The URL can be used to link to this page

82-09-21CITY OF MOUND AGENDA Mound, Minnesota HOUND CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Tuesday, September 21, 1982 7:30 P,M, - City Hail 1. Minutes of September 7, ]982, Regular Meeting 2. Public Hearings on Adoption of Special Assessment Roles for: A. "County Road 1.10 Project" - County Road 110 from Bartlett Blvd. to the North City limits, and Lot 2, Block 1, Sherwood Shores - Total cost of improvement $305,780.53 B. "County Road IlO Street Light Project" - County Road ll0 from Bartlett Blvd. to North City limits - Total cost of improvement $]87,252.13 3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS A. Case No. 82-]43 - Frank H. Livingston - 5249/5251 Bartlett B'l'vd. ~'SEly 15 feet Lot 32, Auditor's Subd. 170; Lots 17-19, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit C, Tracts D & E of RLS #813 - Preliminary Subdivision of Land MAP - 8 B. Case No. 82-]4] - Kevin Hetchler - 49]3 Island View Drive Lot 14, Block-14, Devon -.Reconsideration - Nonconforming Lot & Structure Variance (tO place an attached garage 18 feet to 20.3 feet from the street)- MAP 15 4. Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present (please limit to 3 mi. nutes) 5. Bids for Administrative Vehicles - Bruce Wold 6. Quotation to Paint Exterior of City Hall 7. Approval of Bid Specifications for a ~ew 1983 Police Squad Car to be paid from Federal Revenue Sharing Funds - Bid Opening 10:00 A.M., October 12, 1982 8. Report from the Mayor regarding his suggested changes in the Central Business District (Discussion Item) 9. Verbal report from George Boyer on progress of the Well in Island Park 10. Request for a one year extension of Resolution 81-216 which approved a subdivision of Lot 50, Auditor's Subdivision Noo i68 - Extended date would be July 7, 1983 il. Report by Mayor on Meeting of Lake Minnetonka Task Force held September 1~, 1982 (includes handout on Water Patrol) 12. Letter to Spring Park Edgewater Drive Parking 14~ Payment of Bills Pgo 2102-2111 Pg. 2112-2127 Pg~ 2128 Pg. 2129-2136 Pg, 2137-2142 Pg. 2143-2147 Pg. 2148 Pgo 2149-2162 Pg. 2163-2167 Pg. 2]68-2170 Pg. 2171-2175 Pg. 2176 Pg. 2177-2178 Pg. 2179 Page 2101 Page 2 Agenda September 21, 1982 15. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Note of Thanks from Irene Jezorski B. Letter to HUD regarding Downtown Improvement Program C. Article from September 13, 1982, Time Magazine D. Letter from City Attorney on Status of Legal Cases E. Lett,er from L.M.C.D. regarding Driftwood Shores Association Dock Permit F. Letter from League of Minnesota Cities regarding Effect of New Tax Law on Municipal Bond Market after .January l, 1983 G0 Note from Metropolitan Council regarding New Transportation Development Guide/Policy Plan for 2000 Ho Minnehaha. Creek Watershed District Agenda Minnehaha 'C'reek'~Watershed District Minutes I. Hold Harmless Agreement with Minnetonka Portable Dredging Pg. 2180 pg. 2181,-2182 Pg. 2183 Pg. 2184 Pg. 2185-2188 Pg. 2189~-21~.1 Pg. 2192-219~ Pg. 219~-219i3 Pg. 2196-2204 Pg. 220-5 Page 2101-a 183 September 7, 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 534.1Maywood Road in said City on September 7, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock L~ndlan, Councilmembers P~nky Charon, Robert Polston, Gordon Swenson and Donald Ulrick. Also present were: City Manager 'Jo~ Elam, City Attorney Curt Pearson, Building Inspector Jan Bertrand, City Clerk Fran Clark;'and the following interested persons: Mr. & Mrs. Ronald Pe. la~skl, Richard Larson representing the Pelarski's, Mr. & Mrs. Richard Bialon, Mrs. Kevin Hetchier, Matthew Phillippi, Gary Paulson and Eon Gehring. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people attending. MINUTES The Minute of the.August 24, 1982, Regular Meeting were Presented for consideration. Swenson moved and Charo~"seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the August 24, 198.2, Regular Meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The City Attorney suggested that the Council amend page 175 of the August 24, 1982, Minutes, Resolution #82-228 to read as follows: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE'CITY MANAGER TO BEGIN TO NEGOTIATE THE SALE OF BONDS FOR THE COUNTY ROAD llO STREET IMPROVEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $3OO,OO0~00 The amount was changed from $299,999.99 to $300,0OO;OO. .Ulrlck moved and Charon seconded a motion to amend the August 24, 1982, Minutes as' suggested by the City Attorney (above). The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. .PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS A. LAKESHORE SETBACK AND PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RONALD PELARSKI - 1609 BLUEBIRD LANE - LOTS 2,3,4,21,22 & 23, BLOCK 7, WOODLAND POINT The City Manager explained that the applicant wants to build a home on Lots 4 and 21, plus the divided 10 feet from Lots 3 and 22. He is also requesting permission to place the structure 30 feet from the desigpated mean high water level of 929.4 (sea level) instead~ of the required 50 foot setback. The setback should not be a problem because the lots face Wawonassa Commons which is approximately 1OO feet deep in front of the lots in question. Mr. Gordon Swenson owns Lots 3,2,22, and 23, Block 7, Woodland Point and is requesting to divide off 10 feet of Lots 3 and 22 to Mr. Pelarski. The request has been approved by the Planning Commission and the Minnehaha Watershed. District. The Watershed District has suggested that a drainage easement be given to the City. The Planning Commission put the following stipulations on their approval: 184 September 7, t982 i. New surveys be submitted with the elevations shown as required by our City Engineer, including proposed utility connections and the monuments to be reset. 2. Floodproofing is.to be accomplished as per code for the utility connections. 3. Our City Attorney to review the descriptions of the drainage easement shown on the survey. · 4. The new building site pay or be assessed the street unit charge ($1,170.90) plus the front footage of $7.95 + .08 a square foot from the 1978 street, assessment. 5. The plans need to indicate how the street extension will be handled and the proposed elevations of same. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-234 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 30 FOOT LAKEFRONT.'SETBACK VARIANCE REQUIRING A DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF MOUND OF THE' EAST 40 FEET OF LOT 4 A~D THE EAST 40 FEET OF THE WEST 10 FEET OF LOT 3, BLOCK 7, WOODLAND POINT The vote was unanimc~usly in favor. Motion carried. UlriCk moved and Polston seconded the following :resolution. RESOLUTION #82-235 RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY.SUBDIVISION OF THE.NORTHERLY 10 FFET OF.'LOTS 3 & 22, BLOCK 7, WOODLAND'POINT WITH STIPULATIONS The Vote was unanimously in' favor. Motion carried. B. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC' HEARING FOR STREET VACATION - RICHARD BIALON - " 3495 EAST SHORE DRIVE - SULGROVE ROAD EAST OF TUXEDO BLVD. - 30 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY Char'On moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution'. RESOLUTION #82-236 RESOLUTION TO SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON STREET VACATION OF 30 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SULGROVE ROAD EAST OF TUXEDO BLVD. FOR OCTOBER 5, 7982, at 7:30. P.M. During discussion on this matter the Ci.ty Attorney suggested that a public hearing is a bit premature because the City needs more information on this.vacation. To vacate this portion of SulgrOve Road would cut off access to several pro- perties in Mound. He Suggested tabling this item until later in the meeting so that he, Jan Bertrand'and the Bialons could confer on this matter.. Councilmember Swenson withdrew his second and Councilmember Charon withdrew her motion; Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded a motion to table this item until later in the meeting. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Co 185 September 7, 1982 VARIANCES TO PLACE AN ATTACHED GARAGE 18 FEET TO 20.3·FEET FROM ISLAND VIEW DRIVE - KEVIN JAMES HETCHLER - 4913 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE - LOT 14, BLOCK 14, DEVON Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-236 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNI~IiG COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE 2'F00T STREET VARIANCE Discussion followed. Councilmember Charon expressed concern about safety.because of. the.hill, and the danger for the neighbor in backing out. of their driveway. She felt the Hetchlers.should meet the 20 foot setback and take 2 feet off the proposed garage. The City Manager reported that the neighbor has called and is concerned abOut the safety aspect of.not requiring the 20 loot'.setback. Counci.lmember Ulrick stated that he felt this is not a hardship case and should not be allowed.. The Mayor sta~d that be'felt maybe.the.surveyor mode a mistake in the width of Island View Drive and therefore the survey may not be correct. Councilmember Polston stated that the Planning Commission has many time in the past.approved variances because of topography and he feels this is a hardship c~se because of the topography. The vote on the resolution was two in favor.w~th.Cha~ob~.Ul.~ick:and. Lindlan voting.nay. Motion denied. D. NONCONFORMING USE AND STRUCTURE VARIANCES - MATTHEW PHILLIPPI - 4521 MANCHESTER ROAD~- LOTS 22 & PART OF 1,2,3, AND 5, BLOCK 14, AVALON The City Manager explained that this applicant started remodeling without a.permit, it is rental property, the Building Inspector would like the property brought up to.Code before a variance is granted because the building is in hazardous condition and is nonconforming. The owner has been uncooperative and the Planning Commission tabled any action on this item. The City Attorney has been consulted in the matter and has Prepared a resolution for the Council. The Building Inspector has.also prepared a list of repairs that should be done. Charon moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-237 RESOLUTION RELATING TO CERTAIN HAZARDOUS PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY LOCATED AT 4521 MANCHESTER ROAD ALSO INCLUDING THE RECOMMENDED LIST OF REPAIRS SUGGESTED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Council took a beack at this point. 186 September 7, '19.82 Upon returning from the break, Matthew Phillippi stated that he could not afford, at this time, to have separate water and sewer , connections installed to the two buildings on the property and asked foK a specific time limit to have this done. The Council advised MK. Phillippi to sit down with the'Building Inspector and discuss his plan then submit a written request and plan to the Council on.when he could have this done. The Council could .then act on his wr. itten plan. -COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT There Were n~F comments or suggestions from citizens present. REPORT FROM THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON WORK IN THE CITY The Building Inspector submitted a report to the Council asking for feedback from them on polici'es Of the Inspection Department. Councilmember Swenson asked about the double.fee policy. The BJilding Inspector stated that she t~ies to assure equal treatment tp everyone and has charged some pe~son~la double fee if it seems to be a blatant defiance of the City Codes. The Building Inspector and the Council discussed the posslbilty of. including a Certificate of Occupancy for one and two. family dwellings in the City Code and also.a minimum housing code standard for existing dwellings. The City Manager suggested having the Bui~lding Inspector, draw up some perameters on the Certificate of Occupancy and a minimum housing code that would allow grandfathering in-existing homes unless there is a major problem. No action was taken on this item. CITY HALL ROOF. SITUATION WITH RECOMMENDATIONS The Building Inspector presented a report of her research into the leak~' City Hall roof and some possible:solutions.. She has met with the architect,'Jim O'Brien of Williams/O'Brien Associates and he has agreed to write up a specification sheet for contractors to bid from and will charge'us only for any structural cal6ulations necessary to complete the building alterations. Sander and Company (foam roof system) has agreed .to do any recovery of the roof, at no cost, when the skylights are altered at the lower level. The upper roof, we would be charged for blending in the foam system with the skylights, but our warranty would continue in force until expired by our original agreement of July, 1980. She wants Sander and Company to replace all of the lower roof at no charge. The upper roof has only sustained storm damage to be repaired by the City. The three alternates of skylight design, in order of preference are: Remove the skylights and install new domed-thermo-commercially made skylight units. The size would be reduced to approximately 4 feet by 4 feet, two in each of the five present openings. (10 domes) 2. Same as above, except two of the five openings be removed. Two domes in three openings over the planter area. (6 domes) Attached is a 4' x 4' Wasco dome, approximately $450 each, not installed. The curb -- height is 9 inches. e 187 September 7, 1982 Raise the existing skylights off of the roof deck no less than 8 inches and install new flashing. The joint seals between units should be examined well'at the time of alteration to assure that they remain tight. The Council decided that they do not want anything to do with Williams/ 0'Brien Associates (the original architects) because they have 10st all confi.dence in the firm for not being able to correct the problem after all these years. Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded a motion to hire an independent architect/ structural engineer to give the City advice on resolving the problem with the roof. system.' The vote was unaninimousl.y in favor. Motion carried. The Building Inspector was instructed to obtain all architectural information, drawings, etc. from Williams/0'Brien Associates. Planning.Commission Item B, Richard Bialon, that was tabled earlier was now brought to the floor. The City Attorney.rePorted that in.the meeting with the Building Inspector and the Bialons it ~as.'~ecided that 'the Council should defer-any action on this street vacation request until.the Bialons speak with their neighbors and lay out a plan working out a way so'the Mound residents affected would have access to their property. SETTING DATES FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARINGS COUNTY ROAD IlO IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND 198'1 COUNTY ROAD 110 STREET LIGHT PROJECT The City Manager reported that these two hearing have been set previously for September 21, 1982~ ~. CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE - suggested date September 28, 1982 Charon moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-238 RESOLUTION SETTING SEPTEMBER 28, 1982, FOR THE CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEAR I NG The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. D. DELINQUENT WATER & SEWER BILLS - suggested date September 28, 1982 Polston moved Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-239 RESOLUTION SETTING SEPTEMBER 28, 1982, FOR THE DELINQUENT WATER & SEWER BILLS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING E. UNPAID TREE REMOVAL-CHARGES - suggested date September 28, 1982 Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. 188 September 7, 1982 RESOLUTION #82-240 RESOLUTION SETTING SEPTEMBER 28, 1982, FOR THE UNPAID TREE REMOVAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING The vote was'unanimousl.y in favor. Motion carried. UNPAID WEEDCUTTING CHARGES -.suggested date September 28, 1982 Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-241 RESOLUTION SETTING SEPTEMBER 28, 1982, FOR THE UNPAID WEEDCUTTING CHARGES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING The vote was unanimously i.n favor. Motion carried. PARTIAL PAYMENT - AERO ASPHALT -'1982 STREET OVERLAY'PROJECT The City Manager reported that Aero.has dOne an excellent job on this project and is nowlrequesting partial payment. Ulrick. moved and Polston seconded.almoti6m to approve'the partial payment to'Aero'Asphalt for the 1982 Street Overlay. Proj[ect in the amount of $29,554.52. The vote was unanimously in'favor.. Motion carried. "M.S.A. FUNDS FOR COUNTY ROAD'llO PROJECT The City Manager repor, ted that there is a possibl'ility, that.the City of Mound could appropriate a portion of its M.S;A. Construction. Fund for the work on County Road 110. The City has, at this time, a balance, of $92,654.77 in their M.S.A. Construction Fund.. The Council can decide:if they want to draw this money out for the County. Road 11.0 Project or leave it there for future use. Ulrick moved and Swe~son seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-242 RESOLUTION FOR APPROPRIATION OF MUNICIPAL STATE- AID FUNDS TO C.S.A.H. OR T.H. PROJECT The vote was unanimously in favo.r; Morton carried, REPORT FROM.THE C.I.T¥.'