka Senior Housing/Preliminary Funding Requirements Dear John: As discussed briefly on May 3, 1982, it would be beneficial to the West Tonka 202 development process if the City of Mound would reprogram $2,000 - $3,000 in previous year CDBG funds into a Year VII activity for the West Tonka Housing project. The reprogrammed funds would be used to provide acquisition consultant assistance in securing the necessary purchase option, consistent with the requirements of the Uniform Act for Acquisition and Relocation. The reprogramming process requires a public hearing and City Council resolution, the forma~ for which are enclosed, prior to execution of contracts for the consultant assistance. If you have any questions please contact me at 348-5859. Si ncerely, Larry,' B1 ackstad Senior Planner lw Enclosures HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby,given that Hennepin County and the City of Mound are sponsoring a public hearing for the purpose of amending the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Program as it involves the City of Mound for program Year VII funded under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 as amended. The hearing is to be held on June 8, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. at Mound City Hall. This publ|c hearing is being held in accord with the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement pursuant to M.S. 471.59. May 7, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 .(612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Enclosed is the proposal that the Downtown Advisory Committee selected fOr design services. The firm selected is Ernst Associates Landscape Architects and John Weldt Associates Architect. They are located in Chaska. Mr. Weidt, incidentally, lives in Mound. They were selected from an initial group of seven proposals of which three firms were interviewed in depth. Their proposal is within the budget guidelines of $4,000 and promises to work up some exciting ideas. They now need Council approval to enter into a contract with Ernst Associates for Downtown Design Services for building and streetscapes as outlined in their proposal which was submitted to the Downtown Advisory Committee. JE:fc enc. ~0~o c~o 0 0 · m 0 ~0~0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ g~oo zz I t~ 33 ITl :> [3 · V 0 o~ 0 0 0 0 bO 0 0 0 o ~- o o = 0 ~ 0 o e'~o .C 0 o.o cO 0 o o · c~ .~o~ 0 -~4 ~.~ 0 ~ 0 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS AIA Document B727 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect for Special Services 1979 EDITION THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR USE WHEN OTHER B-SERIES DOCUMENTS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES; CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION AGREEMENT made as of the 11th Hundred and eighty two. day of MaS. in the year of Nineteen BETWEEN the Owner: City of Mound Mound, MN and the~~ ~andscape Archi'tect hereinafter referred to as Architect: Ernst Associlates · For the following Project: (Include detailed description ot Project location and scope.) Provide professional services to assist in development of design guidelines for buildings and streetscape in the City of Mound. The Owner and the Architect agree as set forth below. Copyright 1972, © 1979 by The American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Avenue. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006. Repro- duction of the material herein or substantial quotation of its provisions ~ithout permission of the AIA violates the copyright laws of the United States and will be subject to legal prosecution. AIA DOCUMENT B727 · SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT · JUNE 1979 EDITION · AIA~ · G1979 THE -\MERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.W.. WAStlINGTON, D.C. 20006 B727 ~ 1979 1 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT ARTICLE 2 THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 2.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding requirements for the Project. 2.2 The Owner shall designate, when necessary, a rep- resentative authorized to act in the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project. The Owner or such authorized representative shall examine the documents submitted by the Architect and shall render decisions pertaining thereto promptly, to avoid unreasonable delay in the progress of the Architect's services. 2.3 The Owner shall furnish required information as ex- peditiously as necessary for the orderly progress of the Work, and the Architect shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness thereof. ARTICLE 3 DIRECT SALARY AND DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE 3.1 Direct Salary Expense is defined as the direct salaries of all the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project, but does not include the cost of contributions and bene- fits related thereto, whether mandatory or customary, as described in Paragraph 3.2, and included in Direct Per- sonnel Expense. 