Loading...
82-06-08Mound, Minnesota MOUND CITY COUNCIL June 8, 1982 Regular Meeting City Hall - 7:30 P.M. 1. Minutes of May 25, 1982, Regular Meeting 10 11 12 13 14. 15. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, adding wetland districts and regulations and relating to fees for administering the Zoning Ordinance. Resolution establishing a Schedule of Fees for all zoning matters in the City of Mound. PUBLIC HEARING: "For the purpose of amending the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Program" by reallocating up to $3,000 from C.D.B.G. Housing Rehabil- itation to Senior Citizen Housing Development to cover preliminary costs. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS A. Case 82-113 James W. & Mary B. Scruton 5267 Bartlett Blvd. Lot 31, Auditor's Subd. 170 Application: Preliminary'Lot Split Zoning District: R-1 B. Case 82-114 Rebecca Yantes 4936 Edgewater Drive Parcel A & Parcel 'B, Skarp & Lindquist's Ravenswood Application: Subdivision Lot-Split Zoning District: R-2 C. Case 82-115 James C. Hendricks 3006 Westedge Blvd. Lots 4,5,6, & 19, Block 14, The Highlands Request: Sideyar~ Variance Zoning District: R-1 Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present (please limit to 3 minutes) Tax Forfeiture Parcels Manchester Parking Signs (Between Brighton Blvd. & Commons) Bluebird Lane Problems - Holly Lovseth Purchase of Election Ballot Counter with Revenue Sharing Funds Approval of Easement Agreement from 1979 Street Improvement Soil Borings on City Storage Lot on County Rd. 15 - Verbal Report Soil Report - Widmer Building County Rt. llO Gambling Permits - A. Shoreline Early Intervention & Bridge B. Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church Payment of Bills Pg. 1127-1135 Pg. 1136-1144 Pg. 1145 Pg. 1145-1152 Pg. 1153-1157 Pg. 1158-1159 Pg. 1160-1161 Pg. 1162-1163 Pg. 1164-1171 Pg. 1172-1173 Pg. 1174-1176 Pg. !177 Pg. ii78-1180 Pg. 1181-1197 Pg. i198-1199 Pg. 1200-1201 Pg. 1202 Page 1126 16. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Letter from Attorney Jim Larson on Continental Case B. Material from Maple Plain Newsletter C. Continental Purchase of Computor Business' D. Letter from MTC on Shelter at Bartlett & Shoreline E. Notes from Jim Kegan on his request for 0rdinanc~ change. F. Letter from City Prosecutor G. Letter from City Attorney on Lake Front Lots H. Letter to Buffalo Bituminous regarding 1980 Street Project I. Letter to Hardrives regarding 1980'Street Project J. LMCD Appointment to Lake Minnetonka Task Force K. Brad Van Nest request for appointment to Lake Minnetonka Task Force L. 1982-~ Downtown Development Budget M. Explanation of Agencies involved with the Lake N. Article on Tonka Toys Annual Meeting O. L.M.C.D. Minutes - April 28, 1982 P. I'City Liable for Sidewalk Hole" Q. Hennepin County Agricultural Society request for contribution R. American Legion Post 398 - Gambling Report S. School Board Minutes T. "Civil Liability for Police Administration" - an article by the City Prosecutor U. Letter from Senior Citizen Center, Inc. V. DAC Meeting Date Change Pgt 1203-1204 Pg. 1205 Pg. 1206 Pg. 1207-1208 Pg' 120~-1210 Pg. 1211 Pg. 1212-1213 P9. 1214 Pg. 1215 Pg. 1216 Pg. 1217-1221 Pg. 1222 Pg. 1223 Pg. 1224-1225 Pg. 1226-1229 Pg. 1230 Pg. 1231 Pg. 1232 Pg. 1233-1236 Pg. 1237-1246 Pg. 1247 Pg. 1248 Page 1126-A i04 May 25, 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 s~id City on May 25, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Robert Polygon. ~ordon §w~n~On and Donald Ulrick. Als0 present were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Attorney Curt Pearson, Police Chief Bruce Wold, City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: John Wagman, Bob Hanson, Margaret Hanson, Gary Paulsen, David Klein, Dick Carlson, Glenn Rogers. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting on May II, 1982, were presented for consideration. Swenson movedand Charon seconded a'motion to approve the minutes of the May 11, 1982, regular meeting, as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Mayor Lindlan opened the public hearing and asked for any comments or objections from the public on the delinquent utility bills. There were none. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-145 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS IN IN THE AMOUNT OF $2234.91 AND AUTHORIZING THE STAFF TO SHUTOFF WATER SERVICE FOR THESE DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT'- GASOLINE PUMPS - PDQ STORE. The City Manager explained that the-Planning Commission has approved this Conditional Use Permit with the Building Inspector's recommendations. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Mr. Shelton, a representative of PDQ Stores, presented a picture to the Council of a similar operation in Eden Prairie. The Council questioned having 3 underground tanks and only 2 dual pumps. Mr. Shelton explained that the third underground tank would be for putting another fuel in at some future date if needed. Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-146 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S CONDITIONS ON PAGE 1044 OF THE COUNCIL PACKET AND ADDING _ APPROVING 3 UNDERGROUND TANKS AND 3 PUMPS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried 105 May 25, 1982 EXPANDED CLEAN-UP CAMPAIGN The City Manager explained that he has worked up some ideas on how to handle the cleaning up of some 300 to 400 lots in the City of Mound. This would be an expanded campaign but cannot be done overnight. His plan would be: I. Create a City Employee Task Force with cameras and note pads to go over the entire City lot by lot and block by block. 2. Review the City Ordinances to insure we have the legal tools to enforce the clean-up. 3. Identify everyone who has junked cars, trash or junk in their yards or lots. '4. Send out a.letter giving these people 30Z60 days to clean-up thei~ property. The letter will outline specifically what needs to be done. 5. Follow-up the process by checking each site after ~5 days. 6. After the 60 days has expired, if progress has not been made, a citation Will be issued. Next, 10 days will elapse and specific arrangement~ made to correct'the violations by the property owner.or 7. Prosecution will begin and a court order sought to insure clean-up compliance begins. 8. If action still isn't taken, the City will hire a clean-up crew, keep tract of the'costs and assess the cos'ts ba~k against the property. The City Manager also stated that if the city wide clean-up in the Spring and Fall would include all items of trash; maybe we wouldo't have the problems we have now. That will be looked into before the Fall Clean-Up. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion to authorize the Staff to prepare an expanded City Clean-Up Campaign using the points above. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. GRAVEL DRIVEWAY PROBLEM The CitY Manager explained that. one of the city's most difficult problems is keeping the crushed rock from dr'i'veway runoff out of the streets and. storm sewers. He is proposing that the City develop an-ordinance to at least require from 5 to I0 feetof hard surface'back of the'gutte~ be i:nstaIled in all driveways. The City Attor'ne¥ stated that legally'the City cannot do this. Councilmember Swenson pointed out ~hat when people hard surface their driveways their taxes go up so he could see why people would not want a hard surface drive. No action was taken on this item. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked if there were any comments or suggestions from citizens present. John Wagman - asked why the Wetlands Ordinance was going to have to be reapproved and a public hearing held. The Mayor'explained that the reason for the reapproval and hearing was because after the original one the Map was changed to more accurately reflect the size and location of the wetlands thus the entire procedure must be done over. WINE LICENSE & SET UP PERMIT - AL & ALMA'S - RENEWAL Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. I06 May 25, 1982 RESOLUTION #82-147 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RENEWAL OF A WINE LICENSE AND SET-UP PERMIT FOR AL & ALMA'S RESTAURANT The'vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MISCELLANEOUS LICENSES - CIGARETTE AND GAMES OF SKILL Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-148 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF LICENSES AS LISTED ON PAGE 1060 OF THE COUNCIL PACKET The vote was 4 in favor with Councilmember-Charon abstaining. Motion carried. PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT The City Manager explained that the Mohawk Jaycees have applied for a Public Dance Permit for the Pond Sports Arena for June 12, 1982, and have asked that the fee be waived. This will be a "Schools Out" benefit dance. Ulrick.moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-149 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT TO THE MOHAWK JAYCEES FOR JUNE 12, 1982, AT THE POND SPORTS ARENA FROM 7 P.M. TO 12 MIDNIGHT The Vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. TAX FORFEITURE LANDS - RECONVEYANCE The City Manager'asked the Council if they had any reasons why the 17 lots listed on page 1062 of the Council Packet should not be reconveyed back to the County for private auction to adjacent property owners. The City Attorney voiced concern over the possibility of reconveying the following three lots: Lot I~ Block 2, Halstead View Lot 4, Block I, Halstead View Lot 3, Block 1,. Halstead View because he felt that it would be bad planning for the future. The majority of the Council-felt that these three lots have a history of problems and that selling them to adjacent property owners and getting them back on the tax roles is most important at this time. Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to direct the Staff to prepare resolutions for each of the lots outlining the reasons the lot is being sold, giving whatever special assessments are outstanding, interests of abutting property owners and stipulating that if the abutting property owners are not interested in purchasing the lot that the City retains ownership. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ~o7 May 25, 1982 WOOD CHIPPING - REFUNDS The City Manager explained that there are refunds for woodchipping because of prepayment for the 'service. Ulrlck moved and'Charon seconded a motion to approve the refunds for woodchipping to the following persons: 1. Brent Miller, 4524 Tuxedo Blvd. 2. John Richard, 3037 Highland Blvd. 3. Vern Christianson, 3098 Shoreline Blvd. 4. Byron Petersen, 31OO Highland Blvd. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. $3O.0O 30.oo 3O.OO 30.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.ACTIVITIES - PART OF YEAR VIII-URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT The City Manager.explained that to complete development of the Year VIII Urban Hennepin.County Statement of Projected Use of Communi'ty Development Block Grant funds, it is requested that the Council enact a resolution authorizing inclusion of the following activities' in the Statement of Projected Use of Funds: I, Downtown Commercial Building Rehab Design' 2. Low. Interest Commercial. Rehabilitation Loans 3. Housing Rehabilitation 4. Special Assessment Grants 5. Elderly Housing Development 6. Administration ~ Charoh~mov~d'and Swenson'seconded the following resolution. 5,ooo 40,000 20,O00 .I0,000 10,000 4,890. RESOLUTION #82-150 RESOLUTION.AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AOTIVITIES FOR THE CITY OF MOUND TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CONSIDERATION AS PART OF THE YEAK VIII URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION IN ACCORDANCE'WITH THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED The vote was unanimously in favor. PARKING - MANCHESTER ROAD Motion carried. The City Manager explained that from what he'can ascertain, the street construction crews must have put up "No Parking'Anytime" signs on Manchester from Brighton Blvd. to the Commons, because there is nothing in the parking ordinance covering this area. Thus, the signs have been removed and "No Parking Nov. 15 to April 15" signs have been installed on.the south side of Manchester. The south side has no curb. Dave Klein and Dick Carlson, who live on Manchester by the Commons, are objecting to the "No Parking Anytime" signs being removed.. Since the signs were put up last year, they have had no problems with vandalism, thefts, kids parking, parties or noise. They would propose allowing parking on the other side of Cambridge but not right down to the lake. 113o 108 May 25, 1982 Councilmember Swenson stated that the area between Brighton Blvd. and the Commons on Manchester was never signed I'No Parking" before last fall. The Council felt they did not have appropriate background information to make a decision. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion to defer action on this subject until the June 8th meeting when background information could be furnished. The vote was unanimously ~n favor. Motion carried.. THREE POINTS BLVD. SIGNING The City Manager stated that'John Cameron has pointed out that when Three Points Blvd. was done the City signed a contract stating that there would be "No Parking Anytime" signs on al. 1 of Three Points Blvd. from Commerce Blvd. to Resthaven. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following amendment to the Parking Ordinance: ORDINANCE #433 'AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 46.29, SUBSECTION 60 (c) BY ADDING SUBDIVISION #10 ~ "NO PARKING ANYTIME" ON BOTH SIDE OF THREE POINTS BLVD. FROM COMMERCE BLVD. TO RESTHAVEN The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Mayor Lindlan stated that he would like to see the Stop Sign at the corner of Gull and Three Points Blvd. on Three Point Blvd. elimina'ted. Bruce Wold, Police Chief explained that the sign is there to slow traffic down on Three Points Blvd. Mayor Lindlan moved to have the Stop Sign taken down and Caution Signs put up in its place. Motion died for lack of a second. CROSSWALKS The Police Chief explained that Hennepin County will install and sign a cross- walk on the north side of Three Points Blvd. at Commerce Blvd. but they will not do the crosswalks on Shoreline Blvd. because of manpower cutbacks. The City Manager stated that he has contracted with Precision Striping' to have several striping jobs done including the Shoreline Blvd. crosswalks. STREET SIGNS The Police Chief informed the Council that there are still some places where street signs are either improperly placed or haven't been installed. He will continue to inform Public Works as these areas are identified. BLUEBIRD LANE This was an information item that the City Manager felt the Council should be aware of in case Holly Lovseth of 1656 Bluebird Lane comes to the Council and asks for 'lNo Parking" signs on both sides of Bluebird Lane. The City Manager and the Police Chief concur that they can see no reason for zoning the whole street "No Parking" because there are no unusual topography or other factors which would require the change in the parking zones. May 25, 1982 PAYMENT OF BILLS Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of $119,802.18, when funds are available. Roll call vote'was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS The City Manager provided information on the following. A. LETTER FROM DAVID DURENBERGER ON IRS RULING 81-58 This ruling dealt with the tax status of police and fire relief assocations and was resolved in favor of the Hinnesota Police and fire relief associations. LETTER FROM POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Notification that Mike Reese'passed his Class'"D" Wastewater License. SUBURBAN PUBLIC HEALTH NURSE SERVICE LETTER. Annual statisti'cs for 1981 of'-the nursing services provided to the residents of Mound. D. SYMPOSIUM ON SMALL BUSINESS A presentation made by Dr. Dav'id.L. Birch regarding the forces and conditions that have affected the North Central States~ economies in the past decade. E. TWIN ~"ITIES LABOR MARKET'INFORMATION FOR MAY " MAY 12, 1982 SUN NEWSPAPER EDITORIAL An edi'toriai by Donald M. Carlson, special assistant to the commissioner, Dept. of Natural Resources Trails and Waterways Unit, St. Paul, explaining their views on the Lost Lake'Access. G. MINNEHAHA CREEKWATERSHED DISTRICT AGENDA FOR MAY 20, 1982 H. NOTICE REGARDING PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO HEADWATERS CONTROL.STRUCTURE/ MANAGEMENT POLICY The Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District met on May 20, 1982 and didi not'take action on the proposed changes to the Management Policy for the Headwater~ Control Structure. They desire to conclude their information-gathering meetings with residents in various'areas of the District before taking action on the proposed changes. WAFTA MINUTES Minutes from the April 21st meeting of the Western Area Fire Training Academy. LETTER FROM AWWA A congratulatory letter to the Mound Water Department for their out- standing safety record for 1981 from American Water Works AssoCiation. K. HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT REDISTRICTING PLAN By legislative directive, the structure of the Park Reserve District Board will undergo significant changes on January 1, 1983. The size of the Board will be reduced to seven members from the current eleven. IlO May 25, 1982 Three members will be appointed from the membership of the Minneapolis Park Board. The remaining Commissioners will continue to be elected from four suburban districts. However, the districts will be redrawn based on population instead of the current method which uses geography as a basis for drawing district lines. The Plan is based on 1980 census figures and attempts to combine communities of similar interests. BACKGROUND MEMO - HOCKEY ASSOCIATION The City Manager reported that he has been approached by the Hockey Association'about. the possibility of securing a temporary 3.2 Beer License and a Gambling Permit for two separate fund raisers in the Ice Arena. They wish to hold these sometime this Fall. Councilmember Ulrick stated that the arena is' under lease to two school districts'for the Summer. , The City-Attorney advised that the two school districts would have to approve'th6'Hockey Association holding these fund raisers before the City could act.. No action was taken. SEA[ED BID SALE The City Manager reported that the City, has been notified that under the authority in Internal Revenue Code section 6331, the Surfside, Inc., 2670 Commerce Blvd. has been Seized for nonpayment of internal revenue taxes and will be sold at public sale. under sealed bid on June 10, 1982, 10:O0 A.M. Ne CONTINENTAL TELEPHONE INFORMATION · A press release from the Minnesota Department of-Public Service and the article published in the Minneapol. i~s S.tar regarding the MDPS's recommendation to reduce Continental Telephone's rate increase almost in half. Also enclosed in this'packet was the testimony of Derick O. Dahlen, our.rate analyst, before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission on May 21, 1982. Councilmember Swenson asked that as many of the Council as possible attend the Maple Plain Public Hearing on Monday, June 7, 1982, and also the Mound Public Hearing on Thursday, June 10, 1982. O. L.M.C.D. An Agenda for the May 26th meeting. WEST SUBURBAN PROPERTIES A progress report regarding 6639 Halstead Avenue. A jury trial date was set for August 3, 1982, with no negotiation settled at the pre-trial hearing. Jane Bertrand, Building Official, has discussed a condemnation hearing with our City Attorney, Jim Larson. Mr. Larson is drafting a resolution to be adopted by the City Council to have the buildings removed under the provisions of the hazardous building act. EXECUTIVE SESSION Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to go into Executive Session regarding the Bonhoff case which is a legal matter. 9:50 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Council reconvened at 10:35 P.M. in the Council Chambers. //~3 111 May 25, 1982 BOHNHOFF CASE The Council~ during Executive Session, discussed with the City Attorney possible ways to settle this case. Background. The Bohnhoffs on Island View Drive are suing for the damage to a boathouse which they alleged was damaged as a result of a pipe that leaked. The pipe being owned by the City. Their original claim was for $8,615.00. Our insurance company, Aetna, refused to participate in the matter. Now, after negotiations, the Bohnhoffs'are willing to settle for $4,000.00 of which the insurance company has agreed to pay $2,000.00 if the City will pay $2,000.00. The more difficult problem is the fact that the existing damaged boathouse encroaches on a public lane by approximately 1/10th of a foot. The City Manager is recommending that the Council vacate the easterly 1 foot of the public lane which will get the boathouse~off of public property and that this vacation will not have an adverse affect of the public interest. The City'Attorney recommended that the Council initiate, with the Bohnhoffs, the vacation of the easterly l'foot of the public lane from Island View Drive to the Commons and asSuming~:that after the public hearing, the 1 foot is vacated, the Council would then agree to pay the $2,000 and the insurance company $2,000 to resolve the disputed lawsuit. Charon moved and Ulrick s~conded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-151 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INITIATION, WITH THE BOHNHOFFS, FOR THE VACATION OF THE EASTERLY 1..FOOT OF THE PUBLIC LANE FROM ISLAND VIEW DRIVE TO THE COMMONS AND ASSUMING THAT AFTER'THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE l FOOT IS VACATED,· THE COUNCIL WOULD THEN AGREE TO PAY THE $2,000 AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY $2,000 TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTED LAWSUIT The vote was unanimously in favor with Councilmembers Polston and. Swenson qualifying their yes votes.' The.only re~son they. voted yes was because in 1979 the Council authorized a variance and the boathouse encroachment was overlooked at that time. Motion carried. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to. adjourn at 10;40 The vote was unanrmously in favor.'"Motion carried" C,ty Clerk City~ager BILLS ...... MAY 25, 1982 Applebaums 11.94 All Star Electric 84.43 " " " 343.28 Jan Bertrand 25.40 Badger Meter 40.41 BuElington Northern 533.33 Bowman Barnes 125.06 " " 93.03 Badger Meter 20.98 Chapln Publishing 45.03 Commissioner of Revenue 3.00 Century Camera 137.50 Coast to Coast 63.82 Continental Telephone 1,211.53 Bill Clark Standard 2,716.83 .Gary Cayo 4.50 Dixco Engraving 3.25 Empire Crown Auto 29.95 John Ewald 4.00 Firemen's Conference Exp. 1,645.OO First Bank Mpls 20.00 Ganzel Signs 106.27 Gerrys Plumbing (HUD) 678.50 Henn Co. (½ R.E. tax) 32,169.64 Eugene Hickok 80.OO Hayden Murphy 211.00 Henn Co. Treas 1,950.00 Henn Co. Chf Police PTAC 60.00 Henn Co. Sheriffs Dept 5.70 Illies& Sons 195.00 Internatl Assn Fire Chiefs 60.00 Kromer Co. 45.75 Koehnens Standard 12.33 Ken & Norms Cabinets 75.00 LOGIS 1,260.92 Lehn Electric 164.50 Lutz Tree Service 565.00 Wm Mueller & Sons 1,111.70 McCombs-Knutson 9,724.00 Metro Waste Control 19,277.27 City of Minnetrista 136.OO MacQueen Equip 87.79 Minnegasco 3.00 Mound Hdwe 7.83 Mound Super Valu 65.18 MS Print, Inc. 73.05 Martins Navarre 66 30.25 Mpls Star & Trib 80.00 City of Mound 45.33 Mound Postmaster 1OO.OO Lorraine Manson 44.00 Modern Express 23.50 Macqueen Equip 3,000.00 City of Mound 85.44 NSP 7,294.42 Nemadji Tile 1,O71.45 John Nafus 90.00 Navarre Hdwe 55.61 NSP 716.19 NW Bell Tele 60.30 Old Dominion Brush 540.00 Pitney Bowes Credit 26.00 Charles Pearson 14.52 Brad Roy 60.00 Reo Raj Kennels 215.00 Sterne Electric 103.98 Sun Newspaper 84.00 Spring Park Car Wash 109.30 Ted Stallman 12.OO Thrifty Snyder Drug 93.14 Towns Edge Ford 1,824.65 Thurk Bros. Chev 76.00 Village Printers 286.25 Van Waters & Rogers 1,075.65 Unitog 336.30 Water Products 234.80 Westonka Sewer & Water 153.50 R.L. Youngdahl & Assoc 6,248.50 Xerox : 573.40 Ziegler, Inc. 573.29 F.H. Bathke 13.80 Blackowiak & Son 56.00 State Treas 15.OO Skyview Design (HUD) 2,090.00 State of MN Documents: 14.75 Mike Savage 90.00 Wood N Nail (HUD) 4,434.00 WoodChipping Refunds 120.00 The Liquor House 348.24 Griggs, Cooper 3,509.62 Johnson Bros. Liq. 4,663.49 MN Distillers 1,132.90 Old Peoria 1,194.59 Ed Phillips 1,495.32 TOTAL BILLS 119,802.18 NOTICE OF'PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ADDING WETLAND DISTRICTS AND REGULATIONS AND RELATING TO FEES FOR ADMINISTERING THE ZONING ORDINANCE 'NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota will meet on the' 8th day of 'JUN£ ' , 1982, at the City Hall located at 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing and adopting a Wetlands Ordinance and Map as a part of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically delineating the wetlands areas and districts within the City and providing authority to the City Council to charge fees for administering the Zoning Ordinance. A cop.y of the proposed Ordinance and official Wetlands District Map are on file in the office of the City Clerk for inspection by any interested party. The public is invited to attend and such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the adoption of the Wetlands Ordinance and Map will be heard at said meeting. Francene C. Clark City Clerk Published in The Laker May 25, 1982 ~ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WETLAND DISTRICTS AND REGULATIONS AND PROVISION FOR FEES The City of Mound does ordain: The following additions are made to the Zoning Code of the City and shall read as follows: Section 23.1100. Wetlands - Purpose. The City Council of Mound finds that there are ~tlands within the City which, as part of the ecosystem, are critical to the health, safety and welfare of the land, animals and people within the City. These wetlands, if preserved and maintained, constitute important physical, aesthetic, recreational and economic assets for existing and future residents of the City. Therefore, the purposes of this district are: 1. To provide for the protection, preservation, proper maintenance and use of specified wetlands. 2. To minimize the disturbance to them as to prevent damage from excessive sedimentation, eutrophication or pollution. 3. To prevent loss of fish and other aquatic organisms, wildlife and vegetation and the habitats of the same. 4. To provide for the protection of the City's fresh water supplies from the dangers of drought, overdraft, pollution or mismanagement. 5. To reduce the financial burdens imposed upon the community through rescue and relief efforts occasioned by the occupancy or use of areas subject to periodic flooding and prevent loss of life, property damage and the losses and risks associated with flood conditions. 6. To preserve the location, character and extent of natural drainage courses. Section 23.1105. Authority. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.357, 459.20, 378.31, Subd. 11, and Chapter 105, the City of Mound does adopt district boundaries and a map showing said wetland boundaries and types; and regulations and controls for all designated wetlands within the City. Section 23.110. District Boundaries. The districts as herein- after defined shall apply to wetland areas which are specifically delineated on the Official Wetlands Map of the City of Mound which is attached hereto and adopted as a part of this ordinance and which designates which lands are within each defined district. The definition of each district is as defined in U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39 (1971 Edition), and are defined as follows: 'TYpe 3 Wetlands: Inland shallow fresh marshes. The soil is usually waterlogged during the growing season; often it is covered with as much as six (6) 'inches or more of water. Vegetation includes grasses, bulruShes, pickerelweed' and smartweeds. These marshes'may nearly' fill shallow lake basins or sloughs, or they may border deep marshes on the landward side. TYpe.'4 'wetlands: Inland deep fresh marshes. The soil is covered with six (6)inches to three (3) feet or more of water during the growing season. Vegetation includes cat- tails, reeds, bulrushes, spiderushes and wild rice. In open areas,'pondweeds, naiads, coontail, watermilfoils, waterweeds, duckweeds, waterlilies or spatterdocks may be found. These marshes may almost completely fill shallow lake basins, potholes, limestone sinks and sloughs or they may border' open water in such depressions. Type'5 'wetlands: Inland open fresh water. Shallow ponds and reservoirs are included in this type. Water is usually less than ten~ (10) feet deep and is fringed by a border of emergent vegetation. Vegetation includes ponRweeds, naiads, wild celery, coontail, watermilfoils, muskgrasses, water- lilies and spatterdocks. For purposes of determining the application of this district to any particular parcel of land or water the above referenced map shall be on file in the office of the City Manager and shall be available for inspection and copying. Section 23.1115. 'Wetland Permit. Except as hereinafter provided in this ordinance, no person shall perform any development in a wetland district without first having obtained a wetland permit (hereinafter referred to as "Permit") from the City of Mound. Develop- ment shall inDlude the construction, installation or alteration of any structure; the clearing or altering of vegetation or land and the division of land into two or more parcels. Section 23.1120. EXceptions. The Permit requirements estab- lished by this ordinance shall not apply to: Emergency work necessary to preserve life or property. When emergency work is performed under this section the person performing it shall report the pertinent facts relating to the work to the City Manager prior to the commencement of work. The City Manager shall review the facts and determine whether an emergency exists and shall, by written memorandum, authorize the commencement of the emergency exception. A person commencing emergency work shall, within ten days following the commencement of that~ activity, apply for the issuance of a Permit. The issua~. thereof, may require the permittee to perform such work as is determined to be reasonably necessary to correct any impairment to the wetland occasioned by such work. Be The repair or maintenance of any lawful use of land existing on the date of adoption of this ordinance. Section 23.1125. Application for and Processing of Permit. Ae A separate application for a Permit shall be made to the City of Mound for each development activity for which a- Permit is required. Only one application need be made for two or more such acts which are to be done simul- taneously on the same parcel. The application shall include a map of the site, a plan of the proposed develop- ment and the estimated cost of development. Other engin- eering data such as surveys and other descriptive information are also required. In order to determine the effects of such development of the wetland the City Council may require additional information including but not limited to the following: 1. A specific description of the type, amount and location of the development. 2. A description of the ecological characteristics of the wetland. 3. A conservation plan describing actions to be taken to mitigate any detrimental effects of development. 4. Maps and data on soils, water table and flood capacity of the wetland. When the proposed development includes the construction or alteration of a structure, two sets of plans thereof shall be submitted with the application. Be The permit application shall be processed according to the procedures specified in Section 23.505 of the Zoning Ordinance which pertains to processing of conditional use permits. The Permit may be processed at the same time and in connection with the processing of an appli- cation for a building permit or any other permit required by ordinance of the CitY of Mound. Section 23.1130. Permit Standards. No permit shall be issued unless the City of Mound finds and determines that the proposed develop- ment complies with the following standards: Ae Filling. A minimum amount of filling may be allowed when necessary but in no case shall the following restric- tions on total amount of filling be exceeded. Since the total amount of filling which can be permitted is limited, the City, when considering Permit applications, shall consider the equal apportionment of fill opportunity to riparian land owners. Total filling shall not cause the total natural flood storage capacity of the wetland to fall below the projected volume of runoff from the whole developed Be wetland watershed generated by a six (6) inch rainfall in twenty-four (24) hours. 2. Total filling shall not cause the total natural nutrient stripping capacity of the wetland tp fall below the nutrient production of the wetland water- shed for its projected development. 3. Only fill free of chemical pollutants and organic wastes may be used. 4. Wetlands shall not be used for solid waste disposal. Dredging. Dredging may be allowed only when a boat channel is required for access to a navigable lake, for a marina or when it will not have a substantial or signifi- cantly adverse effect upon the ecological and hydrological characteristics of the wetland. Dredging, when allowed, shall be limited as follows: 1. It shall be located so as to maximize the activity in the areas of lowest vegetation density. 2. It shall not significantly change the water flow characteristics. 3. The size of the dredged area shall be limited to the absolute minimum. 4. Disposal of the dredged material shall not result in ~.~ ~ ~.~a__significant change in the ·current;~'flow, stantial destruction of vegetation, fish spawning areas or water pollution. 5. Work in the wetland will not be performed during the breeding season of water 'fowl or fish spawning season. 6. Only one boat channel or marina shall be allowed per large- scale development. 7. In other residential developments, dredging shall be located so as to provide for the use of boat channels and marinas by two or more adjacent property owners. 8. The width of the boat channel to be dredged shall be no more than the minimum required for the safe operation of boats at minimum operating speed, Dis char ge s. 1. No part of any sewage disposal system requiring on- land or in-ground disposal of waste shall be located closer than 150 feet from the normal high water mark unless it is proven by the applicant that no effluent will in~aediately or gradually reach the wetland be- cause of existing physical characteristics of the site or system. 2. Organic waste which would normally be disposed of at a solid waste disposal site or which would normally be discharged into a sewage disposal system or sewer sh~~ not be directly or indirectly discharged to the wetlz o. Stormwater runoff from construction sites may be directed to the wetland only when substanti'ally free of silt, debris and chemical pollutants and only at rates which will not disturb vegetation or increase turbidity. Building constraints. 1. The lowest floor level or basement elevation shall be at least three feet above the seasonal high water level of the wetland. 2. Development which will res61t in unus~l road mainten- ance costs or utility line breakages due to soil limitations, including high frost action shall not be permitted. Vegetation. No wetland vegetation may be removed or altered except that reasonably required for the placement of structures and use of property. Section 23.1135.. Conditions. A Permit may be approved subject to compliance with reasonab'%e conditions which are specifically set forth in the Permit and are necessary to insure compliance with the requirements contained in this district. Such conditions may include but are not limited to the following: 1. Limitation of the size, kind or character of the proposed work. 2. Require the construction of other structures. 3. Require replacement of vegetation. 4. Establish required monitoring procedures and maintenance activity. 5. Stage the work over time. 6. Require the alteration of the site design to ensure buffering. 7. Require the provision of a performance bond. 8. Require the conveyance to the City of Mound or another public entity of certain lands or interest therein. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning district(s) may be modified in furtherance of the purpose of this ordinance by express condition contained in the Permit. Section 23.1140. Time of Permit. A permitee shall begin the work authorized by the Permit within sixty (60) days from the date of issuance of the Permit unless a different date for the commencement of work is set forth in the Permit. The permittee shall complete the work authorized by the Permit within the time limits specified in the Permit which in no event shall exceed more than twelve (12) months from the date of issuance. The permittee shall notify the Building Official at least twenty-~four (24) hours prior'to commencement of work. Should the work not be commenced as specified herein, the Permit shall become void. Extensions. If, prior to the date established for commencement of work, the permittee makes written request to the City Manager or his designated agent for an extension of time to Commence the work, setting forth the reasons for the required extension, the administrator may grant such extension. Be Renewals. A permit which has become void may be renewed at the discretion of the City Council upon payment of a renewal fee. If the City Council does not grant such renewal a Permit for such work may be granted only upon compliance with the procedures herein established for an original application. ~ C. Notice of completion. A permlttee shall notify the City Manager or his designated agent in writing when he has finished the work. No work shall be deemed to have been completed until approved in writing by the City Manager or his designated agent following such wr i t ten noti_f_i ca t i on. D. Inspection. The ~ity.-may~¥e~uire inspections of.the work to be made periodically during the course thereof by a member of the City of Mound staff and shall cause a final inspection to be made following the completion of the work. The permittee shall assist the administrator in making such inspections. Section 23. 1145. Responsibility; Effect. Responsibility. Neither the issuance of a Permit nor compliance with the conditions thereof, nor compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall relieve any person from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for damage to persons or property. The issuance of any permit hereunder shall not serve to impose any liability on the City of Mound or its officers or employees for injury or damage to persons or property. A Permit issued pursuant to this ordinance shall not relieve the permittee of.the responsibility of complying with any other require- ments established by law, regulation or ordinance. Special assessment. The land within a designated wetlands district area for which a development or other restrictive easement is conveyed to the City shall not be subject to special assessments levied by the City to pay the costs of public water, sewer, curb, gutter or other public municipal improvements for which such assessments are authorized pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. -6- Co Variance. The City Council may authorize in specific cases following appeal and hearing a variance from the provisions of this ordinance where the literal applica- tion of the ordinance would result in substantial inequitable hardship to an applicant property owner. In assessing hardship the City Council shall balance the severity of the physical, social and economic effects of the literal application against the interests of the City in effecting the purposes of this ordinance as expressed above. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. No variance may be granted which would allow any use that is 'prohibited in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. A variance shall be granted in writing accom- panied by specific findings of fact as to the necessity for the grant of the variance and its specific provisions. ,~A variance request shall be proc~,ssed: in,~adcordance with the provisions of Section 23.506 of the Mound City Zoning Or dinance. Section 23.1150. Fees. The City Council may establish by resolution fees for rezonings, variances, permits, conditional use permits, special permits or requiring administrative time or public expenditures under any section of the zoning ordinance. Attest: Mayor City Clerk Adopted by City Council Published in Official Newspaper WET. LANDS .~MAP R24W R23W 10 S 11 S12 S 7 · i ' ~ ' ~ · ~ ..:., . ~ ~ I . _. ~ . ~ ... ~ . ¢=~,~ _~ , , '~ OPEN WATERX~.¥R24 W R23 W WILLIAM O. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R. ORR )LO E. DAHLIN r L. HANSON GILL THEODORE O. KEMNA JOHN W. EMONO KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT R. SCOTT HARRI GERALD L. BACKMAN R, MARK KOEGLER SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, PLANNERS AND SOIL TESTING (612) 93B-7601 · 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH ,, HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 June 2, 1982 Mr. William F. Kelly William F. Kelly and Associates 351 Second Street Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 Subject: Lot 59 Auditor's Subdivision No. 168 City of Mound, Minnesot~ Dear Mr. Kelly: We have reviewed the wetland classifications proposed by the City of Mound for the above named property and offer the following comments. First, the area should not be separated into two different wetland classifications. By definition, a Class 41 wetland has three feet or more of water at times. The area proposed' as Class 4 can not have three feet of water over it due to the outlet pipe elevation. The undergrowth and tree cover is the same in both areas designated as two separate wetland types which would indicate that the two areas are similar and should be classified the same. Second, the definitions of the'wetland types proposed by the City of Mound for this property appear to be in error. By definition, a Type 31 wetland is inland shallow fresh marshes. The soil is usually waterlogged during the growing season; often it is covered with as much as six inches or more of water. Vegetation includes grasses, bulrushes, spikerushes, and various other marsh plants such as cattails, arrowheads, pickerelweed, and smartweeds. Common representatives in the North are reed, whitetop, rice cutgrass, carex, and giant burreed. In the Southeast, maindencane, sawgrass, arrowhead, and pickerelweed are characteristic. These marshes may nearly fill shallow lake basins or sloughs, or they may border deep marshes on the landward side. They are also common as seep areas on irrigated lands. ~ SCHOELL ~ MAE)SON.~NC. Mr. William F. Kelly William F. Kelly and Associates Page Two June 2, 1982 By definition, a Type 41 wetland is inland deep fresh marshes. The soil is covered with six inches to three feet or more of water during the growing season. Vegetation includes cattails, reeds, bulrushes, spikerushes, and wildrice. In open areas, pondweeds, naiads, coontail, watermilfoils, waterweeds, duckweeds,' waterlilies, or spatterdocks may occur. Water- hyacinth and waterprimroses form surface mats in some localities in the Southeast. These deep marshes may almost completely fill shallow lake basins, potholes, limestone sinks, and sloughs, or they may border open water in such depressions. In my opinion, the area, if it were to be classified a wetland, would more likely fall under the classification for a Type 61 or Type 71. Type 6 is shrub swamps. The soil~.is usually waterlogged during the growing season, and is often covered with as much as six inches of water. Vegetation includes alders, willows, buttonbush, dogwoods, and swamp-privet. Shrub swamps occur mostly along sluggish streams and occasionally on flood plains. They are used to a limited extent for nesting and feeding in the North and for roosting and feeding in some of the Mississippi Alluvial Valley States. Elsewhere, shrub swamps are little used except in a few special situations. Type 7 is wooded swamps. The soil is waterlogged at least to within a few inches of its surface during the growing season, and is often covered with as much as one foot of water. Wooded swamps occur mostlY along sluggish streams, on flood plains, on flat uplands, and in very shallow lake basins. In the North, trees include tamarack, arborvitae, black spruce, balsam, red maple, and blask ash. In the South, water oak, overcup oak, tupelo gum, swamp black gum, and cypress are dominant. In the Northwest, western hemlock, red alder, and willows are common. NOrthern evergreen swamps usually have a thick ground covering of mosses. Deciduous swamps frequently support beds of duckweeds, smartweeds, and other herbs. Very truly yours, WREngelhardt: mkr SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Wetlands of the United States, Their Extent and Their Value to Waterfowl and Other Wildlife by Samuel P. Shaw, C. Gordon Fredine, Circular 39 Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Depart- ment of the Interior 1956, Reprint 1971. . RESOLUTION #82- RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR ALL ZONING MATTERS IN THE CITY OF MOUND WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of all the citizens in the City of Mound to have a strong and effective program of city planning, and WHEREAS, this includes the development and implementation of a program of community zoning and all of its' various components, and WHEREAS, the administration of a program like this requires a high degree of expertise, and 'WHEREAS, this expertise must be paid comparable rates with other adjacent cities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the following Schedule of Fees is hereby adopted and that the income these fees generate shall be used by the City of Mound to cover those General Fund costs relating to Planning and Zoning in the City of Mound. 