.ATTORNE¥~SAL£.OF .... BONDS~TO COVER'THE COST OF THE ? COUNTY ROAD llO IMPROVEMENT PROJECT The City Attorney. reported that he has made inqurrles into the sale of $300,000 worth of bonds for the County Road..llO Improvement Project and he is recommending the bid of Dain Bosworth, Inc. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-243 RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF $300,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1982: FIXING THE FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 189 September 7, 1982 AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 37 OF THE CITY CODE The Police Chief requested that.there be an amendment to Chapter 37, D of the 'City Code to specifically exempt'community based non-profit organizations from the need to pay for a h~wkers, peddlers or solicitorsl license. Charon moved and Swenson seconded a motion directing the City Attorney Fo draw up an amendment to Chapter 37, D, to grant exemption from licensing hawkers, peddlers or solicitors if they are a community non-profit organization. 'The City Attorney pointed out that Section 37.31 deals with this.problem in a broad s~nse so there is no need to. amend the ordinance. Swenson withdrew his second ahd Charon withdrew her motion. MOUND BAY PARK SPECIFICATIONS & ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS The City Manager reported that the Mound Bay Park specificatilons are now ready and the City can advertise for bids. Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-24~ .... RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE MOUND BAY PARK SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS TO BE .. OPENED SEPTEMBER 20, 1982, AT 2:00 P.M. A roll call vote was 4 in favor with Mayor Lind]an voting nay. Motion carried. TRANSFERS FOR 1982 FIRE SERVICE -& CAPITAL OUTLAY The Finance Director has asked for two resolutions. One satisfied the Fire Capital Outlay Fund deficit at January l, 1982. The second is. to satisfy Mound'.s portion of the 1982 cost of the contract with surrounding communities. Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-245 RESOLUTION. TRANSFERRING $9,097.67 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE FIRE CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. · Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-246 RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING MOUND'S ]982 FIRE COSTS PER CONTRACT The Vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ADDING SECTION 55.38A TO THE CITY CODE RELATING TO TEMPORARY SIGNS The City Attorney has prepared, at the Council's request, a section to add to the City Code relating to temporary signs. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following: ORDINANCE #440 AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 55.38A TO THE CITY CODE RELATING TO TEMPORARY SIGNS 190 . September 7, 1982 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 'PAYMENT OF BILLS Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the payment of bills as presented on the pre-llst in the amount of $134,O76.O8, when funds' are a.vailable.. Roll call vote was unanimously in favor. .Motion carried. LOT l, BLOCK 38, WYCHWOOD -'PID #24-.117-24 41 O149 The City Manager explained that this property was sold to the adjacent property owner. It was a tax fo. rfiet property and before the County will'allow the owner to combine this piece with his and have it put in his name the City must reconvey the land back to .the State. This· is because the County claims the City '~. 6annot sell this piece of ~roperty. Charon moved Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-247 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY MANAGER · ' TO SIGN A RECONVEYANCE OF FORFEITED LANDS TO STATE · ' ..... OF MINNESOTA BY GOVERNMENTAL SUBDIV!.$1ONS AND REQUESTING THE.COUNTY BOARD TO IMPOSE CONDITIONS ON THE SAME OF SAID TAX FORFIET LANDS AND TO RESTRICT THE SALE TO OWNERS OF ADJOINING LANDS 'The vote was unanimous!y in favor. Motion carried. ADDING.SECTION 27.10 TO THE CITY CODE The City Manager reported that a tree has fallen across the Lost Lake Channel from the John I~gman property.- He has notified M~. ~agman, by letter, th'~t the tree across the.channel is the same as a tree across a public roadway and that if he does Qot remove it the City will come in and remove it and assess the costs back to him. The City Attorney read the Minnesota Statute.#429.101 that can be adopted by the City. Council as an ordinance to cover specially assessing the costs back to the property owner. Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded the following: ORDINANCE #441 AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 27.10 TO THE CITY CODE AUTHORIZING SERVICE CHARGES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST BENEFITED PROPERTIES FOR CERTAIN CITY SERVICES The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CHANGE IN MEETING DATES Since the next regular meeting falls on September 14th and that is the day of the Primary Election, the City Manager suggested holding that meeting on the 16th. The Council felt that along with the public hearings on the 21st, they could cover any items that may come up in a short meeting after the hearings. Io? 1~I September 7, 1982 Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to have the remaining two Council meetings this month on September 21st and September.28th. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. NOTICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY - Name change in firm to Wurst, Pearson, Hamilton, Larson & Underwood; new phone number is 338-4200. B. NEWSCLIPPING ON TONKA.TOYS (from the 8-22-82 Mpls. Tribune)- regarding Tonka's problem competing with video games. C. L.M.C.D. AGENDA & MINUTES - Agenda from August 25,. 1982 and Minutes from June 23, 19'8I~. O. LETTER ON TUXEDO BLVD. & THREE POINTS BLVD. TREE REPLACEMENT - The trees that have died along these two roads .that.were put in on 1981.Street Pro3ect will be replaced between October 5 and 20, 1982. E. NOTICE OF TAX FORFEITED LAND.SALE - September 10, 1982, at 9:00 A.M. F. LETTER FROM C~TY OF TONKA BAY ATTORNEY - regarding t~e L.M.C.D. attorneys~ prosecuting misdemeanors in Tonka Bay. G. LETTER REGARDING PLACEMENT OF NEWSSTAND BY BUS DEPOT - U.S.A.. Today, a newdaily newspaper, will have a newstand by the bus depot. NOTICE OF LAKE MINNETONKA TASK-FORCE'MEETING - September 14 at 7:00 P~M. at the Sheriff's Water Patrol Headquarters in Spring Park. City Manager to notify them that 9-14-82 i.s Primary Election Day and a public meeting cannot beheld until after the polls close at 8:00 P.M. HENNEPIN COUNTY'S lATEST PLANS FOR COUNTY ROAD IlO - Hennepln County has notified the Police Dept. that'they are considering raising the speed limit from 30 to 35 M.P.II. The stretch of County Road I10 which is 250:feet north of Balsam Road north to the city'limit.would be affected. J. AMERICAN LEGION POST #398 GAMBLING REPORT - August 31, 1982, Report. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to adjourn at ll:OO'P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk BILLS .... SEPTEMBER 7~ 1982 Aero As~hal t Air Corem A]I Star Electric Astleford Equip .Applebaums A AiBattery Co. Aero Minnesota Auto Con Industries Bradley Exterminating Chris Bollls Bowman Barnes Burlington Northern RR Baldwin Supply Janet Bertrand Brock White Co. Sy Cooper Commissioner of Revenue II II Concord Travel Commiss. of Empl. oyer Relatn Cy's Mens Wear Cheyenne Copy Center Fran Clark. Dependable Services ELMarketing Jon Elam Judy Fisher GreYhound Travel Henn Co. Sheriffs Dept Henn Co. Treas Robert E. Johnson J & R Refrigeration Ken & Norm~!s Cabinets Kelley & Kelley Sharon Legg Glen Litfin Transfer Minnegasco City of Minnetrista: Mid Central Fire Mound Super Valu Metro Forte Mound ExplOrers N.S.P. M.F~O.A. City of Mound Metro Waste Control Mound Postmaster MWCC Conference Nat'l League of Cities Lynn Nichols 29,554.52 90.00 1,480.05 16.10 34.24 149.94 140.60 108.60 55.O0 178.20 114.16 533.33 53.19 44.10 6.70 315.91' 1,408.20 4,853.36 lOl.O0 25.93 574.43 .22.oo 9.46 33.00 6,275.00 28.24 15.75 179.00 274.54 1,567.50 23.32 900.98 15';OO '. 38.00 23,88 225,00 19.61 420.00 59.85 76.47 11.80 56.00 355.43 12.O0 77.7~' 1,262.25 lO1.04 60. O0 235.00 51.07 Jerry Longpre Peat Marwick Mitchell Pitney Bowes Credit Don Rother Bob Ryan Ford Wm Stewart State Bank Mound(Bond II II II State Bank Mound Swedlund Sewer & Wtr Water Products' Xerox Corp R.L. Youngdahl Ziegle'r, Inc. Marina Auto Supply Pymt) TOTAL BILLS LIQUOR BILLS Bradley Exterminating: Butch"s Bar Supply City Club Distrib. Coca Cola Bottling Diversified Representtve Day Distrib East Side Beverage Gold'Medal Beverage Home Ju|ge Johnson. Paper Kool Kube Ice The Liquor House City of Mound Midwest: Wine A.J. Ogle Pepsi Cola/7 Up Pogreba Distrib Real One Acquisition Thorpe Distrlb Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor.. Old Peoria Ed Phillips & Sons 17.10 464.00 26.00 25.30 24.96 75.00 18,331.90 18,950.00 17.10 300.00 179.83 191.00 5,538.00 41.25 356.O1 96,8o3.93 19.00 243.75 3,392.1o 285.20 83.72 5,282.64 4,371.O6 221.09 29.04 279.55 555.60 1,177.23 26.40 .712.56 2,831.84 337.00 4,237.80 675.O0 6,080.90 2,897.O3 1,804.32 168.86 1,560.46 Total Liquor Bills 37,272.15 GFUkND TOTAL--ALL BILLS 134,076.08 CITY OF MOUND, I~INNE$OTA 1982 SPECIAL ASSESSHENT HEARING SEPTEHBER 21~ 1982 PINKY CtL~RON BOB POLSTON CITY HANAGER CIIY ENGINEER CIIY ATTOKNEY MAYOR: ROCK LINDLAN COUNCILHEHBERS STAFF $ORDIE SWENSON DON ULRICK JON ELAM McCOHBS-KNUTSON CURTIS A. PEARSON PROGRAM 1. INTRODUCTION: MAYOR LINDLAN 2. LEGAL BASIS FOR HEARING: MR. PEARSON 3. EXPLANAIION OF CONSTRUClION WORK COMPLETED AND FINAL COSTS FOR EACH PROJECT: McCOMBS-KNUTSON 4. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS After being recognized by the Mayor, please state your name and ad- dress prior to your questions or comments. 5. FINAL RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED September 21, 1982 Dear Property Owner: We want to thank you for attending tonight's Special Assessment Bearing' The reason for this meeting is'twofold. First of all, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, we are required to certify the special assessment rolls prior to October 12th this year in order that these Special Assessments can be placed upon the tax rolls for the following year. Secondly, you as an affected property owner are given an opportunity to co,~-ent on your proposed assessment. All costs incurred in the construction of the projects to be discussed at tonight's hearing have been totaled. These total costs are then spread accord- lng to various factors among all affected property owners within a given benefit district. The specific method or methods to distribute costs will be discussed individually for each project as it is brought up at tonight's meeting. Your individual costs were included with your hearing notice. Questions you have regarding the rate of assessment will be discussed as it relates to ~he entire project cost. For an individual property owner, the total proposed assessment will be available through the 'Engineering Staff located at the counter on second floor of this building. You are welcome to discuss your cost with one of the Engineering Staff who is here tonight. If Council action alters or adjusts any costs or rates, then our staff will need additional time to recalculate the individual assessments. If you have questions about your restoration or the construction, please see the Engineering Staff located at the counter. No complaints relating to the construction will be handled during the hearing. The attached page shows an example of how an amount is spread over a year period. It shoulo be emphasized that you have the option of either paying the total amount of the assessment i~mediately, or paying it in annual installments. If you pay the entire amount of your assessment within 30 days after adoption of the assessments rolls by the Council, you will not be charged any interest on the amount of the assessment. If, however, you choose to pay after the 30 day period, interest accrues at the rate of 11.0% per year. During each subsequent year, payment of the remaining balance may be made, if paid on or before November 15th, to have special assessments removed from the following year's tax statements. Partial payments are not allowed. Yours very truly, Jon Elam City Manager OE/jb COUNTY ROAD 110 - COMMERCE BOULEVAI/D $'I'REET IMPROVEMENTS The street improvement work on Cone~erce Blvd. was undertaken by Bennepin County with the City of Mound to pay a portion of the costs. The following is an itemization of Mound's share of the cost ($305,780.53) of the total street improvement including storm sewer. Invoiced from Hennepin County ~156,592.49 Miscellaneous Expense (Televise & Repair Sanitary Sewer, etc.) 6,414.09 Engineering, Legal & Administrative 14,323.00 Items to be Assessed Separately (School Bus Drop and Sewer & Water Services) 21,984.61 Peabody Road Storm Sewer (Not including county share) 11,283.00 Interest During Construction SUBTOTAL 20,183.34 ~230,780.53 Estimated Right-of-Way Cost TOTAL COST OF PROJECT .$ 75,.000.00 $305,780.53 The amount proposed to be assessed to the benefiting properties is ~187,437.39, which leaves a balance of ~118,343.14 to be paid from City funds. The three major items proposed for assessment are curb and gutter, concrete driveway aprons and storm sewer. The actual construction cost for these items were furnished by Hennepin County and then the City's cost added to arrive at the amount to be assessed. The following is a breakdown for each of these three items. Concrete Curb and Gutter Mennepin County Construction Cost Engineering, Legal and Administrative Costs Interest During Construction Total to be Assessed 34,768.78 3,928.80 3,957.69 42,655.27 Concrete DriMeway Aprons Hennepin County Construction Cost Engineering, Legal and Administrative Costs Interest During Construction Total to be Assessed 19,913.40 2,250.14 2,266.69 24,430.23 Storm Sewer Hennepin County Construction Cost Engineering, Legal and Administrative Costs Interest Durin~ Construction *Peabody Road Extension ~otal to be Assessed 72,089.27 8,1&4.06 8,203.95 6~620.00 95,057.28 These preceeding costs were then used to determine the lineal foot and square foot charges. They were computed as follows: Curb and Gutter Cost per Front Foot $42,655.27 4 12,355.09 L.F. = $3.45/L.F. Concrete Driveway Apron Cost per Square Foot $24,430.23 + 15,976.78 S.F. = $1.53/S.F. Storm Sewer Cost per Square Foot $95,057.28 · 1,867,065 S.F. - $0.051/S.F. The cost for new sewer and water services, the School Bus unloading area and a portion of the Peabody Road Storm Sewer was assessed directly to the .benefiting properties. *~his figure is only that portion of the total cost which is to be assessed on a square foot basis. COUNTY ROAD 110 STREET LIGItT$ A portion of this project was completed by Hennepin County, specifically the control panels, underground wiring and the concrete light bases. The s£allation of the light poles and fixtures were handled as a City project. The following is an itemization of the total cost ($187,252.13) of the project. Collins Electric (City's contractor) Hennepin County (HcCrossan & Egan NcKay) Interest expense Engineering, Administrative, Legal and Fiscal Total Cost of Project $ 62,254.40 92,150.73 20,475.00 12,372,00 $'187,252.13 The amount proposed to be assessed to the benefiting properties is $68,700.00 which leaves a balance of $118,552.13 to be paid fro~ City funds. The properties have been divided into two categories, single family resi- dential use as one and all ocher uses as the second category. The charge per foot for the other uses was computed at 1-1/2 times the residential rate. Us- ing this criteria, the amount to be assessed ($68,700.00) was spread between the two uses as follows: Residentlal Use - $17,157.81~ 3,919.44 L.F. - ~4.38/L.F. Other Use - $51,542.19~-7,849.35 L.F. - $6.57/L.F. EXAHPLE ASSESSI~NT TOTAL PRINCIPAL ' 1[.100.00 15 YEARS INT~P-E ST'8 11.0% ANNUAL PRINCIPAL ' [6.67 Pa~nnent Schedule Balance of Amount Int. at 11.0% Total Amount ae~aining of on Unpaid Levied With Unpaid Installment Balance Current Tax 1983 $100.00 $6.67 $13.75' $20,42 1984 93.33 6.67 10.27 16.94 1985 86.66 6.67 9.53 16.20 1986 79.99 6.67 8.80 15.47 1987 73.32 6,67 8.07 14,74 1988 66.65 6.67 7.33 l&.O0 1989 59.98 6.67 6.60 13.27 1990 53.31 6.67 5.86 12.53 1991 46.64 6.67 5.13 11.80 1992 39.97 6.67 4.40 11.07 1993 33.30 6.67 3.66 10.33 1994 26.63 6.67 2.93 9.60 1995 19.96 6.67 2.20 8.87' 1996 13.29 6.67 1.46 8.13 1997 6.62' 6.62 .73 7,35 *First year based on 15 month's interest. To figure the yearly payments for your individual assessnent, divid~ the total assessment by 100 and multiply times the total amount after each year above. Example: Total Assessment - $1,743.00 $1,743.00-~100 ' 17.43 x 20.42 ' $355.92 - payment for 1983. $1,743.00~-100 ' 17.43 x 16.94 ~ ~295.26 - payment for 1984. 