3.2 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct salaries of all the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project, and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary contributions and benefits related thereto, such as employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pen- sions, and similar contributions and benefits. ARTICLE 4 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 4.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to the Archi- tect's compensation and include actual expenditures made by the Architect and the Architect's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project for the expenses listed in the following Subparagraphs: .1 expense of transportation and living expenses in connection with out-of-town travel authorized by the Owner, .2 long distance communications, .3 fees paid for securing approvals of authorities hav- lng jurisdiction over the Project, .4 reproductions, .5 postage and handling of documents, .6 renderings and models requested by the Owner, .7 data processing and photographic production techniques when used in connection with Addi- tional Services, .8 expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized by the Owner. ARTICLE 5 PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT 5.1 Payments on account of the Architect's. services, and for Reimbursable Expenses as defined in Article 4, shall be made monthly upon presentation of the Architect's state- ment of services rendered or as otherwise provided in this Agreement. 5.2 An initial payment as set forth in Paragraph 10.1 is the minimum payment under this Agreement. 5.3 If the Project is suspended or abandoned in whole or in part for more than three months, the Architect shall be compensated for all services performed prior to re- ceipt of written notice from the Owner of such suspen- sion or abandonment, together with Reimbursable Ex- penses then due and all Termination Expenses as defined in Paragraph 8.4. If the Project is resumed after being suspended for more than three months, the Architect's compensation shall be equitably adjusted. ARTICLE 6 ARCHITECT'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS 6.1 Records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses pertaining to services performed on the basis of a Multiple of Direct Salary or Direct Personnel Expense shall be kept on the basis of generally accepted accounting principles and shall be available to the Owner or the Owner's authorized representative at mutually convenient times. ARTICLE 7 ARBITRATION 7.1 All claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties to this Agreement arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof, shall be decided by arbitration in accordance with the Construc- tion Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitra- tion Association then obtaining unless the parties mutu- ally agree otherwise. No arbitration arising out of or re- lating to this Agreement shall include, by consolidation, joinder or in any other manner, any additional person not a party to this Agreement except by written consent con- taining a specific reference to this Agreement and signed by the Architect, the Owner and any other person sought to be joined. Any consent to arbitration involving an. additional person or persons shall not constitute consent to arbitration of any dispute not described therein or with any person not named or described therein. This agree- ment to arbitrate and any agreement to arbitrate with an additional person or persons duly consented to by the parties to this Agreement shall be specifically enforceable under the prevailing arbitration law. 7.2 Notice of the demand for arbitration shall be filed in writing with the other party to this Agreement and with the American Arbitration Association. The demand shall be made within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event shall the demand for arbitration be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. AIA DOCUMENT B727 · SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT · JUNE 1979 EDITION · AIA® · G1979 THE A~IERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 B727-- 1979 3 7.3 The award rendered by the arbitrators shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. ARTICLE 8 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT I].1 This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days' written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms through no fault of the party initiating the termination. 8.2 This Agreement may be terminated by the Owner upon at least seven days' written notice to the Architect in the event that the Project is permanently abandoned. 8.3 In the event of termination not the fault of the Architect, the Architect shall be compensated for all ser- vices performed to the termination date, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due and all Termination Ex- penses as defined in Paragraph 8.4. 