1982 FEE SCHEDULE Variance Rezoning Conditional Use Permit (Housing) Special Use Permit (Housing) Wetlands Permit Street or Easement Vacation Subdivision of Land Special or Conditional Use Permit (Non housing) Proposed Plat 35.O0 1OO.OO 1OO.OO plus $10.OO/unit 100.O0 plus $10.OO/unit 1OO.OO 1OO.OO 35.00 plus $7.00 per lot over 2 1OO.OO 200.00 plus $7.00 per lot 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 public hearing is being held in accord with the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement pursuant to M.S. 471.59. Publish in The Laker May 18, 1982 Francene C. Clark, City Clerk 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. Sincerely, k~c" ~:~ kstad Senior Planner lw Enclosures HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal oppodunity employer June 3, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT Tonight we need to do two things to further the efforts of the senior citizens and their hopes to develop a housing project in Mound. First, we need to conduct a public hearing concerning the question of reallocating $2,552.00 from the Housing Rehabilitation Component over into the Senior Citizen Housing Development Component. This is being done because the limited amount of funds in Housing Rehabilitation. make it difficult to program and next there are a number of initial costs involved in a project such as this, including land appraisal fees, site plans by an architect and miscellaneous smaller costs. All should be covered within the $2552.00 available. Once the hearing is completed and the Council votes to approve this reallocation, we need to explore the specifics involved in developing the project. This includes securing an option by the City on the necessary land by the Catholic Church. This appears to be necessary in order to show HUD that firm site control exists and if they do fund the project that it can go aggressively forward next Spring. Once the site is acquired using HUD funds (no City funds are involved), it would be resold for $I.OO to the senior citizens and their nonprofit housing development corporation. Then the City's actual involvement will end, except that it will retain 1 position on the project's Board of Directors. Thus, the second resolution that needs to be passed is one that authorizes the City Manager to negotiate an option agreement with the church and that the City will act as an agent for the senior citizens in seeking to acquire land for a housing project. From there, I think, we can move forward. JE:fc RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION ~ ~ AMENDING THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AS IT INVOLVES THE CITY OF MOUND FOR PROGRAM YEAR VII FUNDED UNDEH TITLE 1 OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 WHEREAS, the City of Mound has executed a joint cooperation agreement with Hennepin County agreeing to participate in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program, and WHEREAS, the Mound City Council has acted to undertake activities funded through the Program for each year of its participation, and WHEREAS, the City wishes to amend the activities, and WHEREAS, the City conducted a public hearing on June 8, 1982, at 7:30 P.M., to gain citizen input on the amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the Mound City Council amend the Urban Hennepin County Development Program for the Program Year VII as follows: Original program Year Activity Budget Amended Budget VII VII Housing Rehabilitation $20,000.00 Westonka Senior Citizens Housing -O- $17,447.26 2,552.00 HENNEPIN IL OFFICE OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT C-2353 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 (612) 348-6418 May 6, 1982 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: The City of Mound has p?ogrammed a total of $151,731.00 of Community Development Block Grant monies into the Rehabilitation of Private Proper- ties. Following is a summary of rehab activities for the City: CDBG funds: programmed into rehab Year II Year IV Year V Year VI Year VII 7% Hennepin County Administration Committed to clients Payments authorized by Hennepin County Reimbursed to the City Reimbursement unrequested to date Remaining to be committed Number of Clients: completed 11 in process 13 waiting for funding 4 $ 12,004.00 32,470.00 58,000.00 29,257.00 20,000.00 1,400.00 73,340.18 74,438.08 49,484.18 24,953.90 2,552.74 I plan to have a list of the unrequested funds available for you within the next week so we can clear your books before we start making direct payments. If you have any questions, please call me at 348-7695. Si ncerely, MaryAnne Hernandez lw cc: Ms. Sharon Legg Larry Blackstad HENNEPIN COUNTY on equal oppodunify employer CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Rob Chelseth, City Planner 1 June 1982 Development Process for Senior Housing Project As you know, John Rocheford of the COmmunity Development Corporation and Larry Blackstad of the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development are working on the preparation of an application for a Federally funded elderly housing project in Mound. The application, along with several key steps in the process, must be completed by June 30th, 1982 to participate in this year's funding cycle. Both CDC and Hennepin County are enlisting the City's assistance to accomplish several important tasks, including development of a preliminary site plan, appraisals of property to be pur- chased, and negotiations to secure an option to purchase agreement with the property owner. To aid in the coordination of this rapidly developing (and sometimes con- fusing) process, I have prepared the following time and task schedule, that reflects my current understanding of the process: Proposed Site: Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church, 2385 Commerce Boulevard June 1 - Community Development Corporation confirms an interest on the part of the Parish to sell a portion of their 6.5 acre site for elderly housing. June 4 - Planner prepares preliminary site plan illustrating building loca- tion, parking and access to lot. June 8 - Public hearing held by City Council amending Community Development Program funding to support project development costs. Authoriza- tion for City Staff to negotiate option for proposed building site. June 9 - Meeting between City Staff, Hennepin County and Community Develop- ment Corporation to coordinate negotiations on securing an option to acquire the site and the preparation of a funding application to HUD for submission by June 30th. June lO- Contract for property appraisal/review appraisal services. June 17- Begin negotiations with Our Lady of the Lake Parish for an exclu- sive option to purchase agreement valid through October, 1982. June 18 through June 30 - Conclude an option agreement with the Church, and submit it along with addition documentation as part of 202 Elderly Housing application. OFFICE OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT C-2353 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 (612) 348-6418 May 10, 1982 Mr. John Elam City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: West Tonka Senior Housi.ng/Environmental Assessment of Proposed Site Dear John: To assist in the site evaluation and preliminary acquisition process, it is requested that the.City of Mound provide the following infor- mation, to be used in preparation of an environmental assessment of the site: Location Map - site adjacent to Catholic Church Site Size - if available from City records Topography - elevation maps show.in§ site and Langdon Lake Soils - if available from City records Utilities - on site, and in the street Landuse - of adjacent areas Zoning - existing restrictions Distance to Services (in blocks) - grocery drug store medical Comprehensive Plan Conformance-comment churches library senior center Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Larry Blackstad Senior Planner pb HENNEPIN COUNTY on cqu~31 opportunity employer AGENDA FOR THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 24, 1982 City Hall 7:30 P.M. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of April 26, 1982. BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Case 82-111 - Zoning Administrator for Berthold W. Landsman Part of Lot 25, Lafayette Park, Lake Minnetonka - Map 2 Subdivision of Land (Staff to handle) Case 82-112 Vincent Forsman, 4857 Island View Drive Lots 5 and 6, Block 14, Devon - Map 15 Special Purpose Fence Variance (Withdrawn) Case 82-113 - James W. & Mary B. Scruton, 5267 Bartlett Blvd. Lot 31, Auditor's Subdivision 170 - Map 8 Preliminary Lot-Split Case 82-]14 Rebecca Yantes, 4936 Edgewater Drive Lots 16 and 17, Skarp & Lindquist's Ravenswood - Subdivision Lot-Split Map 5 Case 82-115 James C. Hendricks, 3006 Westedge Boulevard Lots 4, 5, 6 and 19, Block 14, The Highlands - Map Il Sideyard Variance Other Business 1. Request that Planning Commission hear "Sign Variance Requests .for School District No. 277" on June 14, 1982. Set policy on whether neighbors should be notified on variances: A. Abutting neighbors B. Neighbors on either side C. Neighbors within 150 feet D. Not at all? 1 MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 24, 1982 Present were: Chairman Russell Peterson; Commissioners George Stannard, Frank Weiland, Gary Paulsen and Liz Jensen; Council Representative Gordon Swenson; City Manager Jon Elam; Building Official Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie Stutsman. Councilman Bob Polston was also present. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 1982 were presented for consideration. Jensen thought it appropriate to add to Item I relative to the barbs on top of the commercial grade fence that "the applicant will be solely responsible for injuries from barbs on the fence". Weiland moved and Jensen seconded a motion to accept the minutes as corrected. The vote was unanimously in favor. BOARD OF'-APPEALS 1. Case 82-111 Re: Conditions of previously approved Subdivision of Land Part of Lot 25, Lafayette Park, Lake Minnetonka Berthold W. Landsman not present/Building Official explained that he had wanted clarification of the setback for moving existing garage on Parcel A to conform with setbacks. Paulsen moved and Jensen seconded moving this item to end of agenda. Vote was unanimously in faQor. Later in the meeting, existing garage was discussed. Setback in new ordinance has a 30 foot setback off street for an accessory building. Future road shows 50 foot right-of-way/actual roadway would probably be not over 28 feet wide. Building meets setbacks off of Three Points Boulevard. Discussed having it moved 15 feet from west property line. Planning Commission told Staff to handle. · Case 82-112 Special Purpose Fence Variance, 4857 Island View Drive Lots 5 and 6, Block 14, Devon Vincent Forsman was present. His request is to build a 6 foo~ high fence from corner of neighbor's garage starting 8 feet from the street front prop- erty line to the Commons. Discussed problems and fence height - new zoning ordinance allows 6 foot high fence starting back 53.9 feet from street (behind building line). Planning Commission questioned blocking neighbor's view of lake. Weiland moved and Stannard seconded a motion to acknowledge his difficulty and allow him a six foot fence from NE corner of his garage to SW corner approximately (Point C on sketch) of neighbor's garage. It was brought out that applicant should build fence according to ordinance and City should not become participant between neighbors. Also, Planning Commission needs legal interpretation of lakeshore lots/double front lots/ should not be able to block a view with fence. Chair proposed that fee be refunded if applicant would put fence up according to ordinance/get legal interpretation on height allowed for the fence. Appli- cant agreed to go with a clarified height of fence as per ordinance, but no less than 42 inches. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May'24, 1982 - Page 2 Weiland withdrew his motion and Stannard withdrew his second. Paulsen moved and Jensen seconded a motion to recommend refund of the applicant's fee as he is withdrawing his petition. The vote was unani- mously in favor. Note: Put definition concerning lakeshore lots/double front lots on next Discus- sion Meeting Agenda. Case 82-113 Preliminary Lot-Split, 5267 Bartlett Boulevard Lot 31, Auditor's Subdivision 170 James Scruton was present. Building Inspector reqdested that #5 be added to her list of recommendations: 5." All persons with financial interest in property submit approval of lot- split. ~ Weiland moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend allowing subdivision of 2 lots providing 'for the 20.!d~.i~ewa¥~acceSs to Lot B and removal of the existing garage and further that the proposed'garage me.et all setbacks and that the Building Official's recommendations (including # 5) be included. The vote was unanimously in favor. Scruton questioned if there were anything that would forbid builder of new house using existing drive. Commission tho. ught not, but suggested he might have fewer problems with separate drives. Case 82-114 Subdivision Lot-Split, 4936 Edgewater Drive Lots 16 and .17, SkarP & Lindquist's Ravenswood Rebecca Yantes and her father, Mr. Peterson, were present. 'Planning Commission suggested jogging lot line so that existing house would meet sideyard setback after lot-split. Discussed taking off 1/2 foot of house to make it a conforming structure if lot-split approved. Applicant advised Commission they would be willing to remove six inches of the house. Weiland moved and Stannard seconded a motion to approve the subdivision with the stipulation that house be brought to compliance with ordinance and shed removed and meet the other recommendations of the Building 0ffi- cial. The vote was unanimously in favor. Case 82-115 Sideyard Variance, 3006 Westedge Boulevard Lots 4, 5, 6 and 19, Block 14, The Highlands James C. Hendricks was present. Stannard moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to recommend approval of a ~.6 foot sideyard variance,'acknowledging the existing encroachment, as the proposed addition does not increase the non-conformancy. The vote was unanimously in favor. Undersized Lot - 496_ Brunswick Road Lot 4 and 1/2 of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood an James Peterson was present - wants to build on/undersized lot/no available land as there is a structure on either side of this site. Discussed briefly. Building Official asked how City could tax as'a ~uildable~site if i't is not? PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24, 1982 - Page 3 # Undersized Lot - 496_ Brunswick Road (Co~t.) Swenson moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to table; bring back at next meeting on June 28th. The vote was all in favor except Peterson voted "No" as he doesn't think his mind will be changed. Paulsen requested that "Mobile/Factory Homes" be discussed at June 14, 1982 Dis- cussion Meeting. Law to be effective August 1, 1982. Other Business 1. The Planning Commission agreed to consider the several sign requests at the June 14th Discussion Meeting. They are: 2 Signs for School District 277 1 Sign for Community Services Possible sign request for the Mound Liquor Store. Discussed briefly handling Planning and Zoning items in between regular meetings during the summer months. The Planning Commission agreed to handle emergency items on the Oiscussion Meeting nights during the summer months. 2. Policy on whether neighbors .should be notified on variances - The Planning Com- mission agreed that abutting neighbors should be notified; agreed to have an agenda with item circled sent to abutting neighbors. Believe the burden of proof should be on applicant and not on the City. Building Official requested the Planning Commission to review site plan for a two story office building to be located next to the Philbrook Insurance Company building at the June 14th Discussion Meeting. This will be listed on agenda. ADJOURNMENT Paulsen moved and Swenson seconded a motion to adjourn to the next Discussion Meeting, June 14th. All in favor, so meeting adjourned. Attest: CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of May 24, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-113 5267 Bartlett Boulevard Lot 31, Auditor's Subd. 170 Request: Preliminary Lot - Split Zoning District R-1 Applicant: James W. & Mary B. Scruton 5267 Bartlett Boulevard Mound, MN. 55364 Phone: 472-2131 The applicant has submitted a preliminary subdivision (lot-spilt) request to divide off an 80 X 125 foot parcel from his existing lot. Both parcels would meet the 10,000 square foot lot size requirements for the R-1 Zoning District. Mr. Scruton intends to remove the existing garage, located on the survey, and construct a new double garage facing Bartlett Boulevard, a mini- mum of 20 feet from the 80 X 125 foot southwest corner of the portion on the survey marked "A". Recommend: I would recommend approval of his preliminary concept allowing a 20 foot access to his property for emergency vehicles and general use from a public right-of-way, due to the excessive depth of the platted property. Fina~ approval of the lot-spilt should require: ]. The submittal of the legal descriptions for Parcel "A" and Parcel "B" with the resetting of the property monuments. 2. The location of the utilities servicing the existing structure and topography of the site placed on the survey. 3. The removal of the existing garage from the site. 4. Resubmit a final subdivision approval within one .year. Refer to City Council June 8, 1982. for J:~'~as '~. Serut.on of bet I hereby ':'~" ~ ' ceru~.~ ~hat u,,:s is a true and correct representation of a of tlc ~o~daries of ~ot 31, Auditor's Su~J viricn L~r, ber 170, He.,ne~in ~[ir~eao~, tko location ot' the e~.~s,~n~ bulidin[s and a drive~ay, and pr~se~ dlvidinj lines. ]t d[:~,g ncr our,s, rt. to sLc%., other i~.prove~,en encro:: c~. men ts. c~rJon ~. ¢o~'i'in' L;'md Surveyor and :la~'mer Long ~ke, Nirmesota oc~le: 1" = ~C.' b~te : ~-~-~i o : Ircn r:~ rke r CITY OF MOUND Mound,. Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of May 24, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-I14'" 4936 Edgewater Drive Parcel A and Parcel B Skarp & Lindquist's Ravenswood Request: Subdivision Lot-Split Zoning District R-2 Applicant: Rebecca Yantes 4936 Edgewater Drive Mound, MN. 55364 Phone: 472-6164 533-7017 The applicant is requesting that she split Lot 17 and retain 5 feet to allow 'her structure to be 5.5 feet from the west side property line at the closest point (N.W. corner) and 6.75 feet at the southwest corner of the house. She ~ntends to remove the shed building and basement entrance from the site. The R-2 Zoning District requires'a minimum of 6,000 square feet lot area. Parcel A and Parcel B exceed the minimum. Lot width minimum is 40 feet which is shown at 40 feet on the.survey. Recommend': I would recommend a motion to give preliminary approval to the lot split conditional upon: 1. Locating utiliti.es servicing the'existing-structure and topographv of the site placed on the survey. 2. Removal of the existing shed building and basement entrance from the site including 6" encroachment of house on Parcel B. 3. All persons with financial interest in the property submit approval of the 10t-split request. 4. Re-submit final subdivision approval within °ne year. Approval of a lot of less than 10,OOO square feet is compatible with the general development for the neighborhood and the comprehensive plan..The area has duplex, business, multiple zoning surrounding this R-2 zone. The zoning would indicate a higher density area. Refer to City Council June 8, 1982. : PA?CEL "A": I - '. Proposed Division ~ for: 4~,C - HY~II'T PETERSON Note: Shed building to be removed, not located. ' 'J" ' - 55.© - - 1~; ".;, ., +.a ~C~ ~_ ~,,XT: ~' /k,,¢E ~ UE The '~est &').,;O feet of lot ]7, $<arp and Lindquist's Rave~swood as measured right angles to the ,~est line tLer.of. Ail of Lot 1~, and tjat part of Lot 17 l)Jnd ~.mst of the West aO.OC feet as measured at r'~ght ~l~.;les to the a'est, line thereof, $karp and Li~J~uist'~ ~{a vehzwooc. We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of all build- ing; and visible encroachments, if any, from of on said land. [2th. b,av Surveyed by ,,, / · // f / ~ / Signed · .v.'/ / // " ~ '~' /' ~/~ / LOT SURVEYS COMPANY CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of May 24, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82- 3006 Westedge Boulevard Lots 4,5,6 & 19, Block 14, The Highlands Request: Sideyard Variance Zoning District: R-1 Applicant: James c. Hendricks 3006 Westedge Boulevard Mound, MN. 55364 Phone: 472-4835 The applicant is requesting a 4.6 foot sideyard variance to allow the con- struc~ion of a 20 foot by 29 foot 6 inch addition on the opposite side of the home from an existing 5.4 foot sideyard. Pursuant to the R-t Zoning District sideyard requirements, Section~23.604.5 (3) states, "the minimum setback shall be 10 feet" and one side yard determined by lot width -- "Lot width greater than 100 feet shall be 10 feet" ReCommend: I recommend the variance be granted as the present house is 5.4 feet from the side lot line. It would be an undue hardship to remove the 4.6 foot encroachment in the side yard as that por- tion has a full basement, is heated, and is part of the present kitchen. Also, the addition to the structure will be in con- formance with the present zoning requirements. Refer to the City Council June 8, 1982. i Certifirate of' Survey -~.~ ~,.~es C. Hendricks of Lots 4-6 and 19, >lock if+, The HiFh!ands Hennepin Cour:%y, Minnesota :.% % ,.'~... % I hereby re:'l, ify that lhi.~; is a true and corr,:at repre.':entatjcn of' a ..... ] / The "~ ~ ~,: ~nd 19, :-~ocx _~, Hiz~r;~,n,.s~ ~_...~ the locz;t,i~n of all existin: ~""~,.. .~...;,,~.