'NOTICE OF HEARING ON'PROPOSED ASSESSHENI' City of'Mound, Minnesota :~O WHOM IT MAY' CON. CERN;. NOTICE IS'HEREBY GIVEN that' the 'City Counci:l of Mound 'will .meet at 7."30 P.M. on Tuesday, September'21, 1982,.at the City Hall located at 5341 Mayw'ood Rbad to pass..upon the proposed assessment for the improvement '- "County Road 110 'improvement' P'roject" ' ~0unty Road 110 from Bartlett Blvd..to the North City Limits and -Lot 2.,_ Block 1,_Sherwood Shores " The total c0st:6-~-'the imProve~'n~ Is :" AND r .... "1981'Cou~ty'Road ll0'~treet light ProJect'~ .............. Count'~'K'°ad 110"frOm Bartlett Blvd. to the. No'r~h City.Limlt~ .... The. total cost'Of'.theimprbvement is.~187,252.13; .-. Pursuant to MSA Sec, 429.01~ to q29.1.11..All property.abutting upon or lying withln..the above :described limits'and b~nefltting the~efrom"ls proposed to be assessed. .The propose41 assessment'tis On.file for public inspection at the City-C.lerk's Office, .Written.or'oral.objections will 'be considered at the hearing, but.'th~'Council may:'conside~ any.objections' to the amount of the proposed i.ndividual, assess~ents"a.t"an adjourned meeting, upon ~uc~ further notice to the affected property'-owners aS'.it deems advisable. .. 'An owner may'appe~l a'n assessment'to'District Court pursuant to'Minnesota Statutes'Section 429.081 by serving..notice of'the appeat upon the Mayor or Clerk of the Ci'ty'wlt.hln 30. days after'the adoption of the'assessment'and filing such.notice with the D!strict'Court within ten da.ys after service upon -the Mayor or Clerk. No such appea~ as.to the..amoun~ of an assessment as t6 a specific pa'rcel of land may be made unless the own~r'Eas either filed a signed written objection to that assessment w. ith"the City Clerk prio~ to the hearing or has presented the written objection'to the pres.iding officer at the hearing. The City Council has adopted pursuant to.the authority granted by · Minnesota Statutes, Sec.' 435.193 to.435.195, a resolution containing standards· and.guidelines for.deferring assessments' for senior citizens for whom it wo~ld b~ a hardship to make the payments 6n homes'tead property. The 'standards and guidelines are on file with the City·Clerk for your'inspection. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk Publish i~ The Laker .September 7,. 1982 September 13, 1982 and CITY of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612). 472-1155 Dear Mound Property Owner: The enclosed official notice is intended to advise you of a Special Assess- -. ment Hearing to be conducted by the City Council of Mound at 7:30 P.M.. on Sep, tember 21, 1982, in the CoUncil Chambers at Mound City Hal%, 5341 Maywood Road. The notice relates to..specific improvement projects, County Road .110 Street Improvements including Peabody Road Storm Sewer and County Road 110 Street Lights previously authorized by the City Council, which has been or is in the process of being completed. Minnesota Statutory requirements provide that this assessment hearing be held prior to certifying and levying.the final improvement~assessment costs to the Hennepin County Finance Department. 7The assessment will he collected over succeeding years by the Bennepin County Treasurer's ~Office along with the real estate taxes. The purpose of the hearing ~s to advise the affected property owners of the final improvement costs to be assessed and the methods of apportionment and payment to be used. IF You HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE QUALITY OR EXTENT OF THE 'CONSTRUCTION WORK UNDER THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT(S) RELATING TO YOUR PROPERTY, PLEASE CALL JON ELAM, CITY MANAGER, AT 472-1155 BETWEEN 8:00 A.M. AND 5:00 P.M. OR COME TO THE CITY OFFICE AT 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE CONTACT US PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE (SEPTEMBER 21, 1982). The proposed assessment cost for the street' improvement was computed using ~3.45 per front foot for curb and gutter, ~1.53 per square foot for driveway aprons and ~0.051 per square foot for storm sewer. The proposed assessment cost for the street lights was computed using ~4.38 per front foot residential use and ~6.57 per front foot for all other uses. The final assessment amounts will be computed ba~ed upon the formula and benefits as ~rde~ed by the City Council at the assessment hearing. Usually, the final amounts are ~he same as the proposed amounts. The following is the breakdown and total proposed as- sessment for your individual property. CURB&GUT. DW. APRON ST.SEW.AREA IOTAL STREET ASSM'T NON- RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL TOTAL LIGHT ASSM'T Some further information for your reference, regarding the proposed special assessments, is given as follows: 1. Minnesota Statutory requirements regulate the special assessment proce- dures to,be Used (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429). 2. An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to Minneso- ta Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk Treasurer of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and 'filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerk Treasurer. 3. No such appeal as to the amount of an assessment pertaining to a specific parcel 6f land may be made unless the owner has either filed a signed written objection to that assessment with the City Clerk Treasurer prior to' the public hearing or has presented the written objection to the presiding officer at the public hearing. 4. Payment in iull with no interest charges may be made within thirty (30) days from the date the City Council adopts the assessment roll. Payments can be made at Mound City Hall. If you wish to make a partial payment, the payment must be in ~100.00 increments. If the total assessment is less than $300.00, no partial payment can b% accepted. 5. If the assessment is paid more than 30 days after Council action but on or before November 15, 1982, interest will be charged to December 31, 1982. 6. If the assessment is not paid on or before November 15, 1982, the amount will be spread over'the assessment period. The first.year payment will include interest for fifteen (15) months (October through December of 1982 and all of 1983). Following years will have interest computed for 12 months. Pay- ments will become due with your real estate taxes. 7. During each subsequent year, payment of the remaining balance may be made and must be paid on or before November 15 to have special assessments re- moved from the following year's tax statements. Partial payments are not allowed. 8. The assessment will be spread for 15 years at the current interest rate of eleven percent (11%) peryear on the remaining principal. 9. The City of Mound does have a deferred assessment policy based on hardship for Senior Citizens 65 years or older who have an income of less than ~10,001 and who reside on and own homestead property. Information on this pro- gram can be secured at the City Offices prior to the public hearing. 10. The City has also previously participated in the Hennepin County Grant Program for Special Assessments. Information on this program can be secured at the City Offices prior to the public hearing. Again, if you have any questions or comments, please contact us prior to the assessment hearing if possible. We sincerely appreciate your cooperation. CITY OF MOUND City Manager McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTIN6 ENGINEERS f LAND SURVEYORS [] PLANNERS August 24, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Perk Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound County Road 110 Street Improvements PreliminarY A~essment Roll File #6001' Dear Mayor and Council Members: As requested, we submit herewith, the Preliminary Assessment Roll for the street improvement work cogpleted by Hennepin County on Commerce Blvd. The total cost for the street improvements on County Road 110 is $305,780.53, of which $187,437.39 is proposed to be assessed back to the abut- ting properties. The following is an itemization of all the costs, except those for the street lights. Invoiced from Hennepin County Miscellaneous Expense'(Televise & Repair Sanitary Sewer, etc.) Engineering, Legal & Administrative Items to be Assessed Separately (School Bus Drop and Sewer & Water Services) Peabody Road Storm Sewer (Not including county share) Interest During Construction Subtotal $156,592.49 6,414.09 14,323.00 21,984~61 11,283.00 ' 20~183.34 '$230,780.53 Estimated Right'of-Way Cost Total Cost of Project $ 75~000.00 $305,780.53 The three items proposed for assessment are curb and gutter, concrete driveway aProns and storm .sewer. The 'actual construction cost for these items .were furnished by Hennepin County and then the City's cost added to arrive at the amount to be assessed. The following is a breakdown for each of these three items. printed on recycled paper Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council August 24; 1982 Rage Two Concrete CurbandGutter Hennepin County Construction Cost Engineering, Legal and Administrative Costs Interest During Construction Total to be Assessed $34,768.78 3,928.80 37957.69 $42,655.27 Concrete Driveway Aprons Hennepin .County Construction Cost Engineering, Legal and Administrative Costs Interest During Construction Total to be Assessed $19,913.40 2,250.14 2~266.69 $24,430.23 Storm-Sewer ~- .... Hennepin County Construction Cost Engineering, Legal and Administrative Costs Interest During Construction *Peabody Road Extension Total to be Assessed $72,08R.27 8,144.06 8,203.95 6~620.00 $95,057.28 *This figure is only that portion'of the total cost which is to be assessed on a square foot basis. These preceeding costs were then used to determine the lineal foot and square foot charges. They were computed as follows: · Curb and Gutter Cost per-Front Foot $42,655.27, 12,355.09 L.F. = $3.45/L.F. Concrete-Driveway Apron Cost-per Square Foot $24,430.23 +15,976.78 S.F. = $1.53/S.F. Storm-Sewer-Cost per Square Foot-- $95,057.28 + 1,867.065 S.F. = $0.051/S.F. The cost fornew sewer and water services, the School Bus unloading area and a portion of the Reabody Road Storm Sewer was assessed directly to the benefiting properties. If you have any questions or need more information on anything in the as- sessment roll, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Very truly yours, 3RC/jb .. McCOM3S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Cameron printed on recycled paper RESOLUTION 1,10 82- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLE 'AS .PROPOSED FOR THE COUNTY ROAD IlO IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by Law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed, assessment for the improvement of County Road 110 between Bartlett Blvd. to the North City limits and Lot 2, Block 1, Sherwood Shores. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall-constitute the special assessment.against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included i-n hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1983, and shall bear interest at the rate of 11 per cent annum from September 30, 1982. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire' assessment.from September 30, 1982, until December 31, 1982. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the day of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from September 30, 1982; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to .the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31, 1982, in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, 1982, or interest will be charged through December 31, 1983. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. McCOMBS'-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC, CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS m PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 August 24, 1982 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood'Road Subject: City of Mound County Road 1~0. Street Lights' Preliminary Assessment Roll File #5951 Dear Mayor and Council Members: As Tequested, we subm£t herewith the Preliminary Assessment Roll for the street light project on County Road llO. The numbers used for this roll have not been changed from those presented in our letter dated August 10, 1.982, a copy of which is attached. If you have any questions or need more information on anything in the as- sessment roll, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Very truly yours, McCOHBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Cameron ORC/jb Enclosure McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS [] LAND SURVEYORS Il PLANNERS August 10, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Subject: Dear Jon: County Road 110 Street Lights Preliminary Assessment Figures File #5951 We have put together the total costs for the above project and also calculated some preliminary charges for assessment PUrposes. The assessment numbers stated in the Preliminary Engineering Report and those talked about at the public hearing were used as close as possible. The total footage to be as- sessed ~nded up to be less' along witha different proportion between the footages of residential and other uses. The properties have been divided into two categories, single family resi- dential use as one and all other uses as the second category. The charge per. foot for the other uses was computed at 1-1/2 times the residential rate. Us- ing this criteria, the amount to be assessed ($68,700.00) was spread between the two uses as follows:' Residential Use = $17,157.81 + 3,919.44 L.F. -- ~4.38/L.F. Other Use = ~51,542.19 + 7,849.35 L.F. = $6.57/L.F. The total cost of the project to date is ~187,252.13, of which approximate- ly $68,700.00 will be assessed back to the abutting properties. The following is a breakdown of the total cost of the street light project. Collins Electric .(City's contractor) Hennepin County (McCrossan & Egan McKay) Interest expense Engineering, Administrative, Legal and Fiscal Total Cost of Project Proposed Assessment Amount Balance to be Paid by City 62,254.40 92,150.73 20,475.00 12,372.00 $187,252.13 68,700.00 ~118,552.13 ' !17 printed on recycled paper Mr. JOn Elam August 10, 1982 Page Two We are aware that even though the total amount to be assessed is unchanged, the charge for the street lights is approximately $1.25 per foot above the figures stated at the public hearing, but we feel that this is the only economical way for the City to finance a portion of this project. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. SRC/jb Very truly yours, McCOMBS'KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Came ron RESOLUTION NO. 82- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLE AS PROPOSED FOR THE 1981 COUNTY ROAD llO STREET LIGHT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the. 1981 County Road 110 Street Light Projec. t between Bartlett Blvd. to the North City limits. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. - Such asse.ssment shall ~be payable in equal annual installments extending Over"~ Period of !5 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1983, and shall bear interest at the rate of ll per cent annum from September 30, 1982. To the first insta'llment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from September 30, 1982, until December 31, 1982. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for bne year on.all unpaid installments. e The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the.assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property~ with interest accrued . to the day.of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from September 30, 1982; and he may,' at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31, 1982, in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, 1982, or interest will be charged through December 31, 1983. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the count, and. such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. 240 August 24, 1982 Councilmember Ulrick moved the following resolution° WHEREAS, RESOLUTION NO. 82-227 RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED, ACCEPTING THE PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT FIGURES AND SETTING SEPTEMBER 21,- 1982, AT 7:30 P.M. IN THE CITY HAL.L' FOR A HEARING ON. THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - COUNTY ROAD 110 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND 1981 STREET LIGHT I MPROV EM ENT a contract has been let for the improvement of County Road l l0 an'd the County Road l l0 Street Light Project, and WHEREAS, WHEREAS, the contract price for such improvements are $156,592.49 for the County Road IlO. Improvement Project and $154,222.13 for the County Road I10 Street Light Improvement, and the additional expenses i'ncurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements amount to $149,188.04 for the County Road ]10 Improvement Project and the 1981 County Road .ilO Street Light Pqo]ect'['so that the total cost of these improvements will be $305,780.53 and $187,252.13, respectively, and WHEREAS, WHEREAS, by this resolution the City Clerk is.directed to prepare, a proposed assessment of the cost of the County Road 110 Improvement Project and the 1981 County Road 110 Street Light Project, and the clerk, has notified the Council that such ~roposed assessment has been completed and filed i~ her office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MN.: The portion of the costs of..such improvements to be paid by the City is. hereby declared to be $]18,382.71 for the County Road 110 Improvement Project and $118,788.46 for the County Road llO Street Light Project. The portion of the cost to be assessed.against benefited property owners is declared to be $187,397.82 for the County Road 110 Improvement'Project and $68,463.67 for the County Road 110 Street Light Project. 