8.4 Termination Expenses are defined as Reimbursable Expenses directly attributable to termination for which the Architect is not otherwise compensated, plus an amount computed as a percentage of the compensation earned to the time of termination, as follows: For Services provided on a Multiple of Direct Salary or Direct Personnel Expense basis, 20% of the total expenses incurred to the time of termination; For Services provided on a Fixed Fee basis, 10% of the Fixed Fee earned to the time of termination. ARTICLE 9 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 9.1 Unless otherwise specified, this Agreement shall be governed by the law of the principal place of business of the Architect. 9.2 As between the parties to this Agreement: as to all acts or failures to act by either party to this Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations shall commence to run and any alleged cause of action shall be deemed to have accrued in any and all events not later than the date payment is due to the Architect pursuant to Article 5. 9.3 The Owner and the Architect, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns and legal representa- tives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. Neither the Owner nor the Architect shall assign, sublet or transfer any interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 9.4 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Owner and the Architect and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Owner and Architect. AIA DOCUMENT B727 · SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT · JUNE 1979 EDITION · AIA® · ©1979 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.~,V., WASHINGTON, D,C. 20006 B727--1979 4 ARTICLE 10 BASIS OF COMPENSATION The Owner shall compensate the Architect for the services provided, in accordance with Article 5, Payments to the Archi- tect, and the other Terms and Conditions of this Agreement, as follows: 10.1 AN INITIAL PAYMENT of dollars ($ ) shall be made upon execution of this Agre. ement and credited to the Owner's account as follows: 10.2 COMPENSATION FOR THE ARCHITECT'S SERVICES, as described in Article 1, Architect's Services, shall be com- puted as follows: (Here insert basis ot compensation, including fixed amounts, multiples or percentages, and identiiy the services to which particular methods of compen- sation apply, if necessary.) Fixed'maximum for time and reimbursable expenses not to exceed $4,000.00. For time, at the following rates per hour: Principals $45.00 / hr. All other staff at 2.75x direct personnel expense, typically: Architect $33.00 / hr. Technical I $27.50 / hr. Technical II $18.00 / hr. 10.3 10.4 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, as described in Article 4, and any other items included in Article 11 as Reimburs- able Expenses, a multiple of Olle ( I ) times the amounts expended by the Architect, the Architect's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project. Payments due the Architect and unpaid under this Agreement shall bear interest from the date payment is due at the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing at the principal place of business of the Architect. 1.5% / month shall be charged to all (Here insert any rate ol interest agreed upon.) balances over 30 days old. (U~ury laws and requirements under the Federal Truth in Lending Act, similar state and local consumer credit laws and other regulations at the Owner'.~ and Architect's principal places ot business, the location ot the Project and elsewhere may affect the ~alldity ot this provision. Specific legal advice should be obtained with respect to deletion, modification or other requirements such az writk, n d~closures or waivers.) AIA DOCUMENT B727 · SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ,, JUNE 1979 EDITION · AIA® · ~)1979 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 B727-- 1979 5 10.5 The Owner and the Architect a§ree in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of this Agreement that: 10.5.1 10.5.2 IF THE SCOPE of the Project er of the Architect's services is changed materially, the amounts of. compensa- tion shall be equitably adjusted. IF THE SERVICES covered by this Agreement have not been completed within SiX ( 6 ) months of the date hereof, through no fault of the Architect, the amounts of compensation, rates and multiples set forth herein shall be equitably adjusted. ARTICLE 11 OTHER CONDITIONS This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above. OWNER ARCHITECT AIA DOCUMENT B727 · SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT · JUNE 1979 EDITION · AIA'~ · G/1979 THE AMERICAN INSflTUTE OF ARCtqTEC~'S, 1735 NEW YORK AVE, NW., WASHINGTON, DC. 20006 B727-- 1979 6 May 6, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Jan Haugen from the City of Shorewood wishes to be endorsed by the City for a position on the League of Cities Board of Directors. If you wish to do so, please pass a motion and I will forward it to the League Nominating Committee. JE:fc /oo / MINUTES OF MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1982 WESTONKA SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER (OLD MOUND HIGH SCHOOL) 7:00 P.M. WESTONKA SENIORS'HOUSING TASK FORCE PRESENT: Larry Blackstad, Tom Frahm, W. J. Gregg, Howard Hodges, Russell Peterson, John Rocheford ABSENT: 'Ron Kraemer GUESTS: Westonka Senior Citizens Building Committee Members A brief introduction of the Task Force members was given by Howard Hodges. Larry Blackstad of the Hennepin County Office of Planning and John Rocheford of the Community Development Corporation gave .a summary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 202 funding process. Each member was given a copy of the HUD Answer Book (Section 202), Development Flow Chart, Comparison of Roles, and Participants and Responsibilities listing. The various roles and responsibilities of the participants in the development were discussed and it was agreed that site selection was the next step. The concensus was that the only possible site locations were in Spring Park and two in the City .of Mound. It was agreed that HUD should look at each site and that their comments should be reported back to the Task Force. John Rocheford agreed to bring HUD representatives Out to the site locations as soon as possible and report back to the Task Force at the next meeting, which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, April 29, 1982 at 7:50 P.M.' at the Mound City Hall. The City Manager of Mound will be asked to attend the next meeting. /0O3- WESTONKA SENIORS HOUSING TASK FORCE Site Review Four site considered: (1) Spring Park (2) Next Mound City Hall (3) Next to Our Lady of the Lake (4) Across Lynwood Boulevard from Super Valu and Oil Company On Thursday, April 22, 1982 a representative from the local office of the Department of Housing and Urban Development reviewed the above four site locations. The following are comments discussed on each site: (1) Spring Park (Parcel A attached) - Railroad tracks across street - Half of land owned by the City of Spring Park - Half of land has two homes - Access to other homes if alley vacated - Bus stop location - Food, drug, and other services located close to site (2) Land Next to Mound City Hall Street access - Water preserve to west - Size of site - Possible attractive view - Bus stop location - Food, drug, and other services located clos to site (5) Our Lady of the Lake Annex and Land South - Attractive view - Sidewalks in place - Soil conditions - Bus stop location - Food, drug, and other services located close to site - Size of site (4) Land Across Lynwood Boulevard from Super Valu and Oil Company (Parcel B attached) - Size of site - Oil taks across from site - Building west of site - Attractive view from site of rear side of Super Valu - Food, drug and other services located close to site -2- Recommendations Proceed with site locations C and D while working to solve problems that each site contains. Site C: soil condition size can purchase option be obtained Site D: size of site oil company across street from site /oo7 °9 ~ARcEL ~ L.,.J ff ~- -~CHURCH CHUF~H R~ ~ L.YN WOO0 g LVO. :t --i % -% - MAY WOO0 NOTE' '3AV 'N3~VM J o~o~o :~o'~¥'~^ IqARKET SURVEY S57 surveyed in the following committees: Mound 28S Minnetrista 59 Spring Park 100 Orono $1 St. Bonifacius 2S Other communities 57 Total 557 Type of Housing at Present: Own home Own condominium Rent house Rent apartment 571 3 5 160 Income Levels of Survey Participants: One person - below 15,200 - above 15,200 110 21 Two persons - below 15,100 - above IS,100 154 94 Three persons - below 17,000 - above 17,000 18 12 Four persons - below 18,000 4 Five persons - under 20,000 10 FRANK J. BUYSSE & ASSOCIATES 3534 IVY PLACE CASCO POINT WAYZATA, MN 55391 471-9037 Broker Real Estate -Investments Business Opportunities April 23, 1982 Police Chief Wold Mound City Hall · 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Chief Wold: It seemed to us, that the only time people contact the police department is when they have a problem or a com- plaint, this time it's different. We wanted to write and compliment your officers for their prompt response to two separate calls we made to your dis- patcher involving burglaries at the Skelly station next to our restaurant. In both instances, within four minutes from the time of our calls, officers were on the scene. It is an extremely comfortable feeling for us to know that we have that kind of police protection available and we would like you to pass on our compliments and appreciation to your officers. D0blNI ~/8 ~AURANT (/~" TD~lHoffma~'W' Shnipman ~, /~ DONNIE'S - ,o FAU.nANT 4131 ~'<11 ~,111111. IR}I 'I.liVAIll) ;~1{ lt'.X'l), ,\lin XI'.'.%( )'l',\ 553G4 'l'[~l.l'~l'llON[h (il"'_,4/--_{~_6.