~,-~ ~nd a drive~'~y *h~r',:~.. It does not ~ur~ert to shew ether i~,<.rove~.ents- or encro~,chments.. June 3, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: JON ELAM Attached is a list and a map showing the parcels that are up for tax forfeiture sale. As usual the County wishes our opinion on what lots to sell, etc. BUILDABLE SITES: Lots 14, 15, 16, 17, Block 12, Avalon PID #19-117-23 31 0114 12,800 Square Feet adjacent to wetland Lots 1Dand f~, Block 20 Whipple PID #25-117-24 21 O134 Lot 6, Block 15, Shadywood 'Point PID #13-117-24 ll 0054 6,400 Square feet very steep 10,200 Square feet (est.) filled in, dead trees, needs some work but very developable. UNBUILDABLE ~ Logical for private sale to neighbors. Part of Lot 6, Block 5, Avalon PID #18-117-23 31 0102 Tiny section of land between CSAH 125 and house. Maybe 2000 square feet Lots IO and 23, Block 9, Block 9, Wychwood PID #19-117-23 32 0090 6400 square feet Narrow strip. Basically unbuidable (probably should be separated and privately sold.) Lots 1 and 18, Block 30, Wychwood PID #24-117-24 41 0103 6,400 square feet. Narrow strip adjacent to unopened Marlboro Lane which could be vacated. Still best use is as land sold on private sale. Lot 7, Block 2, Dreamwood PID #13-117-24 12 OO16 3,200 square feet. Small vacant parcel abutted by vacant land. I don't think we should retain any of these parcels, but if we must to prevent a sale of an unusable parcel then numbers 4 thru 7 would be the only technically undersized or unbuildable lots we have. JE:fc DEPARTMENT OF PROPERLY TAXATION A606 Government Center 'HE"N'""' Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 May 12, 1982 City of Mound Fran Clark, Clerk 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN., 55364 Dear Ms. Clark: Enclosed is a Classification List of non-conservation land in Hennepin County. The described parcels forfeited to the State of Minnesota for non-payment of real estate taxes. As provided in Minnesota Statutes 282, we ask that your Council approve the public sale of these parcels. Parcels may be acquired for public use purposes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 282.01, Subdi~vision 1, If it is the intent of the Council to acquire parcels for public use pqrposes, thi's should be done by resolution stating the use to be made of the parcels. Please also make two separate certification lists as follows: 1. All special assessments cancelled at the time of forfeiture which may be reassessed after the property is returned to private ownership pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 282.02. -(Also note: M.S. 429.07, Subd. 4; M.S. 435.23 and M.S. 444.076.) 2. All special assessments that were levied after forfeiture pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 282.01, Sbud. 3. We are asking that this matter be considered by your Council at its next meeting, After action has been taken, please return to us certified copies of the Council's action by July 1, 1982. If you have any questions, you may contact us at 348.3734. Sincerely, Vernon T. Hoppe Director of Property Taxation Marie A. Kunze Tax Receivables Division Manager MAK: smt Enclosure cc: Ed Richter, Hous. Auth. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunlly employer CLASSIFICATION LIST 662-NC MOUND (no address) (no address) (no address) (no address) (no address) 1669 Finch Lane 1736 Heron Lane NEW HOPE (no address) TONKA BAY (no address) (no address) pa~e 19-117-23-31-0102 19-117-23-31-1~.~.~_ 25-117-24-21-0134 19-117-23-32-0090 24-117-24-41-0103 }3-117-24-12-0016 t3-117-24-11-0054 05-118-21-33-0081 27-117£23-23-0040 27-117-23-23-0041 tx3 ? o~ ,.% · DEVON L/~NE EIOULEv&RD //~¢' MARLBORO ;,:WINDSOR rE o ;' .. LANE ;:' 2764 Cardigan Lane Mound, MN 55364 May 27, 1982 Mr. John Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: P.I.D. 1911723310102 Part of Lot 6, Block 5, Avalon Dear Mr. Elam: It has come to our attention that the above-referenced property is going to be put up for public auction. We would appreciate it if you would withhold that piece of land from public auction and arrange a private auction so that we may purchase it to combine with our present property. Thank you. Very truly yours, Donald M. 'Martin Ko~nie K. M~z~in J II?J CITY of MOUND June 3, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 4'72-1155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER PARKING ON MANCHESTER ROAD Enclosed is a map of the area,discussed at the last meeting, regarding parking on Manchester Road. My recommendation is to post "No Parking" on the South side only and allow parking on the North side. This would allow parking access for the Commons. JE:fc //?.~ I o~loJ cfi NO.LHgl~/~ May 17, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: BRUCE WOLD FROM: JON ELAM Holly Lovseth of 1656 Bluebird Lane wants her section of Bluebird posted for "No Parking" on either side of the street. I have a problem posting streets like this because: 1. People paid for extra width streets so they could park. 2. I think it's near the Commons and a ploy to try to keep people away from their docks. 3. I want to keep the area as open as possible for public use. Let me know your thoughts, since she does seem insistant on getting on a future Council Agenda. JE:fc ] l')q To: Jon Elam From: Bruce Wold Jon, I looked at Bluebird Ln. after the receipt of you memo. I can see no reason for zoning the whole street "no parking". There is no unusual topography or other factors which would require the change,,of the parking zones. I believe I have had one telephone conversation with Ms. Lovseth in the past. The problem that she was having at the time, was the parking of cars at the Broberg residence across the street. In the past, the Mound Police Department has responded to complaints from residents about the parking problems there, and has initiated action in this area without complaint of residents. Mr. Broberg has a great number of local young persons who frequent his house. When they do, they park their cars in the dead end and on the wrong side of the street. We handle these problems as soon as they are phoned in or when one of the patrol officers spots a violation. I will put a notice in our daily bulletin to again alert the officers to the problem. We have had no complaints in that area during the winter months. INTEROFFICE MEMO Jon Elam DATE June 4- FROM: Bruce Wold SUBJECT: Update on Bluebird Lane Activity The past week has been fairly uneventful. The Memorial Day weekend had one reported incident at the Broberg residence. This involved a call initiated by Holly Lovseth. The person involved at that time was Robert Flemal Jr. Bostrom handled the call, and told Flemal that he was going to be charged with Trespass if he was on the property again. To the best of my knowledge Flemal hasn't returned. On June 3,1 responded to a call from Lillian Broberg. Ms. Broberg was com- plaining about an unwanted guest on her property. The person involved was Gessy Langley. I told Hr. Langley that he was to stay off the property. He felt that he was the guest of James Broberg, however,! was quick to explain to him that Ms. Broberg was in control of the residence and she would decide who would be allowed on the property. ~lr. Langley is a walker and there was no car involved. On June 3 at about ll:30PM, Mr. Langley returned to the Broberg residence. Ms. Brob~rg called the police, and officer Roth responded to the call. However, when Roth arrived at the residence, James Broberg and Gessy Langley had left at that time, and attempts to find them failed. However, there was no car involved this time either. .' 0 ELMarketing 25W 651Towpath Court Wheaton, Illinois60187 (312) 668-2987 May 26, 1982 Ms. Fran Clark City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Fran, It was good talking to you recently and hearing about your Council's decision to go to my new computer. I would like to confirm our discussion and show the prices and trade-ins below. Description Price PE~S Unit ~--~-~95. Card Reader - 300cpm 3,585. Cable Connector 155. Program License 140. $ 9,275. Trade-in: 2 Precinct Ballot Counters Pin Feed Style $ 1,500. ea 3,000. Total $ 6,275. I trust the above is self explanatory and hopefully you will acknowledge to me with a purchase order. Upon receipt of your order I will get a machine shipped to your location. Again thank you for your continued interest in EL Marketing. Very truly yours, Ed Lellbach //?? A.THQMAS WURST GERALD T. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOHA$ F. UNDERWOOD ALBERT FAULCON ER JAMES D. LARSOH LAW OFFICES WURST. CARROLL ~ PEARSON IIOO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST J~INNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 May 19, 1982 TELEPHONE (61 ~:) 33B-8911 Mr. John Cameron McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 Re: 1979 Street Improvements Dear John: I have spent a lot of time at the courthouse on May 18 attempting to clear up some of the problem easements. I would like to report to you what is necessary on these individual easements. ~ 1. IP 640. This property consisted of Lots 10, 12, ~ 13 and 14, Block 7, Arden. The actual easement appears to affect only Lot 10. The property has been divided and is owne by three different parties, and Lot 10, Block 7, Arden, is now owned by the State of Minnesota, and I have checked with Gordon Ramm at the Tax Forfeit Office, and he has provided me with an Application by Governmental Subdivision for Conveyance of Tax-Forfeited Land~. I am completing this and sending it on to Jon Elam and asking him to ~ave~t~e:~Council-approve.~ r e s o lut ion author iz ing ~.t~i s.. ap p 1 i~'~i:6~ ~:~nd -author iz i~g~ the~ Mayo~ 'and -i Ma~ag~.~'t¥.: s i g~Ji t ~ .... I ='h'av ~::~'s%~ iB ~ d ;'~ t~E' e as ement ' On"'th~ ..... ~ applz'catmon: ...... Hopefully once the Council has approved this we can send it to Gordon Rmmm and that will complete this matter. Please advise if we need easements over other than Lot 10. John, we .are disregarding the ownership over the other lots. Upon receipt of this, hopefully it will satisfy the requirements of IP 640 and that will be taken Care of. ~ ]~ '~ TM .... WURST GERALD t. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD ALBERT F'AULCONER ~r ,.,lAMES D, LARSON LAW OFFICES WURST, CARROLL ~ PEARSON PROF£SSlONAL ASSOCIATION IIOO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA S.~02 May 19, 1982 TELEPHONE (652) 338-891! Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: 1979 Street Improvements Dear Jon: In connection with the above improvements, we enclose herewith a copy of easement IP 827 which has been filed in the office of the Registrar of Titles as document no. 1466491 on May 10, 1982. This should be kept with the permanent records of the city. ~-~ We also enclose a copy of our letter of May 19, 1982, to John Cameron and an Application by Governmental Subdivision for Conveyance of Tax-Forfeited Lands which is referred to in no. 1 of that letter. Would you please take care of having this  approved by the Council and signed by the Mayor and you and return it to me for fi_j~ing at the courthouse. CAP:ih Enclosures Veery truly y~urs, O~rtis A. Pearson, City Attorney CC: Mr. John Cameron //7? APPLICATION BY GOVERNMENT. AL SUBDIVISION FOR CONVEYANCE OF TAX-FORFEITED LANDS ~li~esota Statutes 19d9, A'eetio~ 282.01 Ir~ the ,~Iatter of the .4ppZieation of ........................ ~..h....e......C"...x...~.y.......~...~...~.~.~n....d....~.....~!.~..n....n...e...~..~...~a.. ........................................... a Oover~rr~entc~Z SubdLvlaion, for c~ ~ogveF~nce of Certain Lcmde. Oo~s ~w ..................... ~h.e.-~.~..Ut~.9..f.~.~9~..u...n..~.a..~.~..n.~.n..~9.~..s.~.~..~.~.~. .......................................................... ,~ ~zu~.: (~me of .ubdivifion) 1. Tb~t appZiec~nt is ~ ( a ) ........ ~..~..~.j~p~`%~....~.~.p.~*.~.~..~..~..~..~..U:.".n.~.~..~.?....~..h...~......l..~..~....~.......~...~.....~...h..e....~.~.ate of Minnesota. ~ That 'b· the City.. Council adopted a Resolution on May 25, 1982, 3. Tkaithere ~ sLtu~ted wLthin app~iaant'sbo~ndariesintheCo~nt~ ~ .......... ~.~ ....................... , eerta~ta~-/or/e~te~anddeserlb~ ~ ~ws: ......................................................................................................................................... An easement over part o~ Lot 10, Block 7, Arden, as follows: A perpetual easement for street purposes over and across that part of said Lot 10 lying southeasterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 10 distant 15.00 feet southwesterly,of the angle point in said line; thance northeasterly to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 10 distant 15.00 feet northeasterly of said angle point and there terminating. zo~ zoned residential and surrounding land has ~. ~hats~id ~nds~re,,.~.!.~i~.~...¥~.~.~IT~.~ .................................................................................... 5. That wpplLac~ut desLres to obta~ir~ said Zan~ for t~e foZ~owln~ pwrposes: (d).....Z.a..~ .................................... easement as above described. 8. Tha~ there i~ need/or s~h lands for the foZbwin~ rec~sons: there is a public street located within said easement. Wherefore appgic~nt prc~ys that stzic~ ~ands be oonveyeag to it for the ~se stateg herein. Its ................. ~.a..Y..9...r... .......................................................... u, ................. ~..a...n....a....g...e...r.. ................................................... tate inne ota, Is, Co~ o Hennep. in' t~ ! ............................................................................ ) L.eigh;.o..~ LSn..d!...a..n......a..n..d....J..p...n......E..1...a.m. .................................... each ~sini first swor~, depose and sap, each ~o~ hirr~self, th~t they ~re respe~tgve~t the .................. ]~ayox. ............................................... ~nd Manager ..... City of Mound, Minnesota ............................................................................... uI ~,n,6 ................................................................................................................................................ tb~t they baxve read the fore~oLn~ appli~atLon and ~ now the contents thereof; and that the rac~tters stated therein ~re Prge. $~bsarlbed and swor~ to before me this ................................. d~y o/ ........................................................................ ,19 ............ .Votary Pub~i~, . ..................................................... County, $[F eomralasio~ e~pirea .................................................................... CITY of MOUND June 3, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Attached is the soil and foundation report on the Widmer Building on County Road 110. As much as I hate to say it, I really think based upon my discussions with Mr. Shaffer (who lives in Mound), the soils are just not appropriate for use as a public works site unless the cost was reduced so substantially ($100,000 or less) that we would have adequate funds on hand for all the repairs we would have to make over the years. The yard could not be hard surfaced (a problem for storing salt/sand) and the building will continue to settle causing the doors to shift and thus having to constantly adjust the doors. I am not sure where to go from here, but at least we are avoiding a fairly major disaster (and an expensive one at that). JE:fc .:: .' ~ .. .~.. · . ' ....~,.i. ~,.~..,...~. ~.[: '"... . -~ · ..: ~-.~-~.~.~-.~.::....,-.. ~:. :--:~: ,:~ ~';::'~-.:~.;..-~ :%,. · .. ,. . - . .-..,.. : ' · ' . .' , -'. ' -'. .- '"' .L-'-~ %-~' ?~ : ' ' '.~.~,~;; :' ~'. · .' ~' "'".~-:' --,' !.-. ~~ ~' ~.' , ! ..:..-r . : -~ - - i' ' ...o-.. ' " · -...~','. ~" ~'~'. .... . ' .'~'=.Z'' .'L' o:~ i-'.-:. '--'.:'~..~., '~'?,_.:~...:'..'-....:" .'. - . . ' '. .... · ' ' '. --' ' ' .~-'- ~L~': ...... ..:e.:'~%'~:; '. .... - ' ,.-'.~--,'.. '. '.'.~ ...... .-_ :' . ....... ' · ' . · . '- ~'-i~. ¢ --:',e'~.::i ' ' ' ~ .'. -- ' ·' . . ~- .' ....'- ' ' · .~.-~.:. -. ., ...::..'.._"'i' :. . .." -~"' '"'---: ~:'-.- i :'.'." .- . ..: -":i' ,' ".'..'!.: -. EXPLoRATIoN OF EXISTING BUILDING I'. " HIGHWAY 110 NEAR THREE POINTS BOULEVARD MOUND, MINNESOTA company May 26, 1982 .... 662 CROMWELL AvENuE :' ,:':' :": .... . ..... :~ ST. PAUL, MN '55114 PHONE 612/645-6446 a sister corporation to TWIN CITY TESTING AND ENGINEERING LABORATORY - .. executive vice president exploration of the soil conditions around 'the above referenced . :? . "secretary/treasurer .:' The soil samples and concrete cores will be held at this office .... OFFICESIN: · for a period of one month. Thereafter, they will be discarded .'~ MANKATO, MN unless we are otherwise notified. - , ..,....,...; . ,:.;. :.. ROCHESTER, MN We have on our staff soil engineers and construction testing ......:.:.. .,. .... :...-. personnel, If we may be of further assistance, please contact '~'.: '.'- ..... .. Very tru yours : ....... "'~ ..... Eric AS A '.'. ,¥'AL ~9OTECT~ON TO CLI?;TS. THE PUBLIC Ar,'D OURSELVES, ALL F.£~C~TS REPORT OF EXPLORATION OF EXISTING BUILDING HIGHWAY 110 NEAR THREE POINTS BOULEVARD MOUND, MINNESOTA WORK ORDER #120-8682 INTRODUCTION This report was prepared to discuss the soil and water conditions encountered in the four test borings put down around the existing building. These conditions are reviewed as they pertain to usage of the building, and surrounding grounds, as a City garage. The borings were put down in the .field on May 21 at locations coordinated with you. 'Additionally, the floor slab of the metal building was cored at three locations. Both the test boring and concrete core locations are shown on the attached site sketch. Surface elevations at the borings were referenced to the top of the floor slab at the locations shown on the sketch. We understand that this point has a datum sea level elevation of 936.3'. Soil sampling was done in accordance with ASTM: D 1586-67. Using this procedure, a 2" O.D. split barrel sampler is driven into the soil by a 140 lb weight falling 30". After an initial set of 6", the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional 12" is known as the penetration resistance or N value. The N value is an index of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. E;OIL eXPLORatIOn Page 2 #120-8682 The floor of the building was cored using mobile drill equipped with a 4" diameter diamond bit. Power was supplied to the coring device by means of a mobile generator. The cores were put down at locations which were readily accessible, and avoided the equipment stored in the building. As the samples were obtained in the field, they were visually and manu- ally classified by the crew chief in accordance with ASTM: D 2488-69. Representative portions of the samples were then returned to the labora- tory for further examination and for verification of the field classifi- cation. Logs of the borings indicating the depth and identification of the various strata, the N value, water level information and pertinent information regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the drill holes are attached. Charts illustrating the soil classification procedure, the descriptive terminology and symbols used on the boring logs are also attached. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Observations The existing building is located on the east side of County Road 110 ICommerce Boulevard) at the north edge of the City of Mound. The building is also one-quarter mile north of Three Points Boulevard, and' is adjacent to an existing marshy backwater of Lake Minnetonka. The building was constructed last year on a shallow pad of sand, which replaced Page 3 #120-8682 the existing vegetation and surface soils. Adjacent to the building is a sloping area of soils placed above the marsh as part of the general reconstruction of Commmerce Boulevard. Presently, the grounds around the building are sparsely covered with weeds. The sloped area south of the building has been seeded and mulched. Although the test borings indicate a generally level area {average surface elevation about 935') much of the land around the building is rather rolling. However, the marshy area which extends east of the building is flat, and slightly above the present level of Lake Minnetonka. Soil Conditions Test boring i was put down near the southeast corner of the existing building. It encountered about 7' of mostly sand fill at the surface. The N values (resistance to sample penetration) indicate the fill is in a loose state. From below the fill, to termination of the boring at the 20' de- 1.'~ ~ · ~'.i ~. ~...:': ~_ .~:' ~. ~ .... . ~ p~h,.~o~[g.a.~~ ~.:~o is - principally peat and muck_~..ar~e, present? These swamp deposits are ' .T ~,. iLi:'.]~ '7'~'~I?~I~'~! :"~ ::~T~ ,L'~ '~ '~'~] -'~'~ ~-~ · ~ ........ ~" waterbear~ng,.and very soft. Test boring 2, which is located south and west of boring 1, encountered generally the same profile as boring 1. However, the fill is a mixture of silty sand and sandy cla~. Test boring 3 was put down about 118' due south of boring 2. It encountered the aforementioned mixed fill to a depth of about 10'. It was terminated in soft, waterbearing peat. SOIL E~Xr~LOr'4~t:lOl-I Page 4 #120-8682 Boning 4 was put down near the northwest corner of the existing building. It did not encounter any organic soils. Rather, the boring extended through 6' of mixed fill over topsoil, and was terminated in soft to rather stiff silty and sandy clay soils. Water Conditions Water was encountered in each of the test borings~and depths ranging from 1' to 4'. In our opinion t~ese !~vels r~flect the~local groundwater conditions at the time..the .borings.,.were. taken.