3" A hearing shall be held on the 21st day of September, 1982, in the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessmentsand at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an oppor- tunity to be heard with reference to such assessments. The City-Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessments to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment rolls not less than 10 days prior to the hearings. 241 August 24,.1982' A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Coun¢ilmember Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following vot~¢ in.favor thereof: Charon, Pol§ton, Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan; .the following ~oted against the same: none; whereupon sa~d resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor. and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Mayor Attest: City Clerk 'l 61 I f I ~. £I l I I' i ] ii/. U) O00MNA9 9 -"' -0 !- M31AONV'M~) C .. .J ~.LT. o,~ I ,-, ¢ON~OMIN~ I I I :'fir* cf . ' ~' I 1 I LANE F'EE OWNER ~'PPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Sec. 22.03-a VILLAGE OF MOUND Location and complete legal description of property to be divided: Southeaster;1y ;15' of Lot 32, Aud£tors Subdivision ;170, T,ots ;17, ;18 & ;19, Block Shirley Hills, Unit C.' ZONING To be divided as follows: ,~"~., .... ~l ! ~ ~ . Case No.'82-143 Preliminary Subdivi~ion/Lo~ Split - 52.49/5251 Bartlett Boulevard The ea'sterly']5 ft. of Lot 32, Auditor's Sobd. No. 170; LOts'17, 18 and 19, Block ], Shirley Hills Unit C~ and-Tracts D & E of Registered 'Land Survey 813 Helen and"John Livingston were present ~epEesenting the owne. r, Frank Livingston. The'applicant .is requesting to'subdivide Lots ~7, 18 ~ 19'an8 the easterly 15 feet of Lot 32 into two building sites with 26,700.and 23,700 square feet of 1ut'area plus a parcel of' 9,800 square feet 'described as "C" to be added to Tract E of Reg'J~tered Land Survey 81'3. The division would allow for proper setbacks on the. principal.structures and. the,detached garage.· After the d~vislon, the owner of-Tract E of RLS No. 813 would..have 20.8~ feet"(Parcel C)'fronting on Bartlett Boulevard; the frontage for Parcel B would.be 52.31 feet and for. Parcel A 67 feetL Ten feet Of LOt 18 would be a private easement for driveway and utilities for the 524~ Bartlett .structure. Discussed ~he requi~rement of separate water and sewer connections for each structure. The Li'vingstons thought there had been two sewer connections put in;.City.records show the senvices to be shared. Weiland-moved and Stann~rd seconded a motion to recommend accepting the sub- division as requested with 'the stipulation that the Building Official's re- commendations be'checked out and the following conditions met: 1. Separate water and sewer connections be prov!ded for each structure. 2. All persons with financi~.l interest in the property have submitted approval 3. Applicant must resubmit final subdivision request within one year. 4. The City Council approves a waiver of the public hearing pursuant to City Code Section 22.00. The-v~te was unanimously in favor. DATE (19~7 Aeriol Photo ) orren~' 2/Jo REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO,~//.~ HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA o Do~aJres Iro~ _I I I T hereby certify that ~ acc, ~o~a£ona of ~apter ~08, of 19~, as ~e~, I ha~e deac~b~ tract of la~ ~ He~ep~ C~ty, ~eso~, vacat~ ~ter ~ ~e ~ster~ l~e of ~t 1~ This eur~ey is a oo~rect dg ~t. eci t,4~s cl~ o Surveyor - Case No. 82-143 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of September 13, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-143 Location 5249/5251 Bartlett Boulevard Legal Desc. SEly 15 feet Lot 32, Audi- tors Subd. 170; Lots 17-19, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit C Tracts D & E of RLS # 813 Zoning District R-1 Request: Preliminary Subdivision Applicant: Frank H. Livingston 5251 Bartlett Boulevard Representative: Helen & John Livingston 2200 Silver Lake Road New Brighton, MN. Phone: 636-2003/571-O743 The applicant is requesting to subdivide Lots 17, 18 & 19 and SEly 15 feet of Lot 32 into two building sites with 26,700 and 23,700 square feet of lot area. Parcel C of 9,800 square feet as described is to be added to Parcel E of Regis- tered Land Survey # 813. The present buildings-.~n tb~ site do not have the proper setbacks, if the lots of record were to be sold. The division will allow for proper setbacks on the principal structures and the detached garage. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum lot width of 60 feet, but Parcel E of Registered Land Survey 813 only has a private easement at present. After the subdivision, he would hav~ 20.89 feet fronting on Bartlett Boulevard. The Lot 18 frontage would be increased from 42 feet to 52.31 feet. Lot 19 structure frontage is 57 feet plus anothe~ 10 feet of Lot 18 for a frontage .proposed of 67 feet. The 10 feet of Lot 18 would be a driveway and utilities easement for the 5249 Bartlett Boulevard structure. RECOMMEND: The owners had discussed a possible right-of-way unto this parcel some months ago. ! had discussed the minimum right-of-way width of 50 feet as stated in Section 22.24 of the City Code. Basically, the two parcels A & B could.have a secondary plan requirement due to the excessive size of the lots. (Lot area of both being double of that required 10,OO0 square feet). The two structures services by water and sewer, have the services shared, by the City.records. The sewer stub in to Lot 17 was lost in about 1968 due to a watermain break. If preliminary subdivision approval is given, the following conditions should be met: 1. Separate water and sewer connections be provided for each structure. 2. The assessment, at this time, does indicate the present use of the property. No additional unit charges need to be paid and/or assessed. 3. All persons with financial interest in the property have submitted approval. 4. The applicant must resubmit final subdivision request within one year. 5. The City'Council approves a waiver of the public hearing pursuant to City Code Section 22.00. This will be going to the City Council September 21, 1982. Jan B~t rand Building Official 9 0~ 0<,./:.. 0£ 63 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVI- SION LOT SPLIT WITH CERTAIN STIPULATIONS PID. 24-117-24 24 O01'4 WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision 'requirements contained in. Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound, and WHEREAS, said .request for a waiver has. been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council, and WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that' there are'special circumstances affecting said property such that the Strict application of the ordinance would deprive the applican['of the reasonable use of his land; that the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right; and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property owners, and WHEREAS, the purpose of this subdivision/lot split is to allow for the creation of two parcels of..~and.~(one 26,700 square feet, the other'23,7OO square'feet) with existing structures on both-sites plus a parcel of 9,800 square feet to be added to Tract E of Registered Land Survey 813, and WHEREAS, both' new parcels exceed the 10,OO0 square foot lot area requirement for the R-1 Zoning District, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: The request of Frank H. Livingston for the waiver from the provisions of Section 22.00 of the City'Code and the request to subdivide proper~y of. less than five acres, described as PID 24-117-24 24 O014 is hereby granted pre- liminary approval to permit division of the property in the following manner: Parcel. A - The easterly 15.O0 feet of Lot 32, "Auditor's Subdivision Number 170; and Lot 19 and-the westerly 10.OO feet of Lot 18, Block l, Shirley Hills Unit C Parcel B - Parcel C - Lot 18, except the westerly 10.00 feet thereof; and. that paPt'of Lot 17 lying westerly of the followln9 described line and its extensions: Commencing at a point on the easterly line of said Lot 17, distant 385.94 feet southerly from the northeast corner of said Lot 17; thence westerly, perpendicular to said easterly line, a distance of 29.79 to the point of beginning of the line tO be described; thence northerly to a point on the northerly line of said Lot 17 distant 20.89 feet westerly from said north- east corner and said llne there terminating. All in Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit C That ~art of Lot 17, Block l, Shirley Hills Unit C, lying easterly of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at a point on the easterly line of said Lot 17, distant 385.94 feet southerly from the northeast corner of said Lot 17; thence westerly, perpendicular to said easterly line, a distance of 29.7~ feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northerly to a point on the northerly line of said Lot 17 distant 20.89 feet westerly from said northeast corner and said line there termlnating~ Parcel C to be added to Tract E of Reg[stered Land Survey 813. Parcel B to have a d~iveway easement over and across that part of the westerly 10.00 feet of Lot 18, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit C, lying northerly of a line. drawn easterly, perpendicular to the westerly line of said Lot 18, from a point'on said westerly line distant 157.90 feet southerly from the northwest corner of said Lot 18. Preliminary subdivision is approved upon compliance with the following condi- tions: 1. Separate water and sewer connections be provided for each structure. 2. All persons with financial interest in the property have submitted approval of the division of the property. That failure on the part of'the petitioner to submit a final plat of the lot split per Section 22.13 within one year from the date of this apprQyal shall deem the preliminary approval to be null and void, unless an e×tensgOn of time is applied for and approved. 4. The City Council approves a waiver of the public hearing pursuant to City Code Section 22.00. ./ PlanNing ·Commission Minutes August 30, 1982 - Page-2 Weiland moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend that the Attorneys for Mound and Minnetrista and' City Engineers try to resolve access and necessary easements for a.Workable plan for a1.1 concern&d in the area of East Shore Drive and the platted Sulgrove Road.' Further stated that there 'would be no need to bring this b~ck to the.Planning Commi.ssi6n., The vote was unanimously in favor. .Case .o. 82-141 Nonconforming Lot and Structure. Variances tO garage 18 feet to 20.3.feet from the street; .-- .. : "- - Mrs. Hetcher was present. Discussed Size of lot (~,062~) and size of proposed'garage and wh~tE~r.'iL"could be less deep (20 feet) so that ther~ Would be a minimum of 20 feet to the street. Also discussed placement of overhead door. Applican{ felt this size needed both for storage and for being able to get around a Charger to work on it. Paulsen moved and Jensen seconded a motion to'recommend that application as . requested be approved.. Paulsen moved and Pete'rson seconded'an amendment to the motion that Overhead door be placed to the N.E. side of garage ashlar as practica). The vote on the amendment was ~ei)and and Stannard against; a)] others voted in favor. The vote on the motion as amended was ~ei]and and Stannard against, all others in favor. Motion carri.ed. ~eiland and Stannard feel that oF 18.6 feet is too close to a dangerous road; garage' could be made 20 feet deep; should be some compromise with the building on a smal-1 lot.- ? planning Commission Minutes September 13, 1982 - Page 2 ThE.City Manager explained that since the City Council denied Case No, 82-141 (H~tcher's reqvest for a street front 'variance to build an attached garage, at 49'13 Island View DriVe), the applicant is planning on building, a detached garage as permitted 8 feet from their.front property line with the garage entrance to the Side.. The neighbor says this will .block their view when they back out of their garage. The City Manager stated he' thinks the City Council may want to take another look at this case and see if garage should be'attached and asked the Building Inspector ~o.con~act applicant to see if they wish to bring it back to the Council. Detached garage would have 4' sideyard, 20' garage and 16' driveway access. CITY OF HOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please. type the following information) Fee Paid ~ · .~. ~'o Date Filed 1. Street Address of Propeb.ty /-~f /~ ~-~'/....~/VZ~ U/~u .... Z)~xc~6 2. Legal Description of Property: Lot /¥ Block /4/4 Addition ' D~'~/ ~,,'V' Address Z/~c~ i~ jfj'/..d,'V'.,O UI_M'-~u,. 4. Applicant (if other than owner) PID No..~.o'--// ? '~h/ // ~0~'0 Day Phone No.../-/'7.~ ~7 70 Name -Address Day Phone No. o 5: Type of Request: V~rlarrce ( ). ConditiOnal Use Permit Zoning Interpretation & Review Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ' ( ) Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other *If Other, specify: Present Zoning District f~_. ' Existing Use(s) of Property ~r~._ ~ .... ~~- Has an application ever been ~ade for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? If so, llst date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) 3:-'"i-C~s~-No. 82-141" Noncofif~rming Lot and Structure Variances-'to place an attached garage 18 feet to 20.3 feet from the street. Lot 14,. Block 14, Devon. Mrs. Hetcher was present. Discussed size of lot (4,062~) and size of proposed'garage and whether it could be less deep (20 feet) so that there would be a minimum of 20 feet to the street. Also discussed placement of overhead do~r. Applican~ felt this size needed both for storage and for being able to get around a Charger to work on it. paUlsen moved and Jensen seconded a motion to recommend that application as requested be approved. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded'an, amendment t'o the motion that overhead d. oor be placed to the N.E. side of garage as-'far as practical. The vote on the amendment was Weiland and Stannard against; all others voted in favor. The vote on the motion as amended was Weiland and Stannard against, all others in favor. Motion carried. Weiland and Stannard feel that 18 feet or 18.6 feet is too close to a dangerous road; garage could be made 20 feet deep; sh'ould be some compromise with the building on a small lot.. Request fQr Zoni.ng Variance Procedure (2) Case // D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities,'etc. E. Indicate North compass direction F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. III. Request for a Zonin~ Variance A~ All information below, a site plan, as described In Part I1, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. Does the present use of the propertyconform to all use regulations for the zone'district in which it is located? Yes (~) No ( ) If "no",.specify each non-conforming dse: C. Do the existing structures comply with all area height and bul~.,regulations for the zone district in'which i't is.located? Yes ( ) No (/)0 If ."no", speci:fy each non-conforming use: D. Which unique physical characteristics of the o its reasonable use for any of the uses.permitted in that zoning district? ( ) .Too narrow ( ) Topography ( ) Soil (.;~ Too. small ( ) Drainage. ( ) Sub-surface ( ) Too shallow ( )' Shape' ( ) :Other: Specify: E, Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after 'the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (X) If yes, explain: F. Was the hardship created by'any other man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No (~) If yes, explain: G. Are the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar · Yes ( ( ) only to the property described in this petition? /~) No If no, how many other properties are similarly affected? H. What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) I. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? /~b~) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: ! t 0 · ~_,Honsen L_~ Pellinen, Inc. 13907 Spring L~k~ Rd.0 Minn~onk,,, Mn. ~.5343 938-$678 O or~°r~ I hereby certify that this survey, prepared by me or under my direct ~uper- vision, is a true and correct representation of the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings, if any thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any,.from or on said land and that I am registered land surveyor under State of Minnesota Statutes Section b~..02 to 326,16, Date: ~3 ~/ Registration No._ ~ ;Z 7~ Job No. ,~'/'/:~0 Book- Page P- 4 G Scale /" Case No. 82-141 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of August 30, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-141 Location: 4913 Island View Drive Legal Desc.: Lot 14, Block 14, Devon Request: Variance for non-conforming lot & structure to place an attached Applicant: Kevin James Hetchler 4913 Island View Drive Phone: 472-4770 garage 18 ft. to 20.3 ft from the street. Zoning District: R-2 The applicant is requesting to place an attached garage 18 feet to 20.3 feet from Island View Drive. The house size is 704'~quaYe Feet; required is 840 square fee~. The lot size is 4,062~ square feet; required is 6,000 square feet. The structure is 5.5 'feet from the southwest property line and ll.1 feet on the northeast; required is 6, and 6 foot and 10 foot. The maximum size of an accessory building is 10% of the lot area or 406 square feet. RECOMMEND: I would recommend granting the variance due to a hardship of lot size and the shape of the lot. The garage addition will be offset to conform to the 6 foot sideyard minimum setback. The lots to either side are built on at the present time. Enclosed and off street parking are desirable as Island View is a 15 foot right-of- way with designated no parking. Possibly the proper sizing of the structure to the lot size should be considered. This will be going to the Council September 14, 1982. Jan Bertrand Building Official 2/9,2_ City of Mound POLICE DEPARTMEWF 5541 MayWood R~. Mound, MN 55564 INVITATION TO BID FOR. CONTRACT New or Used Automobiles. Bruce H. Wold, Police Chief, City 'of Mound will receive sealed bids until · 10:00 A.M. Tuesday, September .14, 1982, .for the intended purpose of securing a contract to purchase, three (5) new or used automobiles as per the attached specifications. Each bid proposal must be clearly identified on the outside of the envelope as "BID FOR AUTOMOBILES" and shall show the name and address of the bidder. The City Council reserves the right'to reject any and all bids and to waive any informalities. MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS: AWARD: 1~82 SpEcIFICATIONS New or Used. Automobiles It is the intent-of these specifications to detail and specify the requirements for furnishing and delivering'three (5) new or used automobiles to the City of~ound. Specified automobiles must be the 1982 model year or newer, from curfent stock for immediate delivery. Bid pride shall be firm, F.O.B. City of Mound. The right is reserved, to inspect, road test, and to either · accept or reject each automobile offered. The automobiles must be made available in Minneapolis-St. Paul a~ea for inspection, road testing'and acceptance or rejection. Bidder to show price 'for each automobile bid aiong"with des- cription, and include specified and applicable warra~.ties. New or used 1982 or newer Chevrolet. Cavalier 2 door or 4 door models;-. ..... Minimum 1.8 liter 4-cylinder engine. Automatic or standard transmission. Power brakes. Ai~ conditioning/original fa~toryeqUi~ment Power steering, original factory equiPment. AM radio. Rear windowdefogger. Left hand mirror. Written drive train warranty, 12,000 mil~s or 12 months computed' from date of delivery and acceptance. Mechanical components' and all body parts including trim, seats, upholstery, dash instruments and floor mats mst be in excellentcondition. Automobiles with odometer readings in excess of 22,000 miles will not'be considered or accepted. Final award will be based but not necessarily limited to the following: 1. Compliance to the. conditions and requirements of the bid specifications. 2. Bid price,' including discounts, if available. Page 1 of 3 1982 SPECIFICATIONS New or Used Automobiles AWARE: ~Cont'd) 5. General reputation and experience of the bidder. 4. ~valUationas to the bidders ability to fulfill his/her cormui~nent to the City under the contract. Knowledge of and experience with the bidder in terms of past performance. 6. Naure and extent of'data furnished-upon request of the city. 7. Bi~d~r'~'"ability to meet delivery requirements. 8. Warranty provision$. The City reserves the right to awardthe contract in whole or in part,' if such action serves the best interests of the City. ¸5. Page 2 of 5 RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE BID FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VEHICLES WHEREAS, pursuant to advertising for bids for new or used automobiles, and WkEREAS, bids were opened publicly at 10:00 A.M. on September 14, 1982, and WHEREAS, the following bids were received: Th~rk Bros. Chevrolet St. Bonifacius, MN. a. (3) three new 1982 Chevrolet Cavaliers b. Bid range: $20,414 to $20,.~(~,~° c. The warranty is a 12 month or 12,OO0 mile warranty on the whole car. An extended 24 month and 24,000 mile warranty is available on the engine, transmi'ssion and drive train. The extended warranty carries a $100 deductible per occurrence. National ~r Rental Mpls./St. Paul International Airport a. (3) three used 1982 Chevrolet Cavaliers with approximately 20,000 miles on each unit. b. Range of bid: $17,400 to $18,OOO c. They would allow us to select cars from their fleet to suit our bid s'pecificati.ons. d. Warranty is quite extensive and includes engine, transmission, brakes, drive axle assembly, front suspens|on, steering, air conditioning and electrical for 24 months or 24,000 miles. There is a $25. deductible per occurrence. Cars can be serviced locally. Hertz Corp. 2400 E. Devon Ave. - Des Plaines, Ill. a. Submitted a bid for subsitute automobiles. (3) three used 1982 Plymouth Reliant Custom K cars. b. Bid Price: $19,O50 c. Warranty is 12 months or 12,000 miles on the power train only. Service performed at a location designated by Hertz. Avis Rent A Car Systems Twin Cities International Airport a. (3) three used 1982 Chevrolet Cavaliers with average mileage of t8,500. b. Bid Price: $19,650. c. 12 month or 12,000 mile warranty on the whole car. Service is performed at the Twin Cities International Airport. Village Chevrolet 16200 Wayzata Blvd. - Wayzata, MN. a. (3) new 1982'Chevrolet Cavaliers on a purchase or lease basis. b. Bid Price: Purchase - $22,413.47 Lease - $660.38/month for 24 months with a buy price of $4500/unit at the end of the 24 month period. WHEREAS, The City would expend $15,849.12 during the lease ter~ and $13,500 to purchase the units at the end of the lease term. The total cost at the end of the lease term would be $29,349.12. Warranty would be 12 month or 12,000 miles warranty on the whole car. An extended 24 month and 24,000 mile warranty is available on the engine, transmission and drive train. The extended warranty carries a $100 deductible per occurrence. CITY of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 · TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL FROM: POLIC~ CHIEF; BRUCE WOLD SUE3: BID PROPOSALS contained in the council packet, is a synopsis of five bids received for new .or used administrative cars. The two bids that I feel warrant further consideration are the bids from Thurk Bros. Chevrolet and National Car Rental. Listed below are advantages and disadvantages that I see to accepting either bid: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL Advantages: 1. Price - $18,000 - 2,859.00 cheaper 2. 24 month or 24,000 mile warranty - local servicing probably'available 3. Used Car B~nager will Dick Schnable and I to pick out the cars from those available in the'fleet. Disadvantages: 1. Cars will have approximately 20,000 miles 2. Cars could receive abuse that we may not detect on an inspection. 3. Warranty carries a $25.00 deductible per occurrence THURK BROS.. CHEVROLET Advantages: 1. New cars with fUll new car warranties 2. Local servicing available 3. Extra one to two years of service 4. Cars will be broken in and maintained properly Disadvantages: 1.' Price . $2,859.00 more expensive 2. Near the end of the model year and choices are limited Both bids have merit. I do feel that there is more merit in accepting the Thurk Bros. bid if the City finances can afford it. The extra year of service and the knowledge that the cars have not been abused is probably worth the difference. However, either vendor will meet our needs. Page No. / Date ~//fi,~2 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO Name ~/~/~./ ~"3C tQ"l 0 ~ rO ~'~ City ~O~b State ~/~ Telephone ~ -- //~- '- WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT Street ~/3,,, ~,~j /~/~/~, i City /~ ~/~Jf-~ State ~/~"'~ 1~ Date of Plans Architect We hereby propose to furnish all the materials and perform all the labor necessary for the completion of /~ ~ I material is guaranteed to be as speoified, and the ~bove work to be be performed in ~ooordan~e with the drawings and 3Qifio~tiO~ ~ubmitt~d for ~bov~ wOFR ~Bd Bo~pl~t~d ia ~ substantial woFkms~liR~ m~r fo~ th~ 8u~ o~ _ o~ ~-, I with payments to be made follows: Oo lars($ / /t' I -- · '- ' A~y ~Iteration or deviatio~ from ~bove $peBifiBation~ involving ~xtr~ oost~, will be exeouted only upon writlen orders, ~nd will beoome a~ extra oharge over ~ad ~bove the estimate. All ~greement~ oontingeat upo~ ~triRes, 8B~ide~t8 or del~y$ beyond our Qontrol. Owner to osr~ fire, tornado a~d other necessary in~r~oe u~on~bove work. Workmen'5 Oompe~8~lign ~nd PubliQ Liability lnsuran~e on above work to be taken out by ~ ~ ~'~ ff ~~I~ ~ Per NOTE - This proposal may be Wi'thdrawn by us if not accepted within ~ (~days II The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Signature Signature Dccepted ate __ . .. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 To: Jon Elam From: Bruce Wold Subject: Purchase of 1983 squad car out of 1982 Revenue Sharing Funds The specifications'~or"~he 1983 police cars are now available. I have prepared packets for prospective bidders, and I am prepared to mail these packets out. The packets specify the type of car and equipment we are requesting from the bidders. Attached to this memo,'is a copy of these specifications. Please place this action item on the council agenda for the September 21, 198~ meeting. I am hoping to have bids received and opened on October 12, 1982. September 21, 19U2 ,5,1b Indian Mound Wayzala, Mmne:;ola 55391 (61 '2) 473-4224 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Mound Well No. U Dear Jon: Reference is made to our recent meeting concerning Well No. g and the feasibility of developing a well on the island. As indicated previously, the gravel deposits encountered at a depth of approximately 160 feet were very ~igh~t and not suitable for well development (at least not suitable for municipal purposes). In an attempt to explore the formation underlying the glacial drift deposits, the eight (U) inch test hole ~as temporarily cased and a nominal eight inch rotary hole drilled from approximately the 200 foot depth to a depth of 236 feet. Remnants of the Jordan sandstone were encountered between 203 and 236 feet. The Jordan formation consisted of very fine sand layers intermixed with layers of shale. It is obvious that the upper portion of the Jordan was removed during glacial activity. Conse- quently, while some 30 plus feet of Jordan sandstone is present, this part of the Jordan is not suitable for groundwater development. If an additional well is desired on the island, I can only suggest that additional test holes be drilled ~n an attempt to locate a suitable groundwater formation. We have secured all information available on wells on the island and no definitive formation exists. As explained last week, the Jordan sandstone in the Mound area is "fingered", thus you never are certain whether it exists or not at a particular spot. I would be happy to discuss this matter with the council. let me know your desire. Please Sincerely, bt POLICE DEPARTMENT 5.541 Maywo~ Rd.' Mound, Mn. 55364 New Police Vehicle Bnice H. P;old, Police .Chief, City .of Mound Will receive' sealed bids until 10:00 AM. Tuesday,. October 12, 1982'for the intended purpose of securing a contract to purchmse one new police vehicle per the attached specifications. .. Bach bid proposal must be clearly identified on the outside of the envelope as 'BID-FOR POLICE'VEHICLE and 'shall show the name and address of the bidder.' The City Council reserves the right' to reject any and all bids and to waive any informalities. MINIM~ SPECIFI- CATIONS: 1985 SPBCIFICATIONS New Police. Vehicle It is the intent of these specifications to detail and specify the requirements for furnishing and delivering one 1983.police vehicle to the'City Of Mound, Specified vehicles must be the 1983 model year, from current stock.,, or from special order~ for delivery. Bid price shall 5e firm, F.O.B. City Of Mound. Bidder to sh~w price for ·the·police vehicle and include.specified and applicable warranties. 1985 Crown Victoria S Police Vehicle,'4 DR.' *5.8 liter H.O. V-8 Engine --*Automatic Overd~iveTransmisgiOn with firstgear Lock-Out *External auxiliary.transmission6il cooler *Police level he.avy-.d~.ty cO~ling package, including viscoUS.fan and coolant rec6ver~.System ' .. '*Heavy duty frame *Police~aximum handling Package includes: Extr~heavy-duty, high-rate front and rear springs Hea.vy-dutyupside front and rear shock absorbers Heavy-duty frond, and' rear police stabilizer bars Steel up~er control arm bushings and upperball 'joints and special lower control arm'bu~hings . *Power steering with forward moun%ed oil cooler *Heavy-duty~ower.'front diSc/rear dr6mbreaks' *Automatic. parking brake release "' " -' *100Ampalternator *Heavy-duty 15X6.5 safety';~imwheels *Calibrated speedometer.' *71-Amp/hOU. r hea.~y.-duty battery - *Battery heat shield *Remote-control electric"decklid release in glove.box " *Single-key locking system. *Dual beam map light ~.' *PZ25/70R15'BSWpolice .special tab'lc radial tires'~ conventional spare *Bright hubcaps ~ *Air conditioner, s~lectaire *Defroster, electric rear.window *Glass, tinted (complete) *Seat trimall vinyl *Steering wheel, tilt · *Windows, power side *Heater, engine block immer$idn *Locks, power doo~ ~Windshield wipers, interval *Seats, bucket *Spotlights, pillar-mounted *Koof reinforcement 1983 SPECIFICATIONS (CONT.) *AM Radio with dual instrument papel speakers ~Anti-theft door lock buttons *Colorzkeyed Cut-pile carpeting *Color-keyed deluxe belts with comfort regulator feature. *Deep-well trunk' with low liftover h~ight *Deluxe color-keyed 4-spoke soft,rim steering wheel *Dual note horn *Front bumper guard~ *Glove box, ashtray and trunk lights *Illuminated bin-type locking glove box *Inside hood release *LHr~note-controlmirror *Power ventilation~system *Rectangular Halogenheadlamps with wraparoundparking lamp's *Tiltaway door hinges. '*1fneellip and rocker panel ~01dings Written drive train'warranty, 12,000miles or 12months computed from date of delivery and acceptance. Finalaward will be based on but'not necessarily limited to the following: i. 'Compliance to the conditions and requirements of the bid specifications; 2.' Bid price,-including discounts, if .available 5~ General. reputation and experieDce of t}{e .bidder." 4. EYaluationas to the bidder's.ability to fulfill his/her commitment tO .the'City. under the contract. " 5. Knowledge of'land experience with the bidder in terms of past performance..' 6. Nature and extent of"data furnish~dupon request of the City 7. 'Bidde~'s aSility to meet delivery requirements. 8; Warranty provisions. ' 1985 New Police Vehicle BID PROPOSAL The undersigned hereSy proposes to ~urn~sh and deliver, F.O.B.'City of Mound, the following new198Z Police Yehicle her~in specified: ADDRESS AUTHORI ZED sIGNA~ TI'TIM T~L~PHON~ N/]MBER · 'ADDENDUM CITY OF YDUND. INVITATION TO BID FOR. CONTRACT BID. OPENING: 1985 police vehicle td)~.00 A'.M..Tuesday, October 12~ 198~. Bruce H.' Wold'.~ "' S~ptember, '21,' 1982 1982-Chevy Impala and Malibu Classic Designed 'and tuned for tough police and taxi operation. For 1982, Chevrolet offers a wide lineup of vehicles to meet the tough, specialized work of public safety agencies and taxi fleets: full-size Impala and mid-size Malibu Classic cars plus a selection of light:duty trucks (see page 8 for truck specifications). Keep in mind that much of what you want in police or taxi vehicles is already engi- neered into regular production Chevrolets. To their solid basic design, you can add special equipment options to satisfy your specific requirements. The 9C1 police chassis, 9C6 taxi chassis and companion special equipment options for Impala and Malibu Classic are designed to be an integral part of the vehicle and are not items installed on regular production cars. The chassis packages and special equipment options are engineered specifically for police and taxi work and, along with the vehicle, are tuned to their special needs. For this reason, it is necessary that you allow suffident lead time between date of ordering and desired delivery of your 1982 Chevrolet vehicles. To further expedite delivery of your Chevrolet police or taxi vehicles, it is suggested that you an'an~e with another supplier for installation of any equipme~ not included in the special equipment options listed on the back page of this catalog. Impala FULL-SIZE ROOM AND COMFORT FOR SIX ADULTS. RESPONSIVE AND AGILE FOR CITY OR HIGHWAY. · :::- '. 