-"" ''~ ' CITY OF WA Y ZA TA 600 RICE STREET, WAYZATA, MINN. 55391 PHONE 473-0234 May 5, 1982 Ms. Fran Clark City Clerk City of Mound 5B41 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Fran: The Wayzata City Council appointed Toni Riley to serve on the INCD ad hoc committee. We appreciate having the opportunity to participate in discussions and thanw the group for leaving a spot open for the City of Wayzata. Yours very truly, City Manager DLB/js cc: Toni Riley 908 E. Shady Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE May, 1982 Saturday 5-15-82 Water Structures & Environment Committee 7:30 a.m., ParkBench Eatery, Spring Park Monday 5-17-82 Lake Use Committee 4:30 p.m., LMCD Office, Wayzata Saturday 5-22-82 Executive Committee 7:30 a.m., Park Bench Eatery, Spring Park Wednesday 5-26-82 Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors 8 p.m., Tonka Bay Village Hall 4901Manitou Road (County Road 19) 5-3-82 CITY OF MOUND , MINNESOTA MOUND CITY WIDE TRASH PICKUP .May 17 thru 19 May 17th 1st Day - Precincts I & II May 18th May 19th 2nd Day - Precincts V & VI 3rd Day -- Precincts III & IV All items for pickup must be bagged or boxed and must be at curbside by 7:00 A.M. on the scheduled pickup day. All large items such as stoves, mattresses, washers, dryers, bed springs @ $41~00~ each. Refrigerators and deep freezers @$5.00 each. Tires @$2.00 each. The above listed items will be picked up on the same day as is designated for all other small items, as long as it is paid for at the time of pickup. Items not accepted for pickupS' (A) Stumps, logs, concrete and rocks (B) Buildingmaterials (C) Garbage (D) Derelict automobiles or large auto parts (E) Brush, limbs, tree or shrub trimmings For disposal of items under "E" above, call for an appointment for the City Brush Chipper at 472-1251. 1 HENNEPIN May 3~ 198~ OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR A-2300 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 Mr. Jon Elam Mound City Manager 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam*. The purpose of this letter is to serve as a progress report on the upgrading of the Hennepin County Public Safety radio communications system that is operated by the Sheriff's Department. The Hennepin County Board Resolution (82-3-84R) that established emergency public safety radio communications as a County function and responsibility, without charge for emergency dispatching services, was passed on March 16, 1982. Since that time, members of the Sheriff's Department, Information Services Department and the Office of Planning and Development have been meeting to provide preliminary implementation plans for the various directives in the Resolution. Specific progress that has been accomplished to date includes the following items: In an attempt to eliminate the congestion on the main law enforcement dispatch radio channel (155.61 MHz), the County has been divided into a North dispatch zone and a South dispatch zone, with Highway 55 serving as the approximate North-South dividing line. The south dispatch zone will continue to use 155.61 MHz as the dispatch channel; the north zone will use 154.8 MHz as the dispatch channel. Both segments will use mobile relay (repeater) type of operation, a network of satellite receivers and a receiver voting system. All base equipment is now installed and operational; most of the mobile radios are also installed and operational. Captain Donald Vodegel of the Sheriff's Radio Division advises that operational tests on the new north repeater channel will begin by June 1, 1982. When the second dispatch zone is fully operational (in a few months), the radio traffic load on 155.61 MHz will be cut in half. This impending improvement will do much to eliminate the serious problem of overcrowding on the main public safety radio dispatch channel. As directed by the Board Resolution, representatives of the Sheriff's Radio Division and the Communications Division of the Information Services Department are developing an Action Plan to remove administrative radio traffic from the main public safety dispatch channel, which is inte~ded to further reduce congestion on the main radio dispatch channel(s). HENNEPIN COUNTY an ~qual opportunlh/employer /0/8 -2- The process for the development of a Users Advisory Committee for the County radio network is being drafted for municipal review including recommendations for the determination of policy, membership and duties of the committee. County staff will be reviewing this process with municipalities in the near future. Procedures are being developed to remove most of the Sheriff's Department communications from the existing car-to-car channel (Channel Two, 155.805 MHz), thereby eliminating much of the competition on the frequency. I have directed staff to provide you with this type of periodic progress report on the public safety communication upgrading project. If you have questions about this report or about any aspect of the project, please contact Mr. Roy Pasquarette at 348-3190 for additional details. Dale A. Aekmann County Administrator Police Chief Bruce Wold Hennepin County Commissioners Sheriff Don Omodt Io17 CLAYTON L. LI:Fle'VIrRIr HERBERT P. LIrF'LER J. DENNIS O'BRIEN JOHN ir. DRAWZ DAVID d. KIrNNEDY JOHN B. DEAN GLENN E. PURDUE CHARLIrS L. LEFEVIrRE