~ This local groundwater table is apt to fluctuate with corresponding changes in the surface elevation of the adjacent Lake Minnetonka, Information regarding water level measure.ments and observations are shown on the attached boring logs. ENGINEERING REVIEW Project Information We understand the proposed building is under consideration for purchase by the City for future use as a storage building for City equipment. Included in the purchase would be about five acres of adjacent land. Only about two acres of the land is dry. The remainder is part of the marsh which bounds the property. If the building and land are purchased, heavy equipment will be stored in the building. The equipment includes snowplows and other street maintenance vehicles. The usable grounds around the building would be fenced-in and paved ~O[L ~XF~tOF~tlon Page 5 #120-8682 for long-term storage of City vehicles and road maintenance materials. Discussion The existing building, by our observation, is a light-weight metal framed structure _which is supported on the concrete floor slab. From our observations it appears that the edge of the slab may have been thickened to support the weight of the metal framing and walls. Our three concrete cores indicate the floor has an average thickness of just over 5", but was not reinforced with wire mesh. At this time heavy equipment is stored in the building. Several antique steam engines are located in the building near our boring #4. Our field crew observed that the floor of the building appeared to be in generally good condi ti on. In our opinion the building and floor slab are performing very well, considering the very poor soil conditions present across the site. Boring 4 was terminated in about 10' of swamp deposits. The soils are, apparently, physically supporting the structure. However, they are apt to settle several inches over the next three ~ five years. The amount of settlement ~ll be dependent, in part, upon the actual depth of swamp deposits and the change in load upon these deposits due to construction of the building and underlying fill. This long-term settlement will result in the formation of voids beneath exp omat on Page 6 #120-8682 the floor slab which, in turn, will cause cracking and floor movement. Since the shell of the building is flexible metal, the movement of the slab may not be particularly detrimental to the framing. How_ev.er, it may~be.necessary to adjust the building's overhead doors,~nd/or re-align the metal shel.1. ~he grounds around the building will also settle in the manner described above. Again, the amount of settlement is dependent upon the organic soil depths and the soil loading. For the proposed maintenance yard areas, we would suggest usin§ only a §ravel pavement. ~he gravel can, then, be regraded as the long-term settlement occurs. Surfacing the gravel with either asphalt or concrete may not be worthwhile. ~hese surfacing materia'ls would undergo the same distress and cracking expected of the building floor slab. Summary The above discussion is intended as a §eneralized review of the soil conditions encountered in the four test borings. In the interest of project budgeting, these borings were terminated in the organic so~ls. Additional exploration to map-out the depth and extent of the organic soil conditions would have resulted in additional project expense, but probably would not have changed our discussion. However, we are available for additional consultation and/or soil exploration, as desired. Page 7 #120-8682 LIMITS OF EXPLORATION The recommendations and/or suggestions contained in this report are our opinions based on data which are assumed to be representative of the site explored, but because the area of the borings in relation to the entire area is very small, and for other reasons, we do not warrant con- ditions below the depths of our borings, or that the strata logged from our borings are necessarily typical of the entire site. c;OIL EXPLORi~t:IOn I · 1" 3' 1 Jo8 ~O. 120-8682 VERTICAL SCALE = BORIN(~ NO PRo~Ec~,EXPLORATION OF EXISTING BUILDING - ,,C.O RD 110 NEAR 3 POINTS - MOUND, MN DEPTH ! DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL SAMPLE LABORATORY L.L. ,N ~su~,c~v,~,o~ 935.3' ~o~o~,c FEET ORIGIN N WL NO, TYPE W O p.~. F~LL, mos~l~ 5~LTY"'SA~D, a 1~1e F~L ~ sand, brown and light brown 4 1 SB  5 i2 SB 5 FILL, ' mostly SILTY CLAY a trace of sand and gravel, black 5 3 SB 7 PEAT," dare ~rOW~',m'~ois~ ('Pt) S'WAMP DEPOSIT 3 4 'SB 9 MUCK, black", ~oft ..... 2 5 SB 12 ORGANIC SILTY cLAY,"Dlack, sof~ FINE ~ (0H) ALLUVIUH 3 6 SB 14 ........ SILTY CLAY, gray, seft (CL) 3 7 SB MUCK, brownish gray, soft (Pt) SWAI4P DEPOSIT 2 8 SB End of Boring ~ WXTERL~VE~E~SUR~.TS S~, 5-21-82 CO~.~E 5-21-82 ~ S*~O C*S,~ C~-'~ w~*[. HSA 0-19h' ~10:45 -5321 10:45 21' ' 'i9~' ..... ,o 11~' "5221 11:05 21' None 1' ,o None LOG OF TEST BORING JOB NO 120-8682 VERTICAL SCALE BORIN¢{ NO. PROJECT EXPLORATION OF EXISTING BUILDING - CO RD 110 NEAR 3 POINTS - MOUND. MN DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL SAMPLE LABORATORY TESTS ,N 934.3' GEOLOGIC L.L. Ou FEET IF'SURFACE ELEVATION __ ORIGIN N WL NO. TYPE W D :' P.L'~ FILL, mixture of SILTY SAND, SANDY FILL CLAY, OLAYEY SAND a~fid SILTY CLAY, a 5 I SB little sand and gravel, brown, gray:~ and a little black, water in fill , below about 5' 8 2 SB 9 3 SB 7½ 4 SB MUCK, black, soft, lense of peat at SWAMP 2 5 SB 7½' ( Pt) DEPOS I T 9½ ORGANIC SILTY CLAY black, soft a FINE lamination of waterbearing sand at ALLUVIUM 2 6 SB about 10' (OH) · 12 MEDIUM FAT CLAY, gray, soft (CH) 4 7 SB End of Boring - '~ ; - WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START 5--21--82 COMPLETE 5-21-82 I SAmPlED CAS,.G C^VE-,. WATER HSA 0--12' I DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH BAILED DEPTHS LEVEL METHOD ~ 11 : 4 5 ,, ! 5-21 11:35 6' 4~' ,o 5' 5-21 11:45l 14' 12' 12' ,o None 5-21 11:50 14' None 3~' ,o None / / ~>~_ . .. ,o ...c,E~, c~l~ Fra nc i s SE-2 (77.B .3 ~ LOG OF TESI:'BORING 1" = 3' 3 JOB NO. ],20-8682 ' VERTICAL SCALE OORINGNO. ~'.OJ~CT EXPLORATION OF EXISTING BUILDING -CO RD 1~0 NEAR 3 POINTS -H~UND', DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL SAMPLE LABORATORY ~ESTS ~N GEOLOGIC  L.L~ Ou ~SU..AC~ ~V*~,O. 936=7 I ORIGIN N WL NO. TYPE W O P.L. ~; ~i~ ~f SAND~ CLAY, SILTY FILL .~ CLAY and LEAN CLAY, a trace of 6 I SB gravel, brown, gray and black 13 2 SB 7 3 SB 13 4 SB 5 SB PEAT, dark brown and black, moist, SWAMP 5 6 SB lense of organic silty clay at about DEPOSIT 13' (Pt) 8 7 SB 14 .. End of Boring WATER LEVEL ~EASUREUENTS START ~ COU~kEIE 5-~] -~2 o.~ ~'~ o~.~. o~.~. o~.~. ~.,~oo~.~s ~ ,,~-oo HSA 0-12' ~ 1:20 5-21 1:20 14' 12" 12~" ,o ~ None 5-21 1:25 14' ~one 3' ,o ') None ..... ,o ~ C.E~', C~,~, Francis LOG OF TEST BORING 1" = 3' 4 JOB NO 120-8682 VERTICAL SCALE BORIN(i NO. PROJECT. EXPLORATION OF EXISTING BUILDING - CO RD. 1..!0 NEAR 3 POTNTS - HOIIND~ MN DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL GEOLOGIC SAMPLE LABORATORY .... TESTS '" F- 935.81 LL. Ou FEET SURFACE ELEVATtON ORIG~N N WL NO. TYPE W D p.'--~. FILL, mostly SILTY SAND, a little FILL sand, concrete at about 2½', brown 2 I SB and light brown '3.0 2 SB ' ~ .0.5 4, SILTY CLAY, black, .medium (CL-OL) TOPSOIL 5 3 SB 7 SANDY CLAY, a trace of gravel, MIXED brown and gray mottled, soft (CL) ALLUVIUM 2 4 SB 9 SILTY CLAY, brown and light gray FINE mottled, medium, a few lens'es of ALLUVIUM _ sandy clay (CL) 5 5 SB 12 SANDY CLAY, a little gravel, brown TILL ~ mottled, rather stiff (CL) !4 6 SB ~ End of Boring - WATE" LEVEL MEASUREMENTS STA.T 5-21-82 CO~.LE~E 5-21-82 SAUPLEO CAS,.G C~v~-,. ~ W~T~. HSA 0-12' I DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH BAILEODEPTHS LEVEL ~,.OO ~ 2:10 5-21 2:10 14' 12' 10' ~o 5-21 2:15 ~4' None 4' ,o None S£-2 (?7.B .3 ~ GENERAL NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS SYMBOL HSA FA HA. DC RC CS DM lW S8 T 3'O W B P _Q _X CR NSR NMR DEFINITION SYMBOL 3 1/4" I.D, Hollow Stem Au§er W 4"° 6" or 10" Diameter Flight Auger D 2"~ 4" or 6" Hand Auger LL, PL 2 1/2", 4", $" or 6" Steel Drive Casing Qu Size A, B or N Rotary Casing Pipe Drill or Cleanout Tube Continuous Split Barrel Sampling Drilling Mud pq J et Water Ts 2" O.D. Split Barrel Sample · G 2 1/2" or 3 lj2" O.D. SB Liner Sample SL 2" or 3" Thin Walled Tube Sample pH 3" TWT {Pitcher Sampler) DC 2" or 3" TWT (Osterberg Sampler) SP Wash Sample PS Bag Sample FS Test Pit Sample SC BQ, NQ or PQ Wireline System CC AX, BX or NX Double Tube Barrel C * Core Recovery - Percent Qc * No Sample Recovered, classification based D.S. * on action of drilling equipment and/or K * material noted in drilling fluid or on sampling D * bit. MA * No Measurement Recorded, primarily due R to presence of drilling or coring fluid, E * Water Level Symbol Vs * RQD LABORATORY TEST SYMBOLS DEFINITION Water Content - % of Dry Wt. - ASTM D 2216 Dry Density - Pounds Per Cubic Foot Liquid and Plastic Limit-ASTM D423 and 424 Unconfined Compressive Strength - in Pounds/ Square Foot- ASTM D 2166 Additional Insertions in Qu Column Penetrometer Reading - TonsJSquare Foot ' Torvane Reading-Tons/Square Foot Specific Gravity - ASTM D 854 Shrinkage Limit - ASTM D 42'/ Hydrogen ion Content - Meter Method Organic Content - Combustion Method Swell Pressure - Tons/Square Foot Percent Swell Free Swell - Percent Sulfate Content - Parts/Million, same as mg/L Chloride Content - Parts/Million, same as mg/L One Dimensional Consolidation - ASTM D 2435 Triaxial Compression Direct Shear- ASTM D3080 Coefficient of Permeability - cra/sec Dispersion Test Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D 422 Laboratory Resistivity, in ohm -cm Pressuremeter Deformation Modulus- TSF Field Vane Shear - ASTM D 2573 Rock Quality Designation - Percent * Sec'attached data sheet or graph WATER LEVEL Water levels shown on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time and under the conditions indicated. In sand, the indicated levels may be considered reliable ground water levels. In clay soil, it may not be possible to determine the ground water level within the normal time required for test bonags, except where lenses or layers of more pervious waterbearing soil are present and even then an extend- ed period of time may be necessary to reach equilibrium. Therefore, the position of the water level symbol for cohesive or mixed texture soils may not indicate the true level of the ground water table. Perched water refers to water above an impervious layer, thus impeded in reaching the water table. The available water level information is given at the bottom of the log sheet. DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY DENSITY CONSISTENCY TERM "N" VALUE TERM Very Loose 0-4 Soft Loose 5-8 Medium Medium Dense 9-15 Rather Stiff Dense 16-30 Stiff Very Dense Over 30 Very Stiff Standard "N" Penetration: Blows Per Foot of a 140 Pound Hammer Falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD Split Barrel Sampler. Lamination Layer Lens Varved Dry Moist Wet Waterbearing Up to 1[2" thick stratum 1/2" to 6" thick stratum 1/2" to 6" discontinuous stratum, pocket Alternating laminations of clay, silt and/or fine grained sand, or colors thereof Powdery, no noticeable water Below saturation Saturated, above liquid limit Pervious soil below water RELATIVE PROPORTIONS AND SIZES Term Trace A Little Some With Range 0-5% 5-15% 15-30% 30-50% Boulder Cobble Gravel Coarse Fine Sand Coarse Medium Fine Silt & Clay Over 12" 3"- 12" 3/4" - 3" #4- 314" #4- #10 #10- #40 #40- #200 #200, Based on Plasticity//~j .... CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES ASTM Designatiom D 2487 - 69 AND D 2488 - 69 (Unified Soil Classification System) Grip Classification c~iteria Major divisions symbols Typical names I Well-graded gravels and w Cu = D~6°greater than 4: U~ _ UfO c '~ GW gravel-sand mixtures, little o ~ or no fines ~ '~ Cz= [D3°)2 between 1 and 3 '-m em Poorly graded gravels and .-u ~ ~ '~ ~ GP gravel-sand mixtures, little '~- '~ Not meeting both criteria for GW ~ or no fines ~ ~ ~ ~ e '~ c GM Sil~ gravels, gravel-sand- ~ ~ "~ AtteSt9 i/mits ~low · - '~ "A" line or P.I. less Atter~rg limits plot- '- S.~ --~ silt mixtures ~ ~ ~ ~~ than4 ting in hatched area  ~ ~ '~ _ are border//ne classifi- ~ ~ ~ ~ A~er~rg hmits above cations requiring use ~ Clayey gravels, gravel- ~ of dual symbols m sand-clay mixtures greater ~an 7 ~ ~ ,~ · e ~60 greater than 6; ~'~ Well-grad~ sands and gte- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ SW velly sends, little or no ~ .~ ~ ~ o c fines ~ '~ (D3ol~ o ~ ~ CZ= ~ ~n 1 and 3 ~ ~ . '= e c o ~ · D~o xD6o go u ~ o ~ '~ ....... e ~ m Poorly grededsands and ~ -- ~ ~ Not~eting~thcriteriaforSW ~ ~'~ ~ SP gre~lly sands, li~le or no ~ ~ = SM Sil~ sands, sand-silt mix- ~ ~. ~ "A" line or P.I. less A~er~rglimits plo~- ~ ~ -~ tur~ ~ than4 ting ,n hatched area ~~ ~ ~ ~ are border/ina classifi- '~ ~ ~ ~ cations requiring use ~ ~ A~er~rg limits a~ve of dual symbols ~ ~ SC CI~ sands, send-clay "A" line wi~ P.I. ~ mi~ures greeter ~an 7 Inorganic silts, very fine' Pla~iciW~a~ ~ ML sends, rock flor. silw or 60 I I I J I J ~ clayey fine sands For classihcat~ of flne~rained ~ ~ soils and fine fraction of coarse- ~o Inorganic clays of Iow to 50~ grained/Is. ~ medium plasticity, gravelly [ Atter~rg Limits plotting in CH . CL c~ays, sa~y cl~s. sil~ hat,ed area are borderline e E clays, lean clays classifications r~uiring use of · ~ ~ x 40'~ dual s~bols, '~ ~ Orphic silts and organic ~ Equati~ of A-line: /~ o '- OL silty clays of Iow plastic/W '- PI =0.73 (LL-20) ~ ~ Inor~nic silts, micaceous m ~ OH end MH .E ~ ~ MH or diet--acius fine ~nds ~ r ~ e m c- or silts, elastic silts 20 ~ "~ J -- InorganiC clays of high 10 ' ~ ~. CH plastici~, fat clays - / { ~ Or~nic clays of ~di~ to 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 = OH high plasticity .. ~ Liquid L~mit - '~ ~ Peat. muck and other highly ~ ~ Pt 'Sa~d ~ the material passing ~e 3 in. (76 ~) sieve. For classihcat~on of fine-grained soils and fine fraction of coarse- grained soils./· Atterberg Limits plotting in CH hatched area are borderline classifications requiring use of dual symbols. Equation of A-line: PI =0.73 {LL-20) /1 · OH and MH / ---E.~'-~_'~5\"~j ML and gL ,670. /~o~. C-/ SOIL TEST BORINGS DRAWN BY //? ICHECKED ~ Fee: $75.00 Annual Permit $15.00 Single Permit CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR GAMBLING PERMIT Name of organization ~./~,~d' ~:~'d~'8'~'l~ Address &~f~C~,~z~ ~~. , a ~*~I~~ organization, hereby applies for a ..~6/~ .. ~ ~_F/~ ) gambl i ng permit. annOal/single occasion Date to be us~.~l~/~ j~/~, /~ Date Organization was organized Purpose of 0 rgan. i za t i on~.____.~_~ ~/~ ~~ Type of Gambling to take place: Paddlewheel Yes No Tipboard Yes No Raffle Yes / No Location of Gambling: Address: .L/.~,~.~)o,,;d/ ~ ~,~ ~,,-'~ t~ ~ Name of Building Owner~._~¢.~ ~.~ ~.~ Is the building owned or leased by the organization~~ Date ownership was acquired If leased, expiration date of lease/ (Copy of lease must accompany applicati/on) Gambling Manager; Name of Gambling Manager ~/~/~ ' .... [ ~ ne Home address ~/,~ ~ / ~ ~, ~ ~ ~, ~m~h~, ...... ~ '~' ~/0~ 17)/U~ ' Is Gambl lng Manager an active member~6~z~ /~,~ (Required) Date membership acquired--~/~ ~ , , , Is Gambling Manager paid by the organization for handling the gambling ~,~.. (The answer to this question must be no - Sec. 43.40) A~unt of bond furnished by Gambling Manager (At least $10,0OO.) Name of Company furnishing Bond agree to file a copy of the bond with the City Clerk. Name of Bank where gambling funds will be kept /~,-::~'i~,7~ and we <2) Bank Account Number for gambling funds / Are funds in the above account mixed with other funds /~/~ (Answer must be "No") AGREEMENT Thec~,.~.~_~z~- ~,/x~(~). hereby agrees that if the license hereia Name of Applican~t is granted that the(~..~c--/~,,c~=- ~/~,~-C. will save the City, its officers Name of Applicant and agents harmless against any claims or actions and the cost of defending any claims or actions arising out of or by reason of the granting of the license or the conduct of any of the activities authorized by the license. It is further agreed that monthly reports shall be furnished the City by the Gambling Manager as directed in the ordinance and thec~.~.e~,7~x:~ ,~?/9J. (g. Name of Applicant hereby authorizes the Bank named above as the keeper of gambling funds to allow the City access to the figures and activity of account number/~ /~ja~'.~~ listed above. Signed by autFiori~ed O~fficer of Organization Date The above application is made on behalf of and all information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date S ignatu re T i't l:'e ~'/)'~~ Annual Licenses: Expire on January 31 of each year. Fees are not prorated for licenses purchased after February 1. //?? BILLS .... JUNE 8, 1982 Air Comm 90.00 Earl F. Andersen 59.60 Astleford Equip 101.40 Diane Arneson 132.50 Assn of Metrop Munic 15.O0 Acro Minnesota 121.63 A1binson 484.00 Holly Bostrom 401.OO Gayle Burns 17.53 Carol Burlet 30.00 Janet Bertrand 28.18 Curtis 1000 281.74 Dependable Services 33.00 Determan Welding 772.80 Jon Elam 46.97 Glenwood Inglewood 46.40 Hayden Murphy 95.10 Wm Hudson 15.26 Internatl City Mgmt Assn 230.00 Kromer Co. 96.85 Doris Lepsch 15.00 Lowells 1.63 McCombs Knutson 745.00 MS Print 89.60 Marina Auto Supply 384.61 Mound Hdwe 7.16 John S. Plahn 18.74 Power Group Trust 73.25 Prairie Lawn & Garden 72.00 Brad Roy 16.00 Suburban Chevrolet 2.18 Star-Tex Corp 454.79 Standard Spring 414.17 State Bank of Mound 14.40 Thrifty Snyder Drug 19.36 Tri State Drilling 417.50 Village chev 5.16 United Fire Fighters 25.00 Water Products 172.72 Westonka Sewer & Water 867.99 Winner Industries 3.08 John Weiland (assess grant) 3,179.11 Widmer Bros. 2,139.75 Cobb Carpet Care 95.00 J.R. Dutton 42.21 Vincent Forsman 35.00 Robert Johnson 63.80 Mike McClelland 126.00 Mound Postmaster 406.08 Bud Orn 500.00 R.L. Youngdahl & Assoc 12,114.59 Howard Simar Total Bills Liquor Bills Blackowiak & Sons Bradley Exterminating City of Mound Mtka Refrig. Real One Acquisition Regal Window Cleaning Butch's Bar Supply City Club Distrib Coca Cola Bottling Day Distrib East Side Bev. Gold Medal Bev Home Juice Jude Candy Kool Kube Ice The Liquor House Midwest Wine A.J. Ogle Co. Pepsi Cola Pogreba Distrib Thorpe Distrib Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Old Peoria Ed Phillips Total Liquor Bills GRAND TOTAL--ALL BILLS 450.011 26,O69.84 32.00 19.O0 26.40 106.55 2,017.52 10.75 209.80 3,891.65 283.81 4,192.55 4,999.70 286.07 41.40 31.20 240.0O 871.08 1,641.65 2,210.32 279.90 3,427.45 5,153.75 1,291.65 1,241.68 618.14 1,548.25 34,672.27 60,742.11 A.THOMAS WURST' GERALD T. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOMAS ~'. UNDERWOOD ALBERT FAULCONER T~ JAMES D. LARSON LAW OFFICES WURST, CArrOLL & PEARSON IIOO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 May 24, 1982 TELEPHONE Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Jon: Enclosed is a copy of the DPS staff testimony, together with a copy of Derick Dahlen's testimony. The staff testimony supports their recommendation that Continental be allowed only a 3 million dollar increase as compared with the 6.7 they requested. 'Of the 3.7 that the staff proposes to cut out, over 2.5 million relates to the staff recommended return on equity investment of 14.7% as compared to the Continental request for 18%. I would expect the Commission to allow about 15% return on equity. Mr. Dahlen's recommendations are largely-additions to the DPS staff position and would further reduce the Continental increases by 1.7 million. Mr. Dahlen is recommending: to remove materials and supplies from rate base because Continental hasn't shown that investors supplied those funds $ 108,953 exclude committed construction from rate base because there have been no investor funds expended $ 612,324 correct payroll expense to eliminate 1982 wage increases $ 1,021,514 WURST, CARROLL & PeArSON Mr. Jon Elam May 24, 1982 Page 2 The DPS staff witnesses and Mr. Dahlen will be cross-examined in the next round of hearings, starting on June 21. JDL:cnm Enclosures PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 7TH ON PHONE RATES RATE CHALLENGE FUND NEEDS HELP On Monday, June~7th at Maple Plain Elementary School, the Minnesota Public ~ice Commission will be holding one of series of meetings that will conducted across the state regarding the proposed 40% rate increase that Continental Phone Company is requesting. This hearing is your opportunity to take a stand against the rate increase and make your opinion count. The hearing will be conducted by a State Hearing Examiner and the testimony taken will be used in making the final determination of how much of the increase will be allowed. Those wishing to testify should prepare their thoughts ahead of time (for maximum effect) and may sign up at the door· After everyone has been heard in order, the floor will be open to everyone. In a recent development, the Minnesota Department of Public Service has announced that they feel that the rate increase requested by Continental should be cut by about 50% of the original request. This position will be a strong element in the final determination by the ~blic Service Commission. It really ~ows that a collective show of support by -~o~unities and groups can indeed influence the outcome of a public ratee ca se. The Rate Challenge Fund, a local cause which opposes the rate increase, still needs help to assist in defraying the large legal expense that has been incurred by the City of Mound in their efforts to block the increase. Donations should be directed to: RATE CHALLENGE FUND P.O. BOX 44 MAPLE PLAIN, MN. 55359 Your help is needed and appreciated. The efforts on their part are to save money for you, and will pay back many fold. The Rate Challenge Fund wishes to thank the following persons for their support in efforts to lower the phone rates: Evelyn Berg Maple Plain Alta Hendrickson Maple Plain A1 Gertz Maple Plain D. Hodroff Maple Plain Mary Johnston Warren Hanson Hugh Stevenson Yvonne Hendricks Nancy Richardson Michelle Sandeen Independence Maple Plain Maple Plain Maple Plain Independence Maple Plain L. Widstrom Independence Darlene Feia Maple Plain ' LaVerne Feia Maple Plain Cynthia Fulkerson Maple Plain Ron Steffenhagen Maple Plain Dellia Roehl Connie Barkley Robt. Kratt James Anderson John Vassar D. Rudolph Doris Weline Mike Stephens Florence Roth Jerome Hansen Gerald Horazuk Alton Bergquist N. Ingersoll Independence Mound Mound Maple Plain Maple Plain Mound Maple Plain Independence Wadena Maple Plain Independence Maple Plain Maple Plain -Mary Leintz Maple Plain Irv Ganz Maple Plain J. Smith Maple Plain Alice Badger Maple Plain Jeff Walton Maple Plain BUSINESSES AND GROUPS City of Maple Plain City of Independence The Fireplace Center Thank you to everyone who has generously helped! : STAFF : : Waneta Anderson : : Brenda Boisclair : · : Don Loebrick : ·' Jeff Walton · PAGE 3 Articles for July/August and will be a ~ap!e Plain - Independence issue should be in City Offices by June 17. CONTINENTAL CONTINU~-PLUNGE INTO DATk-~ERVICES WITH COMPUTER FIRM ACQUISITION After 3 months of negotiations, Continental Telecom Inc. has agreed to buy STSC Inc., a computer services company, for $24 million in cash. STSC, which had revenues last year of $28 million, lost $322,000 last quarter. Continental Telecom is in the midst of restructuring its traditional' rural t~lephome business to enter the unregulated data communications market, and recently changed its name from Continental Telephone Corp. to reflect its new emphasis. Under its information services, network services, business systems and international consulting and contracts groups, Continental provides various data transmission services. American Satellite Corp., jointly owned by Continental and Western Union, provides point- to-point satellite services and Executone Inc. markets terminal equipment such as PBXs and business phones. The acquisition of STSC Inc. will enable Continental to provide computer time and consulting services to its customers, a company spokesman said. STSC will be included in Continental's Contel Information Services group, which also comprises Network Analysis, a consulting arm, and