1BL69 Impala continues to be the full-size value it's been famous for these past 23 years. For '82, we invite you to examine it with an eye on technology. Impala is equipped with Computer Command Control, an on-board computer that monitors engine functions, and fine-tunes the engine's performance under all normal operating conditions~ ~DOORSEDAN :'' continuously~as you drive. Also standard are low-drag front disc brakes. Easy-Roll radial ply tires and 3.8 Liter (229 Cu. In.) V6 engine. (Not available in Calif.). New fluidic windshield washer system. Available only to law enforcement agencies for law enforcement pursuit purposes is a 5.7 Liter (350 Cu. In.) 4-Bbl. V8. Other Impala 1BL69 :.. . ...~:: - ..... - . features include full-size r°°minessand- comfort and impressive driving, automatic transmission, power steering, power front- disc/rear drum brakes, 25-gallon fuel tank and roomy 20.9-cu.-ft. trunk. An optional ga~e package with trip odometer, fuel economy and temperature gages is available except with Special Police speedometer. STANDARD FEATURES · ][6-inch wheelbase with tight turning circle (38.8 feet curb-to-curb). · Computer Command Control. · Delco Freedom II battery never needs water. · Built-in engine electrical diagnostic connector. ·_H[gh Energy Ignit. io~n eliminates points and ignition condenser. · Side-lift frame jack. · Window frame on doors. · Door lock design helps make break-ins difficult. · Molded full foam seat construction. · Singie-loop front seat and shoulder belt system. · New interior trim fabrics and colors. · Extensive corrosion treatment. · Headlight dimmer switch on turn signal lever. · Speedometer face includes metric numerals. · Inside hood release. IMPORTANT: A WORD ABOUT THIS CATALOG. We have tried to make this catalog as comprehensive and factual as possible oWe hope you find it helpful. However, e the time of pdntlng, some of the rmation you will find here may have been updated. Also, some of the equipment shown or described throughout this catalog is available at extra cost. Your dealer has details and, before ordering, you should ask him to bring you up to date. The right is reserved to make changes at any time, without notice, in prices, co]ors, materials, equipment, specifi- cations and models. Check with your Chevrolet dealer for complete in formation. '. This catalog should not be used for ordering purposes. Rather it is intended as a source of advance information for planning future vehicle fleet needs. For further details, contact yOur local Chevrolet dealer or the Chevrolet Zone Office covering your area. LIFE CYCLE COST/PERFORMANCE EVALUATION. - Increasingly important is the cost of keeping a vehicle in service, mile after mile, month after month. Initial purchase price is no longer the only or best indicator of product value. The process of recognizing and consid, erin§ important factors is known as Life Cycle Cost/Performance Evaluation. These factors include initial cost, plus fuel economy, parts replacement, resale value, police or taxi capability, human environ- mental factors, as well as mechanical evaluations such as potential downtime and serviceability of both car and equipment. This process of Life Cycle Cost/ Performance Evaluation is now used by law eqforcement agencies in many parts of the country. When reviewing your needs in terms of vehicles available, it is sOggested that you conduct a Life Cycle Cost/Performance Evaluation on the Chevrolet vehicles and other units you're considering. We'd like to suggest that you also might want to contact Public Safety departments and taxi operators using Chevrolet vehicl&s to compare your findings. Malibu Classic GENEROUS ROOM. SENSIBLE MID-SIZE. EASY TURNING AND MANEUVERABILITY IN CITY TRAFFIC. 4-DOOR SEDAN 4-DOOR SEDAN 1GW69 1GW69 The popularity of the Malibu Classic in police work proves its mid-size and generous overall interior room and trunk capacity make it an ideal vehicle for urban police and taxi duty. For 1982, Malibu Classic standard featu. Tes include Computer Command Control, Easy-Roll tires, side-lift frame jack, improved windshield washer system and power steering. Also standard is a 3.8 Liter (229 Cu. In.) V6 (not available in Calif.). Available only to law enforcement agencies for law enforcement pursuit purposes is a 5.0 Liter (305 Cu. In.) 4-BbL V8. Malibu Classic quality features include a strong perimeter frame, Full Coil spring suspension at all four wheels, extensive corrosion-resistant treatments and a Delco Freedom II maintenance-free battery. Among the option'al equipment available is agage package with trip odometer available except with Special Police Speedome. ter. STANDARD FEATURES · 108.1" wheelbase with tight turning circle .1 feet curb-to-curb). ~dow frame on doors, with large fixed ,dow in rear doors. Behind the rear windows are swing-out vents. · High Energy Ignition. * CooJant recovery system. · Cushioned body mounting system· · Single-loo.p seat and shoulder belt system. . Speedometer face includes metric numerals. · Inside hood release. · Headlight dimmer switch on turn signal lever. This catalog should not be used for. ordering purposes. Rather it is intended as a source of advance information for planning future vehicle fleet needs. For further details, contact your local Chevrolet dealer or the Chevrolet Zone Office covering your area. Impala police vehicle equipment AVAILABLE ON IMPALA SEDAN 1BL69 Police Car SEO 9Cl includes the following which are different from regular production Impala: · Increased gage of certain frame members. · Engine valve train durability features. · Greater capacity oil filter (1 quart capacity --V8 only) (unavailable with 7P8 engine oil cooler). · Firm feel steering gear and linkage. · $..75" ring gear rear axle. · Temperature-controlled fan on models without air conditioning. · Semi-metallic front brake pads. · 11" x 2" 23-1b. rear brake drums. · Large-bolt circle 15" x 7" wheels. · Special police pursuit suspension includes front and rear stabilizer bars, special springs and shocks (included only when police or QHK tires are ordered). - Larger radiator (same as RPO VOS). · Fuel vapor return system on · Special balanced drive shaft. · Heavy-duty battery equivalent to 80-amp-hr. · Special calibrated transmission and torque converter with '(POWERTRAIN .COMBINATIONS ESTED ON PAGE 11) IMPALA DIMENSIONS (In Inches) ~ 4--Door Sedan Exterior Wheelbase 1.16.0 Length (overall) 212.1 Wheel Tread Front 61.8 Rear 60.8 Width (overall) 75.3 Height (loaded) 56.4 Interior Front Compartment Head Room 38.6 Leg Room. 42.2 Shoulder Room 60.5 Hip Room 55.0 Rear'Compartment Head Room 38.2 Leg Room 39.! Shoulder Room 60.5 Hip Room 55.3 Luggage Capacity Usable (cu. ft.) 20.9 THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS MUST BE ORDERED WITH 9C1 EQUIPMENT: · RPO LC3 or LM1 Engine Assembly (see Powertrain Combinations for details). · SEO 7K3 70-amp Delcotron generator (50-amp at 700 RPM idle) (included when air conditioning C60 and C49 rear window defogger are ordered together) or SEO 7K4 80-amp Delcotron generator (58-amp at 700 RPM idle). · SEO 7Z9 Special Police Speedometer with 2-MPH increments, !20 MPH maximum, or SA! production speedometer (for undercover work). · SEO 5JN or 5JS Police Service T~res. SEO 9A3 speedometer gear change must be ordered. In addition, SEO SAA available for police tire deletion. · SEO 6C1. Heavy Service Front Bench or SEO 6F3 50/50 Seat or SEO 6B9 Heavy Service Bucket seats. MPALA POLICE VEHICLE SEAT TRIMS Order Trim Number SEO 6C1 SEO 6B9 SEO 6F3 Upholstery Type Color Bench H.D. 50/50 Seat H.D. Buckets H.D. Regular Production Trims Any Reg. Any Available Not Not (cloth or vinyl) Prod. Color Trim No. Available Availa~' Dark Blue GDD! GDD2 GDD3 SEO 6R6--H.D. Vinyl Doeskin GCCl GCC2 GCC3 Dark Blue PDD1 PDD2 PDD3 SEO 6R7--H.D. Cloth Doeskin PCCl PCC2 PCC_,3 S. pedfications Malibu Classic police vehicle equipment AVAILABLE ON MALIBU CLASSIC SEDAN 1GW69 SEO 9Cl includes the following which' are different from regular production Malibu Classic: · Reinforced frame. · Engine valve train durability features. · · Greater'capacity oil filter g-quart capacity --V8 only) (unavailable with 7P8 engine oil cooler). · Front and rear semi-metallic brake linings. · Vented, higher'gage wheels 14" x 6" 5-bolt. · Specific body mounts. · Special police suspension includes front and rear stabilizer bars, special springs and shocks, special front suspension jounce bumpers (only when pursuit tires are ordered). · Higher cooling capacity radiator (same as RPO VO8). · Temperature-controlled fan on models w'i~hout air conditioning. · Fuel vapor return system on V8. · Special balanced drive shaft. · Specific brake master cylinder and booster. · Heavy-duty battery equivalent to 80-amp-hr. · Special calibrated transmission and torque converter with VS. · Bright moldings deleted from side window openings, deck]id, rocker panels and wheel openings. (POWERTRAIN COMBINATIONS LISTED ON PAGE 11 ) MALIBU CLASSIC DIMENSIONS (In Inches) 4-Door Sedan Exterior Wheelbase 108.1 Length (overall) 192.7 Wheel Tread Front 58.5 Rear 57.8 Width (overall) 72.3 Height (loaded) 55.7 Interior Front Compartment Head Room 38.5 Leg Room - 42.8 Shoulder Room 56.7 Hip Room 52.2 Rear Compartment Head Room 37.6 Leg Room 38.0 Shoulder Room 57. ! Hip Room 55.6 Luggage Capacity Usable (cu. ft.) 16.6 THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS MUST BE ORDERED WITH 9C1 EQUIPMEN~ · RPO LC3, or LG4 engine assembly (see Powertrain Combinations for details). · SRO 7K3 70-amp Delcotron generator (50- amp at 700 RPM idle), or SRO 7K4 80-amp Delcotron generator (58-amp at 700 RPM idle). · SEO 77.2 SpeCial Police Speedometer with 2-MPH incre, ments, 120-MPH maximum. Includes voltmeter, water temperature gage, oil pressure gage and clock. Or SEO 7Z9 special police speedometer (includes dock) with 2-MPH increments, 120-MPH maximum, or 8Al production speedometer (for undercover work). · SEO 5KV or 5KW Police Service 'fires. SEO 9A3 speedometer gear Change must be ordered. Jn addition, SEO SAA available for police tire deletion. · · SEO 6C1 Heavy Service Front Bench without armrest or SEO 6B8 55/45 Seat or 6B9 Heavy Service Bucket Seats. MALIBU CLASSIC POLICE VEHICLE SEAT TRIMS · Order Trim Number SEO 6Cl SEO 6B9 SEO 6B8 Upholstery Type Color H.D. H.D. 55/45 Seat Bench Seat Buckets H.D. Dark Blue NDD1 Not Not SEO 6S5--Std. Vinyl Doeskin NCC1 Available Available Dark Blue TDD1 Not Not O 6S6--Std. Cloth Doeskin TCC1 Available Available Dark Blue GDD1 GDD2 GDD3 SEO 6R6--H.D. Vinyl Doeskin GCC1 GCC2 GCC3 Dark Blue PDD1 PDD2 PDD3 SEO 6R7--H.D. Cloth Doeskin PCCl PCC2 PCC3 Integra Extern~ " Cooler Roomy and Practical for Police and Emergency Needs The LTD Crown Victoria S 4-Door Sedan offers fleet buyers full-size and comfort plus many basic quality features--but at a lower price. Standard features such as halogen headlamps, 5.0 liter CFI (302 CID) V-8 engine, automatic overdrive transmission, power steering and power front disc/rear drum brakes all add up to make the LTD Crown Victoria S a very attractive buy. LTD Crown Victoria S 4-Door Sedan with either the 5.0 liter CFI (302 CID) or 5.8 liter HO VV (351 CID) V-8 engines and includes · Automatic Overdrive Transmission with Integral First Gear Lock-Out (PRN(~) D2) · External Auxiliary Transmission Oil · Police Level Heavy-Duty Cooling Package, including Viscous Fan, Coolant Recovery System and High-Capacity Water Pump · Heavy-Duty Frame · Police Maximum Handling Package-- includes: --Extra-heavy-duty, high-rate front and rear springs --Heavy-duty upsized front and rear shock absorbers --Heavy-dut~ front and rear police stabilizer bars --Steel upper control arm bushings and upper ball joints and special lower control arm bushings · Power Steering with Forward Mounted Oil Cooler · Heavy-Duty Power Front Disc/Rear DrUm Brakes (semi-metallic front disc pads, flared and grooved 11 inch rear drums for efficient cooling with organic linings) · Automatic Parking Brake Release .. · 60-Amp Alternator (IO0-AMP with 5.8L HO engine) · Heavy-Duty Flight Bench Front Seat · Calibrated Speedometer (0-140 MPH ir, 2 MPH increments; 0-220 KM/Hr in 5 KM increments) · 71-Amp/Hour (CCA 475 amps) Heavy-Duty Battery (maintenance-free) · Battery Heat Shield · Remote-Control Electric Decklid Release in Glove Box · AM Radio · Single-Key Locking System · Dual Beam Map Light · Heavy-Duty 15 x 6.5" SafetyRim Wheels · P225/70R15 BSW Police Special Fabric Radial Tires with Conventional Spare Tire · Bright Hubcaps Standard Features In additiOn to those items specified for the Police Packages, the 1983 LTD Crown Victoria S has many features that contribute to comfort 'and/or convenience during the time spent on the road. Solid R~)my Body .The body-on-frame'construction provides a solid platform for mounting chassis components that combine to deliver a Quiet ride. The LTD Crown Victoria S can provide Responsive Suspension A computer-tuned suspension system is a major reason for the smooth ride of a Crown Victoria S. Up front is a long- and short-arm design with Iow friction ball joints. At the rear ~s a compact 4-bar link design with rear shocks mounted forward of the rear axle for an efficient suspension. Sound Insulation Sound insulation surrounds the LTD Crown Victoria $ passenger compartment-- setting up effective barriers against road and traffic noise that can affect working efficiency on the lob. Advanced Front Seat Design The standard front seat for 1983 is a flight bench design with a fold-down center armrest. The heavy-duty front seat design helps assure working comfort the whole shift. Molded- foam padding for comfort combines with a steel 'Flex-O-Lator" spring mat for firm support--especially under the thighs. The LTD Crown Victoria S driver-center provides an instrument cluster that reads at a glance...expansive glass areas...and five prime operating controls at fingerlir' convenience on twin column-mounted control stalks. DuraSpark Ignition System Ford's DuraSpark Solid State Ignition System provides a high-voltage spark, eliminates the conventional points and condenser and extends sparkplug life. The electronic voltage regulator has no moving Darts. Additional Standard Features Include... · Anti-Theft Door Lock Buttons. · Color-Keyed Cut. Pile Carpeting · Deep-Well Trunk (22.4 cu. ft.) with Iow height Color. Keyed ?-Spoke Soft-Rim g Wheel · Dual Note Horn · Front Bumper Guards · Glove Box, Ashtray and Trunk Lights · Horizontal Front Door Lock Plungers in Arm Rests · Illuminated Bin-Type Locking Glove Box · inside Hood Release · LH Remote-Control Mirror · Power Ventilation System · Quad Rectangular Halogen Headlamps. with Wraparound Parking Lamps · Seat Belts with comfort Regulator Feature · Steering Column Multi-Function Levers with Controls for Turn Signals, Horn, Headlight Dimmer and Windshield Wiper/ Washer · "Tiltaway" Door Hinges (easy entry and exit]' - Wheellip and Rocker Panel Moldings 5.8L HO Engine Package The 5.8L High Output Package includes a dual exhaust system, revised camshaft for improved high speed performance, engine oil cooler, spark knock sensor, heavy-duty water pump, premium bearings, special valves and valve springs for added durability. Powertrain Availability Trans- Axle Ratio Engine mission 49-state ..... California High Altitude 5.0L CFI A4 3.08 3.08 3.42 5.8L VV A4 2.73 2.73 2.73 HO The following are deleted from the Ford LTD Crown Victoria Standard Equipment when the Police Package is ordereid: · AM/FM Stereo Radio (replaced by AM) · Bright Window Frames · Decklid Applique · Electric Clock · Front Door Scuff Plates · Hood, Bodyside and Decklid Stripes · Hood Ornament and Bright Rear Molding · Luxury Sound Insulation · Underhood Insulation · Vinyl Insert B0dyside Moldings · Vinyl Roof and Wrapover Molding · Wide Door Lower Moldings Optional Equipment In addition to the many standard features provided on 1983 Ford LTD Crown Victoria S police vehicles, there are a/so many options available to suit the individual requirements of law-enforcement agencies. Regular Production Options (RPO) · Air Conditioner, (Se~ectAire with Automatic or Manual Temperature Control) · Axle, Traction-Lok · Bodyside Protection, Lower · Bumper Guards, Rear · Bumper Rub Strips (front and rear} · Clock, Electronic Digital (Time/Date/ Elapsed Time] · Clock, Ouartz Electric (Sweephand} · Cornering Lamps, Front · Defroster, Electric Rear Window ine, 5.8L VV Tinted (Complete) · Illuminated Entry System · Interval Windshield Wipers · Light Group: includes"headlamps-on" warning buzzer, engine compartment -light, front courtesy lights, rear-door courtesy light switches (4-doors only) · Mirror, RH Remote-Control · Moldings, Vinyl Insert Bodyside · Protection Group: includes bright door- edge guards, front & rear color-keyed carpet mats, license plate frame(s) · Radio, AM with Dual Rear Speakers · Radio, AM/FM Monaural · Radio, AM/FM Monaural with Dual Rear Speakers · Radio, AM/FM Stereo (includes dual front and rear speakers) · Radio Credit Option · Seat. Six-Way Power · SeatTrim, Ali-Vinyl · Seats. Split Bench with Dual Recliners (not heavy-duty) · Speed Control, Fingertip · Steering Wheel, Tilt · Tripminder® Computer: Provides Time of Day, Elapsed Time, Date, Elapsed Trip Distance, Trip Average Speed, Instantaneous Distance/Gallon, Trip Average Distance/Gallon, Fuel Used, English/Metric Conversion (miles/ kilometers and gallons/liters} · Vent Windows, Pivoting Front · Windows, Power Side (includes driver- only control switch on 4-door models) Limited Production Options (LPO) · Alternator, lO0-Amp (standard with 5.8L HO engine) · Floor Mats, Color-Keyed Front Carpeted · Floor Mats, Heavy-Duty Black Rubber (replace standard carpeting) · Glass, Tinted (windshield only) · Heater, Engine Block Immersion · Locks, Power Door · Organic Brake Linings, Front Disc · Wheel Covers, Full (15") · Windshield Wipers, Interval Domestic Special Orders (DSO) Ford's Special Order Department has available a wide assortment of pre- assembled equipment packages to fit specialized fleet needs. Specially engineered individual equipment packages are also developed for small and large fleets. All vehicles are delivered from the factory with all modifications and selected equipment installed, ready for dealer prep and immediate use. · Battery. 