HERBIrRT R LEFLER, m JEFFREY J. STRAND JAMES R O'MEARA MARY J. BJORKLUND JOHN Go KRESSEL DAYLIr NOLAN CINDY L. LAVORATO MICHAEL A. MASH LUKE R. KOMARrK JOAN N. ERICKSIrN ELIZABETH D. MORAN LAW OFFICES LE:FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ A PROFIrSSIDNAL ASSOCIATION BROOKLYN CENTER OFFICE 103 BROOKLYN LAW CIrNTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 5637 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA B542B TELEPHONE (BIZ) 333-OB43 (61Z)536-8037 RICHARO J. SCHIEFFER April 28, 1982 IMPORTANT NOTICE TO SRAMEMBERS Enclosed is a copy of the Minutes of the last quarterly meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority. Section 6 of the Minutes deserves your early attention. The SRA Board of Directors has resolved to attempt to.organize a conference on the MWCC. Each member is requested to state its concerns regarding the adminis- tration of the MWCC by letter to Mr. LeFevere not later than May 10. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to call him, or if he is not available, I will be pleased to respond. Very truly.~our._s, Glenn E. Purdue GEP:jdn Enclosure MINUTES OF QUARTERLY MEETING OF SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY April 21, 1982 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a quarterly meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at the Ambassador Motor Hotel, in the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, on Wednesday, April 21, 1982, commencing at 6:30 p.m. 1. Call to Order: Chairman Orvil Johnson. The meeting was called to order by 2. Roll Call: as follows: Upon roll call attendance was found to be Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Champlin Columbia Heights Eden Prairie Edina Fridley Lakeland Lauderdale Maple Plain Maplewood Mendota Heights Minnetrista Mound North St. Paul Osseo Plymouth Richfield Roseville Shakopee Shoreview Spring Park Victoria Gene Lhotka Graydon R. Boeck Michael T. Baldwin Gayle Norberg John D. Frane Russell C. Hedlund Edward Hamernik Daniel Eichten Raymond Shogren Robert Will John C. Greavu Orvil J. Johnson Charlotte Peterson Leighton Lindlan Glenn Anderson Catherone Goth Frederick Moore Don Hassenstab Charles Honchell Eldon A. Rienke John K. Anderson William Stawarski Patricia Osmonson Raymond Hoag Also in attendance were Mayor Knapp and Councilman Thompson of the City of Excelsior and SRA attorney Glenn Purdue. 3. Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the annual meeting of February 17, 1982, were presented. It was moved by Mr. Boeck, seconded by Mr. Hamernik, that the minutes be approved as mailed. Carried unanimously. 4. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Dalen was unable to attend the meeting. He provided a report indicating that for the period ending March 31, 1982, SRA had a cash balance of $23,631.13 and investments costing $73,359.56 and having a face value of $75,000.00. It was moved by Mr. Frane, seconded by Mr. Hamernik and carried that the treasurer's report be received. 5. Claims: The following claims were presented: City of Edina, which paid the last quarterly statement of LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz, ending 1/28/82 (authorized at the previous meeting of the Board) $3,247.45 LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz, legal services for the period commencing 2/4/82 and ending 4/6/82 $3,514.47 It was moved by Mr. Greavu, seconded by Mr. Shogren that these claims be approved and-paid. Carried unanimously. 6. Report of Chairman Johnson: Chairman Johnson reported for the MWCC Study Committee. He referred to the Minutes of the Executive Committee dated March 31, 1982, a letter from Clayton LeFevere, and Comparative Costs Committee Report, copies of which are attached hereto. Following general discussion of the matter, Mr. Boeck moved, with second by Mr. Hamernik, that Mr. LeFevere be directed to proceed with an attempt to organize a conference as described in Mr. LeFevere's letter. Mr. Boeck stated that the conference would be for the purpose of presenting the issues apparent to municipalities and seeking meaningful responses from agency participants. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Greavu moved, and Mr. Anderson seconded, that members submit the concerns regarding the MWCC to Mr. LeFevere by May 10. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Reinke advised the Board of a meeting of the Joint Legislative Commission on Metropolitan Governance to be held at the Shakopee Junior High School cafeteria on May 7 at 7:00 p.m. The Commission is chaired by Senator Bob Schmidt and is charged with determining local government perceptions of the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Reinke urged all members to submit position papers. It was moved and seconded that the Chairman be directed to appoint someone to appear at the meeting and provide the Committee with the information gathered by the SRA. Motion carried unanimously. 