International Computing Co., which it bought last s,~mer. Earlier in the year, Continental increased its holdings of another computer firm, ~ agement Assistance Inc., from 7.5% to more than 14.5% in what MAI called a takeover bid (TELEPHONE NEWS, May 10). Last week, MAI paid Continental $2.5 million for the option to buy back Continental's holdings of MAI. (Continental Telecom Inc., 245 Perimeter Center Pkwy., Atlanta, GA 30346, 404/391-8016.) May 24, 1982 METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION 915 NORTH CLEVELAND AVENUE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114 - 612-642-2600 Mr. John Elam City Manager 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Mn. 55364 Re: Change in Shelter Type 1981 Shelter Project D-996-2, Bartlett Blvd. & Shoreline Drive Dear Mr. Elam: Confirming our recent telephone conversation, I am enclosing a plan which shows the proposed change in shelter type at the above referenced location. I have drawn a crude profile sketch of the type D shelter which should show why the installation of the originally proposed type C shelter would require bus patrons to walk off the base and into the encroaching shrubbery. With the sensitivity to destruction of any greenery these days, I was reluctant to authorize our contractor to remove the adjacent shrubs in order to build the 13' wide base as originally specified. The ridership information I received from our planning department in- dicates that the Type D Shelter should be adequate to accomodate the number of bus patrons that would normally be waiting for buses at this stop. If you require any further information, please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, j Laurence R. Schumi Civil Engineer cc: Cecil M. Tammen LRS/map C 2 May 28, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD - MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Mr. Jim Regan 5334 Piper Road Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Mr. Regan: The issue you addressed in your letter to the City Council on May 20, 1982, is one controlled entirely by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. They, at this time, are following exactly the thoughts and philosophy you are advocating for Lake Minnetonka. They have refused to even consider any motorized racing for not only Cooks Bay but all other bays as well. If you think the City of Mound should still pass an Ordinance even though it doesn't have any lake jurisdiction, that could be done but even then with Staff and printing costs we could easily have $100.00 invested in a problem which may never exist. I am sending a copy of your let'ter to the L.M.C.D. to .see if they would care to respond. Sincerely, Jon Elam City Manager JE:fc cc: L.M.C.D. City Council~''~ J. E. Regan 5334 Piper Road Mound, MN 55364 May 20, 1982 Honorable Mayor City of Mound Mound, MN RE: City Ordinance Division 3 Chapter 38-Part G Water Craft or Automobile Race Track or Course In the fall of 1969, as a member of the City Council, I introduced a certain ordinance to restrict automobile races on Cooks Bay. For the previous four winters the residents living on Cooks Bay had seen a once a year car race on the ice grow to racing all day every Saturday and Sunday for the months of January, February and March. The intention of the ordinance was to stop the noise problem which disturbed all residents facing the lake, the safety of people fishing on the lake because there were no walls or barriers to stop the spinning cars on an ice race track and also to stop any pollution problems of spilled gas and oil that occur at any race. At that time there was no energy crisis as we know it today, but I believe t~at car racing on the ice is not a good use of energy. My request is that the present ordinance be amended to read: "Motorized water craft or motorized automobile race track or course is prohibited." This then would allow non-motorized races such as canoe racing, row boat racing, sail boat racing and ice boat racing. Lake Minnetonka has been known for its sail boat racing since the early 1900's - witness that there are four yacht clubs on the lake. Non-motorized racing is a pure sport where the person is against the elements with no help in the form of a combustion engine using precious and diminishing fuels. A number of my neighbors who own sail boats asked to to write to the council. They know that I lead the fight to stop the race car track on the ice. I don't own a sail boat or sail but my son' and daughter do and I have always enjoyed the sail boat races on the lower and upper lake. When I have spoken to other people who were involved in the original ordinance to ban automobile races, none have any objection to this proposal. Would you please keep me advised as to the determination of this matter. I would be happy to appear at a council meeting to speak in favor of this request. s ly, CC: R. Polsten P. Charon D. Ulrick G. Swenson POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & DOTY, LTD. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: /Jon Elam, City Manager, City o£ Mound Charlotte Patterson, City Administrator, City of Minnetrista Linda Zitzmann, City Clerk, City of St. Bonifacius Desyl L. Peterson May 28, 1982 Potential Additional Prosecution Costs More bad news. Not only did the 1982 Legislature give the city attorneys prosecution authority for gross misdemeanor DWIs effective April 1, 1982, it also amended the Municipal Court statute, effective January 1, 1983, to give the Court jurisdiction of all gross misdemeanors. I have attached for your information that section of the Court Reorganization Act. Under the existing law, Section 488A.10, subd. 11, the city attorney is designated as the prosecutor for all violations of state and local laws, "triable in the municipal court." Thus, beginning January 1, 1983, I will have juris- diction over all gross misdemeanors which are not specifically designated by law to be prosecuted by the county attorney. I believe there are probably very few gross mis- demeanors which are specifically designated as county attorney functions. Thus, this could mean additional costs for the cities, both through prosecuting attorney costs and jail costs. I do not have a sense of how many gross misdemeanors our police departments handle. Perhaps the volume is small, resulting in only minimal increased costs. I know you are not going to be very happy about this, but I'm afraid there isn't much we can do. Let me know if you have questions about this. cc Chief Bruce Wold Chief Timothy Thompson A.THoMAs WURST GERALD T. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOI~AS F. UNDERWOOD ALBERT FAULCONER ,m JAMES D. LARSON LAW OFFICES WURST, CarrOll ~ Pearson I100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 May 28, 1982 TELEPHONE (612} 338-8911 Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Lake Front Lots Dear Jan: I have your note of May 26 inquiring about the fence requirements on the lake side of residential property. You and I discussed this by telephone, and you indicated you could not find that the lake front was considered a front yard. I have made a cursory review of the new ordinance and I cannot find it either. At the time the new ordinance was being prepared, it was my understanding that since the City Council and the Planning Commission had recently redone the entire zoning definitions section. these provisions of the old ordinance were in effect carried over tc the new ordinance. In my earlier review of the ordinance, I made some comments about definition changes, and it was my understanding that those were going to be essentially changed to incorporate the definitions section because the Planning Commission and the Council had spent considerable time on that project in 1978 or 1979. I am enclosing now page 5 of the definitions section of the Code in effect prior to the adoption of the new ordinance. Please note that between the new numbers 63 and 64, there is a gap of three definitions from the old ordinance covering Lot, Double Frontage; Lot, Interior; and Lot, Key. None of those three were incorporated in the new ordinance, and I do not know if that was done intentionally or unintentionally. I would recommend that the Planning Commission add those definitions back into the new ordinance. I would further recommend that a definition by definition comparison be made of the old ordinance and the new ordinance to see what other changes were made intentionally or unintentionally. The Planning Commission could then recommend an amendment to the new zoning code to add back in any definitions which have been lost as a result of typing or untentionally over-looked in bringing the new code into force. In addition to those two sections of the code, I am enclosing page 65.03 which specifically deals with lake frontage lots and provides the 50 foot setback, and this also appears to be left out of the new ordinance. % am also enclosing page 66.15 with applicabi' lake short front yard setbacks. WURST. CARROLL & PEARSON Page 2 Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector May 28, 1982 I think the Planning Commission and the Council should understand that there will be bugs in the new ordinance, but I hope they will also understand that unless there is a line-by-line comparison, changes may have been made by the planner in drafting or may have been made intentionally or unintentionally by the Planning Commission in recommending the new ordinance to the City Council, and the only way the Planning Co~mnission and the Council will know what they have passed is by making such a comparison. In conclusion, my recommendation is that the old definitions and lake frontage sections be added into the Code if that is deemed in the public interest by the Planning Commission and the City Council. CAP: Ih Enc lo sure cc: Mr. Jon Elam Very truly yoqr. s, ../ , ,/'//' ,.'" · 'I ''' /".~ ~; I, ~ ~- ~(.. Curtzs A. ~earson, City Attorney McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES,' May 26, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. George McAlpine Buffalo Bituminous Box 126 Buffalo, MN 55313 Subject: City of Mound 1980 Streets - Section 1 Warranty Work File #5248 Dear George: I recently went over your 1980 Street Project in the City of Mound and was pleased with the result except for seven items that would fall under the one year warranty. Four of these are curb displacements at catch basins, two are around gate valves, and one road settlement. Our records show the completion date as being August 1, 1981, so we are well within our year limit. I would like your attention to these few items: - 5733 Grandview, road settlement - 5781 Grandview, patch around gate valve - 5886 Sunset, patch around gate valve - 2080 Clover Circle, curb displacement at catch basin - 2885 Highland, curb displacement on Glenwood side at catch basin - 5245 Fairfield, curb displacement at catch basin - Station 21+00 Highland, curb displacement at catch basin. Thank you. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. JC:sj cc: Jon Elam~ John Christianson Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan pr,nted on recycled paper May 28, 1982 COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ! LAND SURVEYORS I PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Tim Albers Hardrives, Inc. 7200 Hemlock Lane North Maple Grove, MN 55369 Subject: Mound, Minnesota 1980 Warranty Work File #5248 Dear Tim: I recently reviewed your 1980 Mound Street Improvement Project and found them to be in pretty good shape except for some isolated problems. Since this project was not finalled until late last fall, this repair would fall into the one year warranty of this project. These problems are as follows: 5473 Lynwood - Remove and replace sidewalk between drives. Lynwood - Patch bituminous as marked by Morton Channel. 2136 Sandy - Settlement around manhole. 8artlett ~ Norwood - Radius traps water remove and replace. 4925 Bartlett - Alligatoring and poor seams in center of road. Bartlett & Fernside - Oolnt separation. 5053 Bartlett - Surface stripping and bad center line joint. * 5069 Bartlett - Gate valve to be raised in curb and gutter. Bartlett & Glendale - Bituminous badly cracked. Aberdeen, just East of Roanoke - Hole in bituminous over water service trench. 4617 Hanover - Road settlement near manhole. Windsor & Warner - Gate valve settlement has already been cut back but not removed. 1840 Shorewood - Sink hole in street. *'This was a condition for payment last February, to be done by June 1, 1982. I would appreciate your attention to these few matters by July 1st. Thank you. Sincerely, McCOHBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CC :lrjon Elam John Christianson Minneapolis- Hutchinson- Alexandria- Eagan pr,nted on recycl~,d DJ~)or LMCO BOARD MEMBERS Robert TIpton Brown. Chairman Greenwood Frank R. Hunt. Jr., Vice Chairman Spring Park Robert P. Rascop, Secretary Shorewood Edward G, Bauman, Treasurer Tonka Bay Alan Fasching Minnetrista Orval R. Fenstad Mound Richard J. Garwood Deephaven Jo Ellen Hu~r Orono Lois C. Johnson MJnnetonka Beach M. Jerry Johnson Excelsior Robert S, MacNamara Wayzata Robert K, Pillsbury Minnetonka Robert E. Slocurn Woodland Richard J. Soderberg Victoria LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 402 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 TELEPHONE 612/473-7033 FRANK MIXA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR May 27, 1982 Department of Natural Resources c/o Joseph Alexander, DNR Commissioner; Charles Weaver, Metro Council Chairman; and Kent Eklund, Energy, Planning & Development Commissioner 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 Gentlemen: The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District will be a willing and supportive participant in the Lake Min- netonka recreation use plan task force. The Lake is a major public recreational resource and brings with it nationally unique management require- ments and challenges. Through legislative charge, the LMCD has, for the past 15 years, successfully met most of those challenges. We will carefully consider the task force recommendation in the ongoing exercise of our responsibility and authority in the management of Lake Minnetonka. The LMCD's designated representative on the task force will be Robert Tipton Brown with Executive Director Frank Mixa serving as a resource person and alternate LMCD representative. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Chairman RTB:jm cc: LMCD Board Members LMCD Area Mayors~-----~ Governor A1 Quie Brad Van Nest May 19, 1982 Lake Minnetonka Area Mayors Dear Mayor: I am enclosing copies of the DNR's letter to the LMCD notifying them of the creation of a Lake Minnetonka Task Force to prepare a recreational plan for the lake. I also am enclosing a copy of my application letter to Governor Quie requesting my appointment to represent one of the three citizens from Lake Minnetonka communities. I believe that it is important that we get members on this task force that use the lake alot and understand the political process necessary to regulate Lake Minnetonka. I believe that I possess these qualifications and therefore would like to serve on this task force. I would hope that perhaps you and your City Council would support my appointment either by letter or resolution to the Governor and the three individuals signing the letter from the DNR~ If I can provide any additional information or answer any questions you may have on this subject please feel free to contact me. My office number is 473-8511 and my home number is 471-9758. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Yo~ truly, Brad Van Nes~----- BVN/1 g enclosure 3295 CARMAN ROAD, EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331-- PHONENO, 296--2549 April 28, 1982 FILE NO. Robert T. Brc~n, Chairperson Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 402 East T~_ke Street Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Gov. A1 Quie has endorsed the idea of es+mhlishing a task force to prepare a plan for the recreational use of Lake Minnetonka and adjacent land. The need 'for additional public access ~Duld be an~ng the primary considerations. The Depaih~nt of Natural Resources, Metropolitan Council, and Depa~-h,~nt of Energy, Planning and Development are currently seeking applicants for membership on the ~ask force. We think the project is necessary because Lake Minnetonka--the state's tenth largest lake--is a natural resource of metropolitan importance. A similar task force approach has been successful in dealing with another precious, unique metropolitan resource, the Lower St. Croix River. In addition, the three agencies fo~ming the task force have worked together since 1979 to develop public boat launch 'Sites in the metropolitan area. The 19-m~nber task force to be selected this June will be expected to develop a cc~plete recreational plan for the lake by June 30, 1983. Its job will include evaluation of current recreational management programs and recreation use patterns on the surface of the lake. The plan will be sutraitted to the governor, the Legislature and appropriate units of government. We are counting on your personal support of this /nportant effort and request that your agency appoint an individual to represent its interests and concerns on the ~m-~k force. We are seeking representation frc~ the follc~ing agencies: Depa~-hz~nt of Natural Resources; 'Metropolitan Council; Depa~h~nt of Energy, Planning and Develc~x~.nt; Lake Minnetonka Conservation District; Hennepin County; Hennepin County Park Reserve District; Carver County; Minnehaha. Creek Watershed District; and Gray Freshwater Biological Institute. In 'a~tion, there will be seven citizen members, three frc~ Lake Minnetonka cc~m~nities and four frc~ other oa,,,~nities in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. One representative each sa/ling, fishing and boating interest groups will cc~plete the %~sk force. Applicants for these positions are now being sought via the open appointments process. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Robert T. Brown' April 28, 1982 Pa9e Two Please designate a representative by May 31, notifying the Depai-~,,~nt of Natural Resources, 1200 Warner Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55106. We sincerely hope you and ycur agency will support and cooperate in this important project. ~sepla Alexander, Cc~missi~er Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources Charles Weaver, Chairman Metropolitan Council Kent Eklund, C~,t,~ssioner Dept. of Energy, Planning & Develo~n~_nt TO: LMCD Board Members, Searles, Maple, Paurus and Van Nest FROM: R. T. Brown 'DATE: May 6, 1982 This action is a direct result of the intense political activity associated with the proposed Kings Point access. It may have either no impact, or significant impact on the future of the LMCD. Please call me if you have any comments or concerns regarding this issue. RTB:jm R. T. Brown 474-6907 (home) .853-2287 (business) 3295 CARMAN ROAD · VAN NEST COMPANY EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 · PHONE 612-471-7881 May 19, 1982 The Honorable Governor Quie 130 Capitol Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Governor Quie: It has recently come to my attention that a task force to prepare a plan for the recreational, use of Lake Minnetonka and adjacent land is being organized. I would like to submit my name for membership on this task force, as a citizen representing one of the Lake Minnetonka communities. I feel that my background of use and study of Lake Minnetonka, as well as my participation in the Orono City Government and other agencies concerned with the planning and management of the lake, give me a unique background which qualifies me for appointment to this task force. I have available much personal knowledge concerning Lake Minnetonka that I would like to share in the development of the proposed recreational plan for the lake. ' I have participated in the Orono City Government for the past 15 years, during - 'which I have been the Mayor for the past six years. Because the city encompasses 'approximately 1/3 of Lake Minnetonka's surface area and shore line, we have placed great importance in our planning on balancing the need to use and enjoy the lake today with the need to protect and preserve the lake for future generations. The City of Orono has long recognized the need to serve the general public on Lake Minnetonka, and did in 1965 establish commercial marina zones in an attempt to satisfy this need. It is my personal belief that these attempts have not been totally satisfactory and that much can be done to improve the marinas' ability to serve the general public's rights, whose rights to the lake are paramount. I look forward to this task force and would like to participate in the development of a recreational plan for the use of Lake Minnetonka. My qualifications for this appointment are as follows: 1. I am and have been a resident and landowner on Lake Minnetonka for 22 years. 2. I am an active user of the Lake, spending at least 250 hours each year on the lake. 3. I have actively participated in the Orono city government for the past 15 years. 4. I am presently, in my sixth year as Mayor of the City of Orono. I am a member, judge and past director of the Minnetonka Yacht Club, a sailing club which is celebrating its lOOth anniversary this year. Complete Materials Handling Systems Governor Quie -2- May 19, 1982 I was an original incorporator, and past director of the Minnetonka Sailing School, an organization designed to teach and promote the art of sailing on Lake Minnetonka. This organization encouraged students from non-lake families, and did develop a plan of scholarships for low income and underprivileged children so that they, too, could enjoy the benefits of Lake Minnetonka. I was one of the organizers of the Lake Minnetonka Association, an association of lake users interested in keeping the management of the lake from federal control under the Corps of Engineers. Be I was one of two individuals who, together with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Lake Minnetonka Association sued the Corps of Engineers when they attempted to usurp state control over Lake Minnetonka under the authority granted by the 1899 River and Harbors Act. As you know, our position in this matter prevailed, thus keeping control of Lake Minnetonka within the State of Minnesota. I have participated in many projects of the Lake Minnetonka Con- servation District and Minnehaha Creek Watershed that involved planning for lake use and the preservation of Lake Minnetonka as one of the State of Minnesota's greatest natural assets. If I can provide any additional information pertaining to my qualifications, please feel free to contact me at my office (473-8511), or my home (471-9758) at your convenience. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. BVN/lg CITY of MOUND June 3, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: FOR 1981-82 REVENUE: CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT BUDGET HUD Community Development Block Grant Revenue Sharing EXPENSES: A. Downtown Design Study B. Consultant Planner C. Implementation TOTAL TOTAL 4,OO0. 6,745. $10,745. 4,000. 4,800. (Approx.) 1,945. $10,745. FOR 1982-83 (After July 1) REVENUE: HUD - CDBG $5,000 - store front design grants $40,000 - Interest subsidy grants $45,OOO. EXPENSES: A. Unallocated grants $45,000. TOTAL ALLOCATION TO DOWNTOWN EFFORT $55,745. JE:fc CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Jan Bertrand, Building Official June 3, 1982 Explanation of the Agencies involved with Lake Minnetonka The Mayor asked me for a simple explanation of the regulatory lake agencies for Lake Minnetonka. LMCD (Lake Minnetonka Conservation District) - takes care of and regulates all activities taking place on the lake, including dockage. MCWD (Minnehaha Creek Watershed District) - regulates all construc- tion, fill, dredging, drainage, placement of road, water with- drawal within 75 feet of the lake (high water level). DNR (Department of Natural Resources) - regulates any construction below the ordinary high water mark (OHW) with very few exceptions. I hope this will help clarify the different agencies' involvement in the lakes and the upland waterways. Jan Bertrand JB/ms 1,,?-2.3 '"" ""'""' "" tou h "" a,jam w,th· . ' ~ , ~ 2L.2~-'""' ~ ?~L~,~,r- .... ~¢' ': t'"'- .:: ':'~v ~"~:.:-~.~ },. ..' B ~n'Fe der ~--~ ' , ~'~" ~oul~only ~y.~at the ouUook for .' S~ff ~Uter -,--~ ................. ,-:; . . :.. ~e r~ of ~e y~r, including' ~e .';,~ .. ,. · 1982~~se~n~unce~in..-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ . [ wdeo~ '~"not' t~y~ i~C~'~nd '~' ",' ' '" :' '`~' ""'" '" ' · ~z ~97s ~ ~ are ~p~dng ~e ~ancY of Tonka's ~tsmal fi~t~ua~er ~'r~ul~ J'~ toy buYem th~ days. ...... .;~;; :;', '..' "' lndl~te ~e challeng~ ~e~c6mpany (The f~~977 and 1978 ~, .~ ., b facing. ~1~ lacre~ed 6 percenL ~ep~nt net I~sea~ ~a~ 'pl~. t°u~ tlmeJ:~f~r ~e 'toy but the mod~t ~ln came at ~e ~ . . ~ .... industry iw gene .ral .dt/ring the eco- nomic recession, has 'brought to a h~lt the' momentum that .carried Tonka: Corp. to steadily, increased earnings the last few years. . ' .-.. ~ ,.: ..~.,-..~ ,-~ . '.,. ~'.,. And the~.e iS-;,o (~.rtaint~.-:{hat mo- mentum will return in the' second half of the year, ' ~:';'V'i-': !"'i"';'~i ,;/' Toy ~sales were relatively fiat last Christmas. Inventories were c~rried over, but sales continue to be weak, leading.to speculation that retailers 'could cancel toy orders this 'summer, normally a peak producUon period ~- for the industry... · With that' in min~,'Tohka told'share-.: hold&rs at:its, annual m~etlngl Wednesday that a weakening in its business that began last year should continue at least through the first half Of 1982. Beyond that, officials expense of eroded operating margins as Tonka boosted tis promotional ex- penditures In an effort to stimulate A loss of $539oo~_ ar 50 cents a '~, w~s grea{er than ihe ~ompany i l~ad expected, said Stephen Shank, president and chie! .executive offi- cer. Interest income 'for the quarter was down $889,000, primarily b.e- cause of Tonka's recent repurchase · of 600,000 shares of stock. 'The inter- · e~t income was the main reason for · the reduced earnipgs, Shank said; "We expect a weak second quarter in both sales and earnings," Shank said. "In all frankness, this quarter may be down conslderably.'~. ' While the econon~y may recover!at- Tonka continued on page 16C" Stephen Shank' "' '. Tonka er in the year, Tonka~"expects' to. improve its results mainly by con- trolling expenses, lowering manufac. turtng costs and boosting sales through Increased advertising and promotion. The tightening already has I~een felt at Tonka's toy plant in Mound. Shank estimated that 20 percent fewer pro- duction Workers were called back this.spring after the seasonal lag in manufacturing early in the year. About 900 people usually are em- ployed at the plant, he said. The shifting o~ some manufacturing operations to'a new plant in Mexico also will contribute to lower' produc- tion costs, Shank said. Tonka expects. the plant will manufacture about $13 million in products this year. The company's promotional efforts will have to deal with a significant change in' the toy market caused by the heavy, influx of electronic toys, Shank said. While the overall effect of videogames on Tonka still is un- clear, Shank said Tonka believes that traditional toys will continue to occupy a stable piece of the market. However, electronic games will have an effect on consumers' perceptions of what they should pay for tradition- al toys. Tonka recently hired a Massachu- setts consulting firm to interview re-' tailers for a study of the impact of videogames on the toy business. However, industry analysts say the company also sought the research in order to prepare for the prospect of canceled toy orders tater this year. "Basically, they're dealing with tWo contingencies now," said one analyst. "They'Q either have to bring back employees quickly to gear up pro- duction if things get better, or if conditions don't improve, they'll have to cut to the bone. I'm afraid it may be the tatter." Working in Tonka's favor are its strong financial position and the help of its brand name and reputation for quality in expanding its product line. Tonka has taken advantage of its brand name by moving outside the toy market, through a licensing agreement with Elkay Industries of New York for the production of boys' wear bearing the Tonka name and logo. Shank also said the company is look- ing for an acqulstiou in another con- sumer-orlented business to broaden its market base, generate real sales growth and improve return on equi- ty. "We have the capacity to finance an acquisition and support 'the growth of our toy division without stretching our balance sheet," he said. "Our acquistion planning is a key element of our long-term strategy," LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR BOARD MEETING TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL April 28, 1982 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was called to order by Chairman Brown at 8:05 p.m. on Wednesday, April 28, 1982 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall. Members present: Jerry Johnson (Excelsior), Robert Brown (Greenwood), Robert Pillsbury (Minnetonka), Lois Johnson (Minnetonka Beach), Alan Fasching (Minnetrista), Robert Rascop (Shorewood), Frank Hunt (Spring Park), Ed Bauman (Tonka Bay), Robert MacNamara (Wayzata), and Robert Slocum (Woodland). Communities represented: Ten (10). MacNamara Moved, Bauman Seconded that the minutes of the March 24, 1982 meeting be approved. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). Hunt Moved, J. Johnson Seconded that the Treasurer's report be approved and the bills paid. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the committee reviewed several Special Event Permit applications and made recommendations for approvals on all except for the Windsurfer Fleet #8's long distance race, which is forwarded to the Board without recommendation, pending the ap- plicant's finding adequate alternate plans. The committee, upon deter- mining that the temporary acceleration clause in the proposed Code amendment may be reinstated for specific channels if needed, recommended the amendment to the Board for third reading. The committee approved the layout of the 1982 boating snyop$is card which includes Rules of the Road with diagrams, and ordered proofs for further review. The committee ap- proved continuation of the Lake Use Study for 1982. The Water Patrol reported that with the addition of the new classof trainees, its strength will reach approximately 48 volunteer members this season; in spite of budget cuts, it is trying to keep boats and men, may have to relinquish some snowmobile service. The new Quiet Waters signs for Grays Bay are in place. The committee held a general discussion regarding the establish- ment of a fee schedule for Special Event Permit applications; any proposal should differentiate between commercial vs. clubs or public activity, and is to be developed for further committee discussion. Bauman Moved, Rascop Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). Bauman Moved, Rascop Seconded that the following Special Event Permit applications be approved as submitted and stipulated: Ski Hut for sailboard racing a. the evening races be terminated one half hour before sunset; b. that five chase boats be provided for the Saturday race, and one for each of the evening races; and c. that Gideons Bay be used as an alternate evening site if' the Excelsior area is congested. CALL TO ORDER ATTENDANCE MINUTES TREASURER'S REPORT GRAYS BAY SIGNS SP. EVENT PERMITS: SKI ~TT SAILB O, LMCD Board Minutes April 28, 1982 Page 2 2. u.s. Boardsailing Association for windsurfer regatta a. that the races be terminated one half hour before sunset. Be Lord Fletchers of the Lake for sky diving a. approval and supervision by the Water Patrol, b. that the Water Patrol be present during the events, and c. cancellation by the Water Patrol at any time if needed. Lord Fletchers of the Lake for log rolling contests Dou8 Theis for parasailing a. an exception to the 85 foot tow rope length limitation be granted to 300 feet but that determination of the rope length permitted be reviewed in January after further history may be established; b. the operation be permitted only during uncongested periods in uncongested areas, and be coordinated with existing race schedules; c. no more than one aloft parasailor'is permitted per LMCD area; d. no parasailing is permitted unless in addition to the operator of the watercraft towing the parasailor, there be another person of suitable age in the watercraft in a position to continually observe the parasailor being towed; e. evidence of adequate liability insurance be submitted; f. subject to the Sheriff's supervision and requirements; g. parasailing be discontinued one half hour before sunset; and h. that Theis notify the Sheriff's Water Patrol in advance of the time and location for each parasailing event. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). J. Johnson Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the Windsurfer Fleet #8 Special Event Permit application for a long distance race be approved as submitted but with the stipulation that, because of the congestion of boaters and fishermen along the Narrows, only the alternate route (Mound to Spring Park) be allowed. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). MacNamara Move~, Pillsbury Seconded that the Windsurfer Fleet #8 Special Event Permit application for evening races in Gideon's Bay be approved as requested with the following stipulations: (a) that the races terminate one half hour before sunset, (b) that a letter of approval be obtained from the City of Excelsior, (c) that a chase boat be provided, and (d) subject to review at the LMCD June meeting. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: Hunt reported that the committee reviewed 1982 dock license renewal requests and recommended Gayle's for approval. The committee reviewed the temporary acceleration deletion Code amendment proposal, determined that it wished to make no further recommendations, and referred it to the Lake Use Committee for any further consideration. The committee reviewed the Code amendment regarding U.S. BOARDSAILIN FLETCHER SKY DIVES, FLETCHER LOG ROLLS, THEIS PARASAILS, WINDSURFER LONG DISTANCE, WINDSURFER EVENING RACES LMCD Board Meeting April 28, 1982 Page 3 Permanent Dock Permits and recommended first reading as revised. The com- mittee reviewed dock license applications which may require public hearings and recommended that the Board approve storage for a police boat at the Wayzata lagoon facility without a public hearing, and that the applica- tions by the City of Greenwood, Hennepin County, Shorewood Yacht Club and Surfside be subject to future public hearings. Hunt Moved, J. Johnson Seconded'that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). Slocum Moved, L. Johnson Seconded that the following 1982 renewal dock license applications be approved: Bean's Greenwood Marina, Inc., Crystal Bay Service, Eagle Bluff, Minnetonka Boat Works, Inc. (Orono), and Wayzata Yacht Club at Big Island. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). Rascop Moved, J. Johnson Seconded that Howard's Point Marina, Inc. 1982 dock license renewal application be approved. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). It is requested that renewal applications for Chaska Marine, !~ayle's, Kreslins, Lakeview Restaurant, Loring Acres and Windward Marine be cleared for the May meeting - they are being held for village responses. CODE AMENDMENTS: Pillsbury Moved, Rascop Seconded that the third reading of the proposed Code amendment regarding the deletion of temporary accel- eration be waived, and the amendment be adopted (Ordinance 53). Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). J. Johnson Moved, MacNamara Seconded that the first reading of the Code amendment for permanent dock permits be accepted. Bauman Moved, Rascop Seconded that the motion be amended to waive the second and third readings .and the amendment adopted (Ordinance 54). Amendment motion, Ayes (9), Nays (1), J. Johnson voting Nay; Main motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). OTHER BUSINESS: The MCWD continues to work with its proposed Lake level management plan; input so far has been the expression of boaters, not necessarily lakeshore land owners. A letter from the'City of Minnetrista was accepted in which the City thanked the LMCD 'for financial and personal support in its opposition to the Metro landfill site. Brown Moved, Pillsbury .Seconded that the public officials' conference on board the Lady of the Lake be scheduled for Saturday, August 7, from 11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. from the Excelsior docks. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). J. Johnson Moved, Bauman Seconded that the LMCD annual inspection tour for Directors be held on Wednesday, June 16 at 5 p.m. from the Wayzata depot docks aboard the Dowager Empress. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). WAYZATA POLICE BOAT 1982 DOCK LICENSES CODE AMENDb~NTS: TEMPORARY ACCELERAT IO] PERMANENT DOCK PERMITS PUBLIC OFFICIALS' CONFERENCE INSP! ~ON TOUR LMCD Board Minutes April 28, 1982 Page 4 Upon recommendation of the Executive Committee, Pillsbury Moved, Hunt Seconded that the hourly rate for the LMCD Inspector be increased from $6.00 to $7.50 effective May 1. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). Pillsbury Moved, Bauman Seconded that the 1982 Save the Lake Sticker Cam- paign which is to be included with the boater card distribution, be approved. Motion, Ayes (10), Nays (0). The City of Greenwood prepared a resolution supporting the LMCD on the dam matter; Tonka Bay may do the same. ADJOURNMENT: Pillsbury Moved, MacNamara Seconded at 9:40 p.m. that the meeting be adjourned. Motion, Ayes (10),'Nays (0). INSPECTION FEES STICKER CAMPAIGN Submitted by: Robert P. Rascop, Secretary Approved by: Robert Tipton Brown, Chairman PREPARED BY JOHN H. HAGUE, ATTORNEY AT LAW ] City Liable For Sidewalk Hole While walking to breakfast, a tourist in Honolulu caught her heel in a hole in the sidewalk, fell, twisted her ankle, and was hospitalized for 17 days. She sued the city and the jury awarded her damages. The city ap- pealed, alleging that the trial court was in error because it failed to grant the city's motion for directed verdict, it should not have declined to use the city-proposed jury charge, and it should have heard testimony from a former city counsel as to credibility. The Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii, in Hascup v. City and County of Honolulu, 638 P.2d 870 (January 1982), affirmed the trial court. With regard to the city's directed verdict motion, the Court ruled that such relief was available only when, having given the Plaintiff's evidence all its legal weight, no finding of liabil- ity could be made. Sufficient evidence was offered to justify the deliberation of the jury. The city wanted the trial court to instruct the jury that it must determine if the dangerous condition existed for a sufficient time to give the city notice. The Court ruled that the jury could make the inference of the hole's existence from the photographs placed in evidence and testimony that the city's building inspector would notice such a hole and would have it repaired on his twice weekly trips through the area. The city also wanted to introduce testimony at trial to impeach the valid- ity of the photographs. The trial court rejected this testimony because the city had not challenged the photo- graphs at the time they were intro- duced. The Appeals Court agreed with the trial court. WESLEY ROEHLKE, President Rogers 498-8502 GERMAIN BOLL, Vice President Maple Plain 446-1067 JUSTINE GOULD, Treasurer Maple Grove 4254472 DIRECTORS: ANDY ROZEBOOM Maple Grove 559-2989 Hennepin County Agricultural Society Sponsor of the Annual County Fair EILEEN ROEHLKE, Secretary - Rogers, Minnesota 55374 23185 Co. Rd. 10 Tel. (612) 498-8502 Sponsor of the Annual County Fair TO: RE: June 1,1982 Hennepin County ~nicipalitles Hennepin County ~'qir JUDY LEWMAN Minnetrista 4724524 JUDY NICHOLS Minnetonka 9354216 FLOYD NELSON Dayton 425-3360 KAREN HUMPHREY Maple Plain 479-1113 MILTON SKOOG Bloomington 881-6391 MEMBERS OF ADVISORY BOARD E. F. ROBB, JR. County Commissioner In past years a munber of cities contirbute funds tothe He.nnepln County' ~.gricultural Society to help finance the'Henne?Zn County Fair° We are again s~licitin~, funds from the cities. Checks made payable to the Hennepin County A~ricultural Society and mailed to the Secretary. The money is used towards the premuims paid to 4H exhbitors, judges and rental equipment. The 1982 fair will again be hold at the Bureau of public service in Hopkins July 29--31o Nearly all muncipalities are represented in the numerous 4H clubs with about 1000 4H members in the county, and about 200 h~andred or more exhibitors in the open classes~ Under the statUte law number 3~.12 Ap;ropiations by certain municpa/ities-~. Muncipalities can give to the County Agricultural society annually a sum not to excede $1000o00 GORDON HUSTAD Administrative Service Manager ~inoerely Department of Public Works TAD JUDE Eileen Roehlke Representative District 42A Secretary JIM KEMP Extension Director MARILYN EGERDAL Administrative Assistant Hennepin Co. Park Reserve Dist. 76th ANNUAL HENNEPIN COUNTY FAIR AT HOPKINS Bureau of Public Service County Road 18 July 29, 30 and 3 I, 1982 American Legion Post 398 DATE MAY 31, 1982 GAMBLING REPORT CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE GROSS: ~- 1700 , O0 ~'7595 · O0 EXPENSES= 5AI:~S T~X ~80.95 GAMBLING BOND 100. O0 SUPPLIES 147. ~'3 PAYOUT AS PRIZES: PROFIT= w~328.38 ~1263.6~ 1000, O0 · ~, ~OO. O0 ~1932.0~ DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS: BABE RUTH ~300.00 SUBURBAN POLICE ASSN. 100.00 MEMORIAL DAY EXPENSES 65.A0 ALANO 25.00 CHECKING ACCOUNT ~90.kO ~2A61.