80 Amp · Gauges; Oil Pressure, Water Temperature, Voltmeter (mounted in radio opening or, with Gauge Package, on left side of instrument panel crash pad] · Lamp, Directional Map- Header-Mounted · Seats, Bucket (Not Heavy-Duty) · Seat, Split Bench (Heavy-Duty] · Spotlights (RH and LH) Pillar-Mounted · Radio Noise Suppression' · Radio Wiring Conduit · Roof Reinforcement Dealer-Installed Accessories In addition to factory-installed opt/ons available to police fleets, your Ford Dealer has many additional accessories available for local installation. For instance: · Compass · Fire Extinguishers ~/g 0 · Wheel Splash Guards . t utU a Police Package The 1983 Fairmont Futura Police Packege is a'vailable on 4-~oor sedans with either the 2.$L (140 CID) OHO four-~ylinder or the 3.3 liter (200 CID) inqine six-~ylinder engine and includes the following equipment: · Automatic Transmission with external Auxiliary Oil Cooler and First Gear Lockout · Power Brakes--(front disc with semi- metallic anti-fade linings; 10" rear drum with organic linings) · Heavy-Duty Unitized Body Structure (includes extra reinforcements for rough- road durability) · Heavy-Duty ?2 Crossmember · Power Decklid Release in Glove Box · Power Steering with Oil Cooler · Police Heavy-Duty Suspension Package-- includes unique front and rear stabilizer bars, unique front and rear springs, front struts, rear shocks and jounce bumpers and front spindles · Maximum Cooling Package--includes extra-fin density radiator and shrouded heavy-duty viscous fan (2.3L engine uses electrodrive fan) · Coolant Recovery System · Parking Brake Warning Light · 60 Ampere Alternator · 77-Amp/Hour (CCA 455 amps) Battery with heat shield · Heavy-Du~ Front Bench Seat · Ali-Vinyl Seat Trim · Calibrated Speedometer--U.S./Canadian increments to 120 MPH/180 Km/Hr--2 MPH/5Km/Hr increments · Adjustable Map Light, Header Mounted · Cigarette Lighter · Heavy-Duty 14 x 5.5".Wheels · P205/70R14 BSW Police Fabric Radial Tires with Conventional Spare Tire Power Choices The standard 2.3L (140 CID) OHC I-4 features an overhead cam with a thin wall, light-weight cast iron block. The optional 3.3 liter (200 CID) I-6 engine is a proven powerhouse. Both feature rugged construction. POWERTRAIN AVAILABILITY Trans- Axle Ratio Engine mission 49-State California High Altitude 2.3L A3 3.08 (a) 3.08 (4 NA 3.3L A3 2.73 (b) 2.73 (b} 2.73 (b) (a) ODtional 3,45 ratio with or without 'rraction-Lok (b) Available with Traction-Lok Standard Features Unitized Body Fairmont Future's unitized body allows for inside roominess with a trimly proportioned exterior. Heavy-Duty Seating Comfort The heavy-duty front bench seat in the Fairmont Future's Police Package is designed to p{ovide all-day working comfort. The standard all-vinyl seat trim cleans easily. Instruments and Controls Instrumentation and driver controls are in convenient reach. Two-lever steering column controls provide five basic functions: (1} Windshield wiper and washer; (2} horn, turn signals, and headlight dimmer with "Flash-To-Pass" feature. A Special Optional Gauge Package is available in two or three gauge configurations (oil pressure, water temperature and/or voltmeter) Rack & Pinion Steering Here:s a direct, Iow-tri~-tion steering system which provides maximum control with minimum effort. Power steering adds convenience during normal patrol activities. Positive Handling Front Suspension Fairmont Future's computer-designed front suspension incorporates a modified version of the well-known MacPherson strut front suspension. The heavy-duty system used in the Police Package is reinforced to pass maximum duty reQuirements--as is the 4-Bar Link Rear Suspension, which Fairmont Futura shares in design principle with many full-size Fords. Front Disc Brakes Power front disc/rear drum brakes provide positive braking. The Police Package incluZ~es heavy-duty semi-metallic front linings for fade resistance and 10" rear drum brakes with organic lining for extended durability. Corrosion Protection To help keep your Fairmont Futura Police Units looking new longer, Ford uses pre- coated (galvanized) steels, vinyl sealers and alumunized wax in critical areas--plus a tough enamel finish-paint coat. Additional and valuable protection includes Ford's 3-year Limited Corrosion Perforation Warranty. Exhaust system components and perforations caused by accidents are not covered. Consult your Ford dealer for full details. ADDITIONAL STANDARD FEATURES · AM Radio with Dual Front Speakers {may be deleted for credit} · Anodized Aluminum Bumpers with Front Bumper Guards · Bright Trim: Futura Grille, Headlamps, Parking Lights, Rear Window, Drip Moldings · Carpeting, Color-Keyed Cut Pile · Deep-Well Luggage Compartment Area · Deluxe Color-Keyed Seat Belts with Comfort Regulators · Dual Rectangular Halogen Headlamps · DuraSpark Electronic Ignition System · Foot-Operated Parking Brake with Warning Light · Ford Motor Company's LifeGuard Design Safety Features · Full Wheel Covers · Gas Cap Tether · Glove Box Lock · Inside Hood Release · Inside Day/Night Windshield-Mounted Mirror · Dual Sail-Mounted Remote Control Rear View Mirrors · Ram-Air Forced Ventilation · Rear-Seat Ashtray · Two-Speed Electric Windshield Wipers with Fluidic Washer System · Visor Vanity Mirror · Voltage Regulator, Transistorized Optional Equipment There are many options available to fit specialized requirements and persona/preferences. REGULAR PRODUCTION OPTIONS [RPO) · Air Conditioner (SelectAire Manual Temperature Controls) · Axle, Traction-Lok · Bodyside Protection, Lower · Bumper Guards, Rear · Bumper Rub Strips, Front & Rear (require rear bumper guards) · Cloth and Vinyl Trim · Defroster, Electric Rear Window · Engine. 3.3L · Extended Range Fuel Tank (20 gallons} · Glass, Tinted (complete} · Light Group: luggage compartment light, ashtray and glove box lights, engine compartment light, passenger and rear door courtesy light switches · Locks, Power Door · Radio, AM/FM Monaural (includes dual front speakers) · Radio, AM/FM Stereo (includes dual speakers front and rear) · Radio, AM/FM Stereo with 8-Track Player (includes dual speakers front and rear) · Radio, AM/FM Stereo with Cassette Player (includes dual speakers front and rear) · Radio Credit Option · Rocker Panel Moldings · Speed Control, Fingertip · Steering Wheel, Tilt · Windows, Power Side LIMITED PRODUCTION OPTIONS (LPO} · Automatic Transmission with First Gear Lock-Out Delete · Fleet Delete Option: Deletes Deluxe Bodyside Moldings, Visor Vanity Mirror, Window Frame Moldings, Full Wheel Covers, Deluxe Sound Package, Passenger-Side Courtesy Light Switch, 4-Door Deletes Accent Paint Stripes and Dual Remote Control Mirror · Floor Mats, Color-Keyed Front · Floor Mats, Heavy-Duty Black Rubber (replace standard carpeting) · Glass, Tinted Windshield · Heater, Engine Block · Light, Luggage Compartment (included in Light Group) · Seats, Bucket (Not Heavy-Duty) Domestic Special Orders (DSO) Ford's Special Order Department has available a wide assortment of preassembled equipment packages to fit specialized fleet needs. Specially engineered individual equipment packages are also developed for small and large fleets. All vehicles are delivered from the factory witll all modifications and selected equipment installed, ready for dealer prep and immediate use. · Gauges; Oil Pressure, Water Temperature, Voltmeter (mounted in radio opening or, with Gauge Package, on left side of instrument panel crash pad) · Radio Noise Suppression · Radio Wiring Conduit · Roof Reinforcement · Seat, Split Bench (Not Heavy-Duty) · Single Key Locking System · Spotlights (RH and LH), Pillar-Mounted Dealer Installed Accessories In addition to factory-installed options, your Ford Dealer has available a number of dealership-installed accessories. These include: · Compass ~,/,~/t,,_ · Fire Extinguishers · Wheel Splash Guards CITY of MOUND MEMO 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 16, 1982 TO: Jon Elam FROM: Rock Lindlan RE: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT CHANGES You asked me to put in writing the small changes in the downtown area that could be undertaken with little cost to the city. It is my belief that these changes and/or corrections, no matter how small, will reflect the cohcer~'that the City has for its business district and will demonstrate its willingness to continue to improve this area. The ½ time man for the CBD bears this out. 1o Area East of Big "A" Auto Parts and South of Ms. Print, House of Moy and the Post Office. A 24 foot "travel lane" established across the future parking lot by simply extending Auditor's Road in a straight line to intercept Belmont at the rear of the Post Office. * low cost = $3,000? * will provide access to and the development of public parking on the South over' its entire length. * makes future street possible. * removes a very faded municipal p;rking lot sign at the corner of Auditor's and Marion. 2. Parking lot East of Minnesota Federal. * eliminate the East entrance (and now the only proper lot entrance) from its position next.to Belmont. Relocate this entrance in the middle on either side of the House of Moy predestrian crossing. Presently the West-bound traffic "sagging off" to enter this East lot gets confused with South-bound Belmont traffic waiting to enter or cross #15. * relocate the south parking curbs on this lot by moving them 3 feet North. This allows for a "proper" sidewalk to the pedestrian crossing of, approximately 6 feet in width. Two feet used to allow for front bumper overhang. Angular parking in this lot needs only 13-14 feet of depth. * ask the County ~o remove the highway signs from the middle of this already designated sidewalk area. (Someday the County sign depart- ment will use some discretion in their placing of signs.!) Page 2 Request the Post Office Department to relocate their auto mailbox 'facility into a space on the public lot West of the present bui~iding (with proper directional signs, of course.) Seek a 2 foot easement from the House of Moy owners (or, as necessary) in order to widen the public sidewalk in front of their entire building. Perhaps the most used sidewalk in the City from the standpoint of Post Office predestrian traffic. In other words, begin the negotiations by notifying them now of the City's wish to correct this sidewalk. o Officially name all the.parking lots in the CBD. East Lot, Main Lgt North Lot, West Lot, South Lot, Borg Lot, using "direction name" rather than proprietor or business for these public lots would be obvious. 6. Main Lot (notice the ease of identification). * discontinue parking in the most Westerly space, second row South of baker~-~ A-'full size car partially blocks the entrance from Commerce Blvd. * cut the pine tree and develope an obvious approach to the new crosswalk. Present approach is "across" the ingress lane, which is not safe. o Ask the school authorities.- to make their corner lot a double-wide lot, by extending this lot westwa'rd. Downtown businesses now locating in pods are experiencing difficulty for.their clients. Its present 1-hour use pattern can be regulated by an appropriate sign at the entrance. The inadequacy of and .improper use of this lot starts reflecting itself in other public parking nearby (e.g. Shepherd's Laundry, the Clinic and the Tom Thumb). 8. Crosswalks - CBD * establish a new design for all crosswalks downtown using a prominent white-painted "safety zone" for pedestrians to step into when they desire a crossl.ng. Said zone 2½ feet into the street from the curb. Between the safety zones, the use of four 16 "wide bright orange stripes across the street. * making a very obvious pedestrian area, ussing a foot wide white band in the proper lane showing cars where to stop would be effective. * light,s should be used at certain crossings. · t ! "L' .I EDEN LAND SALES, INC. 7gz~-C/lite4~t--R~ . Eden Prairie, Minn. 55343 · Tel. 612/94t-5-300 14500 Valley View Rd. 55344 937-8300 September 13, 1982 Mr. John Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear John: Based upon the current economic conditions, our company has been unable and unwilling to complete Langdon's Landing in accordance with the plat approved last year bY the City of Mound (copy attached). We would appreciate additional time to give us the opportunity to reconsider the project and are, therefore, requesting a one year extension of the approved plat. If there are any questions, please call me at 937-8300. Sincerely, JKL/po Enclosure guly 7, 1~8'1 Councilmember Polston moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 81-216 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF LOT 50, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION 168 WITH THE PARK LAND DEDICATION FEE OF $5,050 AND INCORPORATING THE. ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS WHEREAS, by Resolution 81-196 adopted June 9, 1981, the Council provided for a pbblic hearing to be held on July 7, 1981 regarding the subdivision'of land on Lot 50, Auditor's Subdivision 168. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the subdivision be approved for Lot 50, Auditor's Subdivi- sion with the following stipulations: 1. That a 15 foot easement should be provided for the storm sewer. The existing storm sewer is only 5 feet f~om the property line. It should be changed to 10 feet to avoid damag~ to.~eighboring property. 2. An erosion control plan should be submitted to the City. 3. The sewer services to Lots 2 and 8 should be to the sewer main, not the manhole. 4. The street section should be the standard Mound street, 28 feet back to back of. curb, S-5-12 curb and gutter with con- crete driveway aprons, 3½ inch bituminous base and 1½ inch bituminous surfacing. 5. A park dedication fee of $5,050 be given. 6. A title opihion be furnished by the City Attorney. 7. An escrow fund be established to cover engineering, legal and administrative expenses. 8. A preliminary plan be placed with this resolution showing the above. 9. Street lighting to be provided as per NSP Advisory Standards. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof; Charon, Polst6n, Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan, the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest.'