7. Consideration of Communications: The Chairman reported that the City of Excelsior had indicated an interest in being reinstated in the SRA. Chairman Knapp spoke briefly to that matter, and it was moved by Mr. Norberg, seconded by Mr. Boeck, to reinstate the City of Excelsior upon receipt of a proper resolution of the Council requesting same. Carried unanimously. 8. Unfinished Business: Mr. Purdue reported that the NSP electric rate filing is before the Hearing Examiner and that his recommendation should be issued in the next few days. SRA has not been active in this filing, except for monitoring the position of parties. There has been no apparent shifting in the positions of the parties since the previous report. 9. New Business: Mr. Purdue reported of the filing of a petition by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company for a general rate increase, the petition having been filed on April 21, 1982. He recommended that counsel be authorized to intervene on behalf of the SRA, but that such intervention be limited and for the purpose of monitoring the Case and discussing the same with appropriate parties. It was moved by Mr. Norberg, seconded by Mr. Boeck, that counsel be authorized to intervene on behalf of SRA, that such intervention be limited to monitoring the case, and that the Executive Committee be authorized to call a special meeting of the Board if the issues raised in the case may merit additional participation of SRA. Carried unanimously. Discussion followed, without consensus, as to what SRA action might be anticipated in future filings of other telephone utilities, particularly Continental Telephone Company. 10. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before the meeting, it was moved by Mr. Reinke, seconded by Mr. Greavu, to adjourn, and the meeting was declared adjourned. Secretary ATTEST: Chairman 3 CLAYTON L. LKFEvIrRE: HERBERT P. LEFLER J..OENNIS O'BRIEN JOHN E. OI~AWZ DAVID d. KENNEDY JOHN B. DEAN GLENN E. PURDUE LAW OFFICES L£FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN 6, DR^WZ A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION BROOKLYN CENTER OFFICIr ~OOO FIRST BANK PLACE wEST 103 BROOKLYN LAW CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA ~5~0= 5637 BROOKLYN BOULIrVARD BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 554~9 TELEPHONE (~IZ) 333-0543 (612)536-~037 RICHARD J. $CHIIrFFER May. 5, 1982 Dear SRA Members: Enclosed please find copies of the Minutes of the Executive Committee dated March 31, 1982, a letter from Clayton LeFevere dated April 21, 1982, and the Comparative Costs Committee Report mentioned in the Minutes of the Quarterly Meeting of April 21, 1982. Also enclosed is a copy of the financial statement for the first quarter of 1982. The enclosures were to be included with the Minutes recently sent. We are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused. Glenn E. Purdue jdn Enclosures Note: The Legislative Committee meeting in Shakopee mentioned in the Minutes is to be held today, not May 2- I hope the error does not result in anyone missing the meeting. MINUTES OF SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE March 31, 1982 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Executive Committee of the Suburban Rate Authority met at the city hall of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, on Wednesday, March 31, 1982, at 4:00 p.m. The following members were present: Orvil Johnson, Fred Moore, Graydon Boeck and Ed Hamernik. Also in attendance were Beatta Blomquist, Mayor of the City of Eagan, attending · as a representative from the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM); Vern Peterson, Executive Director of AMM; William Schoell, SRA board member, and Clayton LeFevere, SRA attorney. The chairman explained that the purpose of the meeting was to consider what action the SRA might take, either alone or in cooperation with other organizations, such as the AMM, in response to the committee reports prepared by the SRA's ad hoc committees on MWCC matters. Mr. LeFevere gave an explanation of the history of the SRJ~'s involvement in MWCC matters; the voluntary investigations made by the SRA's ad hoc committees; and a comment on the limited resources available to the SRA in reviewing activities of the MWCC. Mr. Peterson commented on the interest of the AMM in matters involving the MWCC and indicated that his organization also has limited resources which it can use to provide observation and review of MWCC activities. Mr. Schoell gave a summary of the conclusions reached by the volunteers on his ad hoc committees and indicated that he believes the volunteers have gone about as far as they can go on a volunteer basis. Mayor Blomquist suggested that it might be necessary for interested parties to advocate legislation which would provide a review of MWCC activities. There was then some discussion about where any such review authority properly should be placed. Mr. Peterson indicated that the Minnesota Legislature has created a committee on governments in the metropolitan area and that