~5 Z o E-- =E CIVIL LIABILITY FOR POLICE ADMINISTRATION Desyl L. Peterson POPH~.I, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & DOTY, LTD. 4344 IDS Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Telephone: (612)333-4800 I. Vicarious Liability Normally, an individual is held responsible only for the action that he himself takes. This is direct liability. However, in the employer/employee area, an individual can be held liable for the acts of his employee without any direct involvement on his own part. This is called vicarious liability or respondeat superior. The doctrine of respondeat superior does not apply to police supervisors or administrators. Jennings v. Davis, 476 F.2d 1271 (8th Cir. 1973). Supervisory officers are not the employers of patrol officers. They are fellow employees of the same employer, which is the city. Police administrators may be found liable, however, when they have had direct involvement in the unconstitutional conduct through ordering, participating in or ratifying the conduct. Additionally, they may be held responsible for a failure to undertake actions which they had a duty to perform. Under this broad scope of liability, several theories of liability for supervisors have been identified, and each will be discussed below. Note that where there is no direct parti- cipation in the conduct, the supervisor's action or failure to act must have been a cause of the unlawful conduct. Johnson v. Duffs, 588 F.2d 740 (9th Cir. 1978)" II. Supervisor on Scene One of the clearest cases of supervisor liability is when the supervisor is present at the scene of the activity and fails to prevent the unlawful conduct. A number of cases have found individual officers liable for standing idly by and preventing a fellow officer from beating the plaintiffs. Hampton v. Hanrahan, 600 F.2d 600 (7th Cir. 1979); Jennings v. Davis, 476 F.2d 1271 ~Sth Cir. 1973). Others have found no liability where there has been no encouragement. Howell v. Cataldi, 464 F.2d 272 (3rd Cir. 1972); Johnson v. Hackett, 284 F.Supp. 933 (E.D.Pa. 1968). For supervisors, the duty to intervene is greater, and the failure to do so or to exercise appropriate command is a basis of liability. Maclin v. Paulson, 627 F.2d 83 (7th Cir. 1980); Dellums v. Powel~, 566 F.2d 216 (D.C.Cir. 1977). III. Direction of Conduct Another clear.case of supervisor liability occurs when the supervisor specifically orders or directs the unlawful conduct. For example, this type of liability would arise where the subordinate officer was told to arrest a person or conduct a search in an unlawful manner. In such circumstances, there would probably be no liability for the individual officer if he/she was merely following orders and did not encourage or in some other manner participate in the decision to issue the 'order. However, if the order did not cause the action, there would be no liability. For example, the mayor of a town issued an order to "shoot to kill" looters. The officer testified that this order had no effect on his conduct. The mayor was found not liable. Palmer v. Hall, 517 F.2d 705 (5th Cir. 1975). IV. Acquiescense in Behavior A supervisor will also be liable when he/she has actual knowledge of the conduct and acquiesces in it. An example of this is a Police Chief who knows that his officers enforce the loitering ordinance against only the followers of Hara Krishna and no one else, and who continues to allow them to d° so. He then has consented to this action and would be liable. For a discussion of this theory of liability, see Santiago v. City of Philadelphia, 435 F.Supp. 136 (E.D. Pa. 1977)~. Ve Negligent Hiring Liability on this theory can arise if the plaintiff can show (1) that the officer who injured him was unfit for appointment and (2) that the appointing authority knew or should have known of this unfitness. In addition, the particular defendant must be shown to have the authority to make the appointment and to have done so negligently. The importance of thorough background checks for demonstrated propensities toward violence, dishonesty, discrim- ination or other adverse characteristics cannot be overemphasized. These checks skould be made before the officer is placed on the street in uniform. The practice of appointing an officer first on the theory that it is only for the probationary period and he can be fired if a problem is found, is fraught with peril. See Peters v. Bellin~er, 22 Ill.App.2d 105, 159 N.E.2d 528 (1959), in which an officer was hired on a 30-day trial basis with no check of his record which would have revealed a history of street brawls and a felony conviction. The plaintiff there recovered damages for having his eye knocked out by the probationary officer. VI. Negligent Retention More frequently, undesirable traits in an officer are not seen until after several years of employment. Like negligent hiring, the plaintiff must show (1) that the officer was unfit for duty and (2) that the supervisor who retained the officer knew or should have known of this unfitness. Knowledge usually arises from acts of prior mis~ conduct -- either one particularly egregious act or a series of lesser acts constituting a pattern of unfitness. Knowledge can be actual or presumed. Presumed knowledge arises when the supervisor was in a position to know, with reasonable effort could have known, and should have known if the super- visory duties were being exercised properly. The Chief of Police then has a duty to discharge the officer or take other remedial action such as lesser discipline or remedial training. However, there certainly are limits on the ability to undertake these actions. These limits will be discussed briefly here. A. Just Cause The standard in Minnesota governing the discharge or demotion of public employees is "just cause." The Minnesota Supreme Court considers "misconduct" to be essentially the same as the standard of "just cause." Ekstedt v..Village of New Hope, 292 Minn. 152, 193 N.W.2d 821 (1972). "Just cause" is defined to be a cause which relates to the qualifications of the officer or his performance of his duties which shows he is not a fit or proper person to hold the position. It must directly affect the rights and interests of the public. It must specifically relate to and affect the administration of the office, and the evidence must be sub- stantial. "Just cause" is not limited simply to performance of the duties while on the job but can also include Conduct off the job which affects the officer's competency and the rights and interests of the public. The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that there is a "high standard of conduct required of a policeman." Turck v. St. Cloud Civil Service Board, 268 N.W.2d 899 (Minn. 1978) In that case, discharge of an officer was upheld where charges against'him included abuse of sick leave, three preventable automobile accidents including one off-duty which resulted in a DWI charge, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest in an off-duty domestic, and sleeping on the job. Ee had previously received reprimands, days without pay, a 15-day suspension for the disorderly conduct charge, and a 30-day suspension for sleeping on the job. The incident which finally led to Turck's dismissal was the DWI charge, but the Civil Service Board considered all of the prior misconduct as well. The Supreme Court held that the Board properly considered the earlier incidents of misconduct even though he had been disciplined when they occurred. Police supervisors are held to an even higher standard of conduct than police officers. In Leininger v. .City'of Bloomingt0n, 299 N.W.2d 723 ~Minn. 1980), the Court " behavior which might be tolerated in a police stated, . . . officer becomes unacceptable in a sergeant who is required to supervise others and work closely with other supervisers." The Court found sufficient cause for demotion although not for discharge. The charges included leaving work early, conducting personal business on duty, misleading two superior officers in order to get time off, and arranging for transport of juveniles without prior authorization in a manner which he knew was contrary to City policy. This conduct occurred in the context of the sergeant's vocal criticism of the police department. The court viewed this disrespect as the reason for the violations of department rules and as just cause for demotion. There are some questions regarding this case: Would the "bad attitude" and disrespect alone be just cause for demotion without any violations of department rules? (2) If no violations were found, could the sergeant have sued the city for the close surveillance of his actions, alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress or a violation of liberty or privacy under ~19837 B. Veteran's Preference The Veteran's Preference law, Minn. Stat. ~S197.455 and 197.46, limits the procedure for discharging or disciplining a veteran. For a veteran, the following rules apply: (1) A suspension without pay pending discharge proceedings is illegal. (2) A suspension with pay pending discharge proceedings is permissible. (3) A supsension for disciplinary purposes without pay is permissible. See Kurtz v. City of Apple Valley, 290 N.W.2d 171 (Minn. 1980), in which a police officer was charged with aggravated assault and then suspended without pay pending resolution of the criminal charges. The Court found that this was a suspension pending discharge because the suspension was not for the purpose of disciplining him, but for the purpose of waiting to see if he would be discharged. He was awarded backpay. - C. Notice and Hearing Whether under police civil service, Minn. Stat. ~419.07, general~municipal civil service, Minn. Stat. §44.08, or no civil service, Minn. Stat. ~179.76, every nonprobationary public employee is entitled to adequate notice of'the charges and an oportunity to respond to those charges at a hearing. The amount of time for notice and for permissible suspension varies depending on which system applies. D. Union Contract Each applicable union contract will set forth procedures for discipline and removal. These, of course, will limit the options of a police supervisor. A recent article in the American Bar Foundation Journal makes the allegation that: "[O]ne of the pressing but rarely stated problems confronting many police chiefs today is their decreasing ability to maintain discipline as unions successfully invade and reorder the internal disciplinary process .... In a number of police departments today, officers who en~age in what the Chief feels is gross misconduct on the job are not infrequently shielded from serious sanction by a disciplinary system weighed down with procedural requirements that normally are not available except to persons charged with violations of the criminal law." The article gives as examples the requirements in some union contracts that an officer cannot be questioned without a union representative present or cannot be questioned until 72 hours after the incident under investigation had occurred. VII. Negligent Assignment If the Chief of Police seeks discharge, but is overruled by the civil service board or arbitrator, he will be excused from liability for negligent retention. The Chief may then face liability for negligent assignment, however. If the officer is reinstated or even pending the discharge proceedings, the officer should be assigned to a non-sensitive position. Tkis means he/she should be reassigned to a position where there is less likelihood of confronting the factors that were present in the prior.incident. See for example, Moon v. Winfield, 368 F.Supp. 843 ~N.D.Ill. 1973) and 383 F.Supp. 31 ~N.D.Ill. 1974), in which tke superintendant of Chicago police failed to reassign an officer when he knew of five separate incidents of mis- conduct in the preceding two weeks and was seeking the officer's discharge. While the discharge proceedings were pending, the officer beat up another individual while on patrol duty. A more difficult question arises where a police chief has no non-sensitive positions. Smaller departments often have only patrol positions. What duty does the chief have in that situation? VIII. Negligent Entrustment This claim usually .relates to the question of fire- arms. It becomes an issue when the police chief has knowledge of a prior misuse of firearms but does not prohibit continued use. An example would be where the chief has sought discharge because of the prior incident, but the officer has been reinstated by the civil service commission. The officer is then assigned to dispatching duties where a gun is not needed, but he shoots someone in a bar with his service revolver which he carries off-duty. The b~tter practice would be to prohibit the officer from carrying a weapon whether on or off duty. But again, what about the small department with only patrol positions? If the chief prohibits the carring of a gun and the officer is subsequently shot by an escaping felon, could the officer then sue the chief alleging that he had nothing with which to protect himself? IX. Negligent Supervision This theory of liability is closely related to the theory of negligent retention. One aspect of negligent supervision is the failure to know of the conduct of subordinate officers, or if known, the failure to properly discipline or correct potential problems. This applies to the conduct of an individual officer as well as to a pattern or practice. For example, in Holland v. Connors, 491 F.2d 539 (5th Cir. 1974), a prison superintendent was sued for his failure to correct a widespread practice of coerced confessions about which he should have known. Knowledge on the part of a supervisor can be established in a variety of ways. One fertile source for plaintiff's attorneys is an officer's personal record and internal affairs files, all of which become relevant in an action for negligent supervision. Some plaintiffs may alleg~ this theory of liability without any real facts just to obtain access to these records. The duty to supervise goes'beyond the need to correct or discipline for past conduct. Some cases have found a failure to supervise even when there has been no past conduct on the part of an individual officer. This could be particularly true when there is a lack of super- vision over rookie officers. As with the issue of discharging an officer, there are certain limitations on a supervisor's ability to investigate, discipline or correct unacceptable behavior. The limitations discussed there apply with equal force here. Some additional limitations include the following: 1. Polygraph Tests When investigating a complaint of improper conduct, a police chief may not require an officer to take a polygraph test or any other test of honesty. Minn. Stat. ~181.75. Previously, there was an exception for police chiefs under- taking internal investigations, but this was repealed in 1976. 2. Psychological Evaluations Several cases have upheld a police chief's right to require an officer to undergo psychological.evaluation and to discharge the officer for refusing to do so. ~ity of Boston v. Boston Police Patrolmen's Association, 392 N.E.2d (Mass.App. 1979); Conte v. Horscher, 365 N.E.2d 567 (Iii.App. 1977). 3. Alcohol or Drug Tests Similarly, officers can justifiably be compelled to submit to tests for being under the influence of alcohol or drugs while on duty. Krolock v. Lowery, 32 A.D.2d 317, 302 N.Y.S.2d 109 (1969). Off-duty situations are another matter, although one court has upheld the right to require tests for addiction to drugs. Division 241, Amalgamated Transit Union v. Suscy, 405 F.Supp. 750 (N.D.Ill. 1975). 4. Telephone Monitoring. Any monitoring must be done legally, and an illegal interception will subject the police chief or other supervisory personnel to personal liability under ~1983. Wright v. State of Florida, 495 F.2d 1086 (5th Cir. 1974). 5. Locker Searches Some courts have upheld the right of a police supervisor to conduct a warrantless search of lockers provided by the police department. United States v. Bunkers, 521 F.2d 1217 (9th Cir. 1975). However, a New Jersey court found that a deputy chief had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his locked desk. State v. Ferrari, 357 A.2d 286 (1976). The deputy chief then turned around and brought a civil suit .against the city under ~1983. The best practice is to make it clear through a rule or general order that all department- supplied vehicles, lockers and desks are subject to entry and inspection without notice. Xe Negligent Training It is generally recognized that cities and police administrators have a duty to train their police officers. A failure to do so or an inadequate attempt will subject the supervisor to liability. Statutes requiring mandatory training and con- tinuing education of police officers may be of some benefit as a defense, but required use of particular equipment or procedures without adequate training could still be a basis for liability. These claims are most likely to arise in the use of firearms or other weapons. Beverly v. Morris, 470 F.2d 1356 (5th Cir. 1972); Marusa v. District of Columbia, 484 F.2d 828 (D.C.Cir. 1973). XI. Failure to Direct This theory of liability places a duty on the police adminitrator to (1) anticipate problems arising in the field, (2) minimize police discretion at the operational · levels, and (3) promulgate comprehensive written directives to guide police behavior. See for example, Ford ~. Breier, 383 F.Supp. 505 (E.D.Wis. 1974), where a plaintif'f sued under §1983 for an unlawful search, alleging liability on the part of the police chief for failing to issue written directives on the proper procedure for making warrantless entries into residential premises. The difficulty with this theory of liability is the scope of the duty. Potentially, it could require a police chief to issue hundreds of directives, trying to anticipate every problem that might develop. XII. Practical Suggestions A. Supervisors 1. Conduct thorough background investigations before placing an officer on the street. ® is happening. either. Set up systems to keep you informed of what Ignorance is not bliss and is not a defense 3. Begin discipline at the first sign of a problem with increasing severity if the problem continues. Build your case. 4. Keep detailed records of training· and discipline undertaken. 5. Be innovative in the discipline used if something seems particularly appropriate. Do a quick survey of other police chiefs to determine if they have ever used the particular sanction. 6. Anticipate the major areas where problems can arise, e.g., use of firearms, search and seizure, arrest, and use of force, and issue written directives which are reviewed with all new officers and yearly with existing personnel. 7. Assure quality in firearms instruction including simulated field situations, not just target practice. 8. Mid-level supervisors should be sure to make all problems known to their superiors. This should shift responsibility to them and relieve the mid-level supervisor from liability. 9. Assure adequate supervision and control of all shifts with experienced and r~sponsible personnel. Do not allow a rookie to go unsupervised. B. Police officers 1. When in a situation where you are unsure ~f the proper course of action, seek direction from your watch commander, shifting responsibility to him. 2. Follow all written and oral directives, again shifting liability to your superiors. 3. In a disciplinary situation, know your rights. Seek advice and assistance from your union or a lawyer. Be prepared to sue if your rights are violated. 4. If you witness inappropriate and unlawful conduct on the part of another officer, do not just stand by. .Seek to intervene and stop it. Senior Citizen Centers ,nGr ;:;%rlis, lnc. President Mr. Eugene t.arson Vice-Presidents Mr. Romeyn Clarke Mrs. Marion/Curry Mr. Gordon Malen Secretary Mrs. Jean Roessler Treasurer Mr. Maurice Griffin Past President Mr. George A. Warp Executive Director Mr. Karl Dansky, ACSW "30 years of senior community service" May 20, 1982' Mr. Jonathon R. Elam City Manager 5354 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: This letter is to inform you of the initiation of the Hennepin County Transportation Coordination Project. The project is funded through Title lll-B of the Older Americans Act which flows through the Metropolitan Council. The primary goal of the project is to coordinate and maximize transportation resources for the elderly in all areas of Hennepin County. Other goals include increasing the use of volunteers, expanding public and private in- volvement and improving the referral system. This program does not provide transportation, rather we work to expand services through technical assistance and purchase of service funds. To successfully make an impact on the transportation needs in Hennepin County, we enco6rage your involvement. As this is a new project, we are anxious to receive your ideas and believe this involvement will result in meeting our mutual needs and objectives. Specifically, we are in need of any data or studies you have completed which include information on transportation for senior citizens. Our office is located at Senior Citizen Centers of Greater Minneapolis, as listed below. The phone number is 827-1721. Office hours are 8:30-4:30, Monday through Friday. Please feel free to contact either of us with your questions, comments or suggestions. We look forward to working together and thank you for your cooperation. Most Sincerely, //'/ar~K .el e~y~ Project Supervisor arris~/~ Project Assistant Administrative Office 3614 Bryant Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55409 (612) 827-1721 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Downtown Advisory Committee Rob Chelseth, City Planner 3 June 1982 Postponement of the next meeting date of the DAC Please note that because of a confl|ct in the schedule of the Architect, our meeting of June 9th, 1982 at 7:30 P.M in the Council Chambers at City Hall has been cancelled. A new meeting date has been set for Wednesday, June 16th, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. We apologize for any inconvenience and hope the majority of the members can adjust their schedule. Rob Chelseth RC/ms ll2 June 1, 1982 BOARD OF REVIEW Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Board of Review convened in the Council Chambers of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at 5341 Maywood Road in said City on June 1, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Robert Polston, Gordon Swenson. Councilmember Donald Ulrick was absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, Hennepin County Assessors Milt Hilk and Don Monk and City Clerk Fran Clark. The Mayor opened the Board of Review and explained that this meeting is to give property owners a chance tO question the market values placed on their property by the County Assessors as of January 2, 1982. These values will be used as the base for taxes payable in 1983. He explained that each person would be heard and then the Board of Review will reconvene on June 15th and bring back their final decision on each property. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to reconvene the Board of Review on June 15, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. with final decisions on each property. The vote was unanimously i'n favor. Motion carried. The following persons responded to the call to be heard; they all. asked to have the value of their property rechecked because they felt it was too high. Frank Livingston - PID #24-117-24 24 0014 David Hintz - PID #23-117-24 24 0045 Loren Piepkorn - PID #13-I17-24 31 0060 Harvey Reder - PID #23-117-24 32 0043 Herbert'Wolner - PID #24-117-24 24 0017 Herbert Flesher - PID #23-I17-24 43 0026 Willard Hillier - PID #12-117-24 43 0054 Leo L. Palesotti~- PID #14-117-24 32 0035 Ron Gehring - PID #25-117-24 21 0013 #13-I17-24 22 0028 #13-117-24 12 0101 #13-117-24 12 0205 #13-117-24 12 0201 #12-117-24 43 0055 #19-117-23 23 0023 #19-117-24 24 0018 David Thurston - PID #18-117-23 23 0055 Eugene Garvais - PID #14-117-24 32 0040 PID #14-117-24 32 0010 Robert G. Wiese - PID #14-117-24 42 0010 Michael GBrlicher - PID #23-117-23 31 0037 William Netka - PID #13-117-24 33 0052 113 June 1, 1982 Kevin Hetchler - PID #25-117-24 II 0043 James Dickinson (Attorney for Wm. Niccum) - PID #23-117-24 32 0006 Roger Polley - PID #12-117-24 43 0003 Dr. Harold Borg - PID #14-117-24 33 0006 #14-117~24 33 0005 #14-117-24 33 0004 #14-117-24 34 OOlO Leroy Johnson ~ PID #24-117-24 24 O011 John Knoernschild - PID #13-117-24 21 0056 #13-117-24 21 0051 Maurice Johndon - PID #14-117-24 34 0034 Nell Froeming - PID #13-117-24 41 0046 Paul Van Risseghem - PID #23-117-24 42 0002 Julie Finn - PID #18-117-23 23 0057 C. E. Gemar - PID #25-117-24 41 0149 Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion ~to reconvene the Board of Review oM June 15, !982, at 7:30 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor'~ Motion carried. F r'a'n- -C- 1'~ rk, --~ i-[~ ~ I erk City Ma nage~r RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRALS WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted M.S.A. 435.193 to 435.195, which authorizes a city to defer the collection of special assessments for homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments, and WHEREAS, the City of Mound adopted Resolution #77-420 "Providing Standards and Guidelines for Deferral of Special Assessments because of Hardship for Senior Citizens" pursuant to M.S.A. 435.193, and WHEREAS, the owners of the following properties and have applied for deferral and have met the above mentioned guidelines. LEVY # 8297 23- 8297 14- 8297 14- 8297 23- 8297 14- 8297 24- 8297 14- 8297 14- 8297 14- 8298 24- 8298 24- PID # 17-24 42 0099 17-24 31 0035 17-24 41 OO41 17-24 42 OO71 17-24 32 0064 17-24 44 O167 17-24 34 0023 17-24 42 O122 17-24 42 0097 17-24 43 0071 17-24 43 OO61 DEFERRED AMOUNT $ 6,171.77 1,104.36 4,471.99 842.81 1,019.12 989.26 1,073.27 1,080.01 1,O95.93 2,248.64 783.66 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the special assessments on the above be deferred and bear interest at 6% per annum on the unpaid balance.