this could be the appropriate place to look for an answer as to how review and oversight of the MWCC might be handled. I.AW OFFICES LE:FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ CLAYTON L. LEFEvERE HERBERT F,. LEFLER J. DENNIS O'BRIEN JOHN E. DRAWZ DAVID J. KENNEDY JOHN B. DEAN GLENN E. PURDUE CHARLES L. LI[FEVERE HERB£RT R LI;'FLER,m JEFFREY J. STRAND JANES I~, O'NEARA NARY J. I=IJORKLUNO JOHN G. KRESSEL DAYLE NOLAN CINOY L. LAVORATO 1~. Orv'il ,Johnson, Cha±rman Suburban Rato Authorit7 750 South Plaza Drive St. Paul, 1~ 55120 A PROFESSIONAL. ASSOCIATION 2000 FIRST BANK RI.ACE WE~=;T MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEImHONE: ([61=') 333-OS~,,3 April 21, 1982 BROOKLYN CENT£R OFFICE 103 BROOKLYN LAW CENTER S637 BROOKLYN SOULEVARD BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA S54;'S (612) 536-8037 RICHARD J. SCHIE:FFER Dear Mr. Johnson: The Executive Committee of the SRA has asked us to formulate a proposed general plan for a conference on the subject of the MWCC. As a consequence, I have contacted a number of people about possible participation, including the following: Charles Weaver, Chairman of the Metropolitan Council; Salisbury Adams, Chairman of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission; Vern Peterson, Executive Director of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities; Paul Gilje, Associate Director, Citizens League; John Bailey, chief administrative officer of the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce and coordinator of activities of metropolitan-area Chambers of Commerce. Every one of these people expressed a willingness to participate in a steering committee either personally or through a designate, to plan and conduct an all-day conference on the MWCC - where it's been, where it is and where it's going. Virtually every one of them felt that this is an extremely important topic to be discussed by interested parties through- out the metropolitan area and that now is the time to do so. All of them offered their full cooperation in publicizing such a conference and doing what they could to make it a success. In my opinion, the conference should not be designed to be either pro-MWCC or anti-MWCC. It should be informational in nature. It should include a number of presenters who would be able to advise us on what is happening to MWCC rates; what new treatment standards are being imposed upon MWCC; what the cost and rate implications of such additional require- ments may be; and, generally, what the future may hold BANK BUILDING 750 SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE · MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA 55120 TELEPHONE (612) 452-1850 December 16, 1981 Mr. William Schoelt c/o Schoell & Madson, Inc. 50 Ninth Avenue South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 COMPARATIVE COSTS COH)IITTEE REPORT on COMPARATIVE COSTS IN SIiIILAR DISTRICTS The Comparative Costs Committee met with Dick Berg, Finance Dir- ector of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission on June 2, 1981 to discuss our study topic with him. We met with Dick because he is tab- ulating comparative cost information right now as a member of the Amer- ican ltetro Sewage Agency {A~ISA). AMS~ is an 86 member organization whose member's service represents 2/3 of the sewage flow generated in the United States. Dick had sent us a copy of his preliminary tabulation which we have reviewed. Attached herewith is the final AMSA tabulation. Our subcommittee has concluded from this tabulation that the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission charges are "average" when compared with like communities. Some guidance in reading the table follow: In~,terpreting the sewer rates table it should be noted that "one family costs" were arrived at by assuming one family contributes 100,000 gallons per year. Furthermore, the dollars shown are Met- ropolitan Waste Control Commission costs charged to the communities not what the communities bill their users. e The way the table is compiled, one can not simply compare all of the costs equally. Level o~ Service and Level of Treatment columns have to be the same to get a fair comparison. There are a great number of municipalities that have secondary treatment SUBURBAN RATE AUTHOP. ITY ANALYSIS OF C~3I','GE IN CASH BALANCE SAI2~T LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA For Three Mqnths Ended March 31, 1982 Balance at January 1, 1982 Additions: Interest income Sale of investments Deductions: LeFebere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brten & Drswz- Legal services Investments purchased Balance at March 31, 1982 $ 6,356.71 .33~954.2~. $ 4,110.18 40,~10.96 $44,421.1~ $ 3,247.45 _ 17,542.56 20,790.01 $23.,631.17 INVEStmENTS Federal Farra Credit B~nk Bonds United States Treasury Bills Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds 10.95% 9.30 15.25 Due 10-22-82 Discount Due 12-1-83 Due 7-23-84 FACE VALUE $10,000.00 17,539.56 4,000.00 42,000.00 .$73,359.5~ ~75~000.00