~City Clerk CMC WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION GRANTING EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION #8]-216 Resolution #81-216 was approved on July 7, 1982, and this resolution approve the subdivision of Lot 50, Auditor's Subdivision #168 with the Park land dedication fee of $5,050 and incorporating the engineer's recommendations, and the, Eden Land Sales, Co. has requested an extension of this resolution for 1 year because of current economic conditions. WATER PATROL REPORT - 1982 Prepared for the Lake Minnetonka Task Force. An Historical Perspective: The Hennepin County Sheriff's Water-Patrol has as it's origin a loosely organized citizen's safety patrol that was formed in the mid 1950's in response to a growing concern among lake users for the safety of the boating public on Lake Minnetonka. This original volunteer group was soon recognized for it's contributions to public service and boating safety. Hennepin County offered to provide support and the patrol's members were subsequently deputized by the 'county sheriff. The name of their organization became the Hennepin County Water Patrol.. The entire staff was comprised of volunteers who conducted patrol activities from their own private boats. In 1959 the state legislature passed the Boat and Water Safety Act requiring all county sheriff's to maintain a program of patrol and posting of public waters. The sheriff's were also given certain duties to report to the state any accidental drowning or boat accidents that occur within their jurisdiction as well as other administrative and patrol responsibilities. In response to this legislative mandate the Hennepin County Sheriff reorganized and expanded the water patrol to include all of Hennepin County. He added full-time deputy personnel ~and a county-owned headquarters building from which they would operate. During the 1960's thru the mid-1970's the water patrol continued to expand to meet the increasing demand for patrol services. The advent if the snowmobile in the early 1970's changed the nature of winter recreational activities on the-lakes and required the addition of an active winter law enforcement program to the water patrol's summer activities. In 1975 there were five full-time deputy personnel assigned to the water patrol along with thirty-five volunteer special deputies. Hours worked by deputy personnel totaled over 29,000. The patrol owned seven boats Panging in size from a 28' twin-inboard cruiser to a 16' aluminum outboard powered fishing boat. Winter patrol was accomplished using seven county owned snowmobiles. In 1976 the water patrol fell victim to a disasterous budget cut from which it has never fully recovered. The budget cuts continued into 1977 and resulted in a loss of over half of the volunteer special deputies and a reduction in full-time deputy strength from five positions to just one-half of one position. Hours worked in 1977 fell to just under 8,000. Total reported public contacts fell from 4,524 in 1975 to 1,247 in 1977. (See Appendix A) The public outcry that resulted from this drastic reduction in services led to substantial increases in funding from 1978 through 1980. However these increases fell far short of restoring funding to the 1975 levels. After adjustment for inflation, 1981 expenditures were only 59% of the expenditure level of 1975. (See Appendix A) Increases in services provided by the water patrol also lagged behind the partial restoration of funding. This was primarily due to the one to tw6~ year lead time necessary to recruit and retrain replacements for the vol onteer special deputies crisis. who resigned during the budget The Water Patrol Today: Currently the water patrol operates with 37 volunteer special deput~ies who are supervised by a full-time staff of one sheriff's sergeant and two deputies. Patrol equipment consists of five patrol boats, seven sn~owmobiles and two trucks. Patrol coverage is allocated on the basis of demand for service. Approximately 80% of the water patrol's activity is conducted on Lake Minnetonka and the majority of patrol activity occurs as a response to peak activity levels on weekends and weekday evenings. 24 hour patrol coverage is not provided. Due to full-time staff shortages the water patrol is in service for only 13 - 15 hrs. per day. During these hours the water patrol is frequently on standby while full-time em~Ioyees work on administrative and~supervisory tasks at the office. SpeCial~deputies are only rarely available for weekday daytime patrol work due to conflicts with their regular employment. During the hours that the water patrol is not staffed, emergencies are handled by local police departments and passers-by who happen to arrive at the scene and assist the injured until on-call water patrol personnel can arrive. The water patrol provides patrol services throughout the entire year. During the fall freeze-up and the spring thaw, water patrol deputies are busy monitoring rapidly changing ice conditions and posting hazardous locations with thin ice signs. It is during these slower times of the year that many program maintenance functions are performed. Examples of these are recruitment and training of special deputies, preparing equipment for the upcomming boating or snowmobiling season, conducting public education classes, and manning displays at the sport show and various boat shows. Patrol Considerations - Lake Minnetonka: The character of Lake Minnetonka presents many unique management problems for law enforcement. Problems arrise from it's unique geography and from it's high traffic density. Lake Minnetonka is actually a collection of 14 bodies of water interconnected by channels. These 14 bodies of water have a combined surface area of 14,200 acres and together account for approximately 140 miles of shoreline. Due to the many separate areas of the lake the water patrol can monitor only a small portion of the lake surface at any one time. During periods of low activity when only one boat is on patrol or on standby, it is likely that a response to an emergency call would require a travel distance of over 6 miles. In the worst case, a response from Gray's Bay to Halstead Bay, the patrol boat would have to travel in excess of 12 miles to reach it's destination. Even under favorable conditions this would require in excess of 15 minutes. Geography also plays a part in causing traffic congestion and increasing accident rates. The "circle route" that connects the eating and drinking establishments on Cook's Bay, Spring Park Bay, West Arm Bay, Crystal Bay, and Excelsior Bay accounts for the majority of accidents that occur on the lake. This is caused by the high traffic volume flowing between these areas and the disproportionately high 'concentration of inebriated boat operators that follow these rouges. Boats ~ are often stacked up 5 - 10 deep waiting to pass through channels on this route. The most important management problem related to lake geography is the extent of public access to the lake. Public access is primarily' through two means. One is to trailer a boat to one of the many public, private, or commercial launch sites. The other is to maintain a permanent seasonal mooring on the lake at either a private residence or at a commercial or municipal mooring site. Current figures indicate that there are an actual 8,477 permanent seasonal moorings on Lake Minnetonka and an estimated 957 parking space~ available at the various public, private, and "unofficial" h:~;t launching sites. Thus the maximum potential peak load is an incredible 9,434 boats. Although it is unlikely that boat traffic would ever reach this figure, levels of approximately 2~000 are not uncommon and estimates of over 4,000 have been made for-busy holidays 'like the 4th of july. During times of peak usage water patrol personnel find it~. difficult utilizing existing resources to provide all of the require'd ~ervices. Due to this difficulty services have been prioritized. Public emergencies are handled first followed by complaints, aids and assists, and then routine enforcement. Due to the volume of higher priority calls during times of peak activity routine law enforcement must by put aside precisely when it's deterrent effect could be used to the greatest advantage. Law Enforcement for the Future: During the past seven years while water patrol funding has fallen, the lake use studies commissioned by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District show that lake usage as almost doubled. Demand for water patrol services has never been greater than it is now. And indications are that lake usage will increase as the number of watercraft registered in Minnesota continues to grow. In 1981 there were 593,400 boats registered in Minnesota~ up 2.19% from 1980. Of this total, 22.5% or 155,658 were registered to Hennepin County residents. Experience with the increase in lake usage that has occurred in the last five years allows Os to make the flollowing predictions with reasonable certianty: 1) Accident rates will increase as boat density increases. Those accidents that are caused by a wanton disregard for safe boating practices can be reduced by increased water patrol enforcement activity, provided that additional resources are made available. However, the majority of the increases in accidents will involve a one-time lapse in attention or a failure by the boat operator to keep track of' all the surrounding traffic or a failure by the boat operator to predict the direction of travel that another boat -will take. The accidents that results from these circumstances will occur regardless of water patrol presence and cannot be prevented without decreasing traffic density. 2) As density increases the quality of the recreational experience of boating on Lake Minnetonka will diminish. Use of the lake for ~- activities such as canoei~ng, fishing, or operating small watercraft ,-2 I?,R will decrease due the incompatibility of these activities with heavy usage b~ high-speed power boats. This effect .is already being noticed during periods of peak activity. 5) Plans to establish a regional park on Big Island will require additional water patrol services. 4) · Alcohol abuse by boaters will grow in significance as traffic density increases and more lakeside restauraunts serving liquors are opened for business. Enforcement of watercraft DWI laws will remain diffucult unless legislation is passed requiring operators of boats to submit to blood alcohol tests as they are now required to do when operating a motor vehicle. 5) Demand for police services will continue to increase. Without a subskantial increase in budget and manpower, the water patrol will be 'unable to provide all requested services. appendix A Hennepin County Sheriff's Department Water Patrol Budget/Activity History 1975 - 1982 Actual State *Actual *State Hours Year Expense Funding Expense Funding Worked Public Contacts 1982 109~410 1981 165,752 124,660 [ 165,752 ] [ 124,660 ] 15,157 2699 ~8~1 1980 177,676 52,645 [ 199, .530 ] [ 36,660 ] 15,946 o o 1979 167,956 52,645 [ 207,711 ] [ 40~572 ] 12,947 2465 1978 146,487 52,645 [ 197,962 ] [ 44,116 ] 9,742 2117 1977 76,101 52,645 [ 109,790 ] [ 47,097 ] 7,816 1247 1976 98.,705 52,645 [ 149,590 ] [ 49,408 ] 14~, 124 2446 1975 177,695 52,645 [ 27~,994 ] [ 51~458 ] 29,265 4524 Actual Expenses is the TOTAL expenditures of the water patrol program including state funding. *Note: Figures enclosed in brackets [ ] were adju_~ed utilizing the Consumer Price Index for the Minneapolis/St. Paul area to reflect constant 1981 dollars in order to factor out the effects of inflation. 4175-- ' C['I'Y of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 16, 1982 Ms. Pat Osmonson City Administrator City of Spring Park Box 452 Spring Park, Minnesota 55384 Dear Pat', As the Mound.City Council went through the Budget Plan for 1983 several . questions came up that relate to the continued future use of Mound employees by the City o[.Spring Park. The first pOsition is the Building Inspector. In 1983 the base support including secretarial, insurance, etc., for that position will be $57,445. Spring Park uses. the Building Inspector extensively 'for a variety of information.and planning activities. It is'felt that since a service like this is.always available and on-call and requires..a minimum base of support, that Spring Park should'-contribute to this base 'support. For 1983 that cost to Spring Park is projected at:$3,OO0, not counting the revenue generated from building inspection fees which are shared under a previously agreed upon formula. In the past, it has been suggested .that the Building Inspector keep track of her time and bill Spring Park for all time put in. That is not a very satisfactory way for us because it doesn't allow for any financial planning and creates a situation where.detailed paperwork records are required. This is.an unnecessary burden to place upon someone who is already spread.too thin meeting:the' full-tlme requirements of the City of Mound° · The next position is that the of'the Tree. Inspector. Again.we want to go to a base retainer of $1,000 per year for.this service, starting in 1983. There is absolutely no way to project the inspection demands and when they do come they always come at the height of the work season in the City of Mound. As a City service provided in Mound, this was stopped as of January l, ]982, except in special'situations. Thus, we also.are questioning providing a serVice.to another City that we ourselves don't provide. The cost .covers the schooling required and the required equipment and supplies. The final position is that of Dock Inspector. Based on past time requirements, a base fee of $500 per year would seem reasonable to support this service to Spring Park. We understand that the City of Spring Park may elect not to continue the use of these positions after January 1, 1983, but we thought it important to notify you of these new financi'al costs at this.time when you are preparing your 1983 Budget. If you have any questions, please let me know. September 16, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-t155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER RE: EDGEWATER DRIVE Early in August we passed an amendment to the City Code Section 46.29, Subd. (b) to move the No Parking At Anytime signs from the East side to the West side of E~gewafer Drive. We did this in response to a citizen request. What I didn't do very well was check out, along the whole street, the support for this. It seems most people were against it and want the situation left as it is. Thus, with a better system for the future, I need the Council to repeal it's action of August 3, 1982. Sorry for the time this took. JE:fc 161. August 3,. 1982 · PARKING CHANGE ON EDGEWATER DRIVE The city Hana9er reported'that there has been a compiaint about the blockage of mai]boxes on Edgewater Drive. A memo from the Police Chief stated that the ordinance calls for no parking on both sides of the roadway but currently the streets is signed to permit parking on the east.side. The Post Office has asked in the past that the side of the street with th~ ma|lboxes be posted no pa~king. The recommendation was to amend the Ordinance to read: "No parking on the West side of Edgewater Drive from Falrvlew Lane to Northern Road". The Council was concerned about the reaction o( residents on Edgewater so they asked the City Manager to send out a letter inf~rm|ng them of the change in the ordinance. Councilmember Swanson moved and Charon seconded: ORD i NANCE #438' -- AN-ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 46.29, SUB. (b) (I) TO READ "NO PARKING ANYTIME ON THE WEST SIDE OF EDGEWATER DRIVE FROM FAIRVIEW LANE TO NORTHERN ROAD BILLS---SEPTEMb~ ~i, 1982 Air Comm Earl F. Andersen Autocon Industries Advance Ambulance Holly Bostrom Biackowiak & Son Bryan Rock Prod Brown Photo Berkeley Pump Co. F.H'. Bat'hke Robert Cheney Robert Cheney . Bill Clark Standard Coast to Coast Continental Te.1 &phone Craftsman Industries Dyna Med, .Inc. Dept of Natur. al Resources Director of Property Tax Election Judges (29) ELMarketing First Bank Mpls -'. Game .T i mu .General Safety Equip Genuine Parts G 1 enwood Ing 1 ewood Herbs Typewriter Eugene Hickok & Assoc Henn Coop Seed Exchange Robert Johnson Internat'l Assn.rC-hlef$ Police Koehnens Standard Koenig & Robin"' Lampert Lbr Lowel 1 s LOGIS The Laker League of MN Cities Doris Lepsch L~tz Tree Serv Lake Mtka Conserv Distr Mound Postmaster Metro Waste Control SAC MN MFOA City of Mound McCombs Knutson Metro Waste Control Minnegasco Minnesota Fire Inc Mound Fire Dept 96.00 46.28 37.25 436.22~ 329. OO 94. OO 839.05 118.90 172.29 2O.70 334.00 1,000.00 5,838.27 116.11 1,12!.29' 36.00 203.70 15.OO '56.80 1,596.71 313.25 20.00 123.29- 4,499.2o 13.95 56.60 80.oo 288.91 99.'95 23.10 35,00 16.00 258.00 68.54 17.75 1,332.40 375.O1' 960.00~ 60.00 3,535.00 1,998.50 300.O0 841.50 75.00 35.16 9,162.00 19,277.27 17.15 190.88 3,957.35 Mound. Locksmith Wm Mueller' & Sons Ronald Marschke Mi nn Comm Martins Navarre 66 Maple Plain Diesel Navarr~ Hdwe NW Bel 1 Neitg.e Construction N.S.P. Plann!ng & De.velop. Riteway Motor Parts Roltins 0il Co. Reo Raj Kennels Regal Window Clean Howard Simar Nels Schernau Spring Park' Car' Wash Don Str~icher Guns Deloris Schwal be Suburban Tire Thurk Bros Chev Unitog Rentals Westonka Sewer & Water Wi dmer Bros. John Ec61es Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Ed Phi. llips TOTAL B I L~_S 9.50 '269.50 10.00 28.5O · 76.60 17.O2 1 O9.74' 72.80 227.50 8,193.12 724.50 130.65 141.20 .334. O0 10.75 265.00 9.24 89.9O 6.20 30. oo 45.04 79.53 217;85 4,048.75 250.50 96.00 1,846. o8 2,49i:70 ' 1,144.78 738.23 3,266.89 85,519.40 A. THOMAS WURST. P.A. CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A, JOSEPH E, HAMILTON, P.A. THOMAS F, UNDERWOOD, P.A. JAMES D. I-ARSON, P.A. JOHN J. BOWDEN LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LAR$ON & UNDERWOOD A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL AESOCIATIONS 1 100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHON.E 338-4200 September 17, 1982 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywc~d Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Lot 1, Block 38, Wychw~3d Dear Mr. Elam: Per our telephone conversation yesterday, I enclose a proposed draft of 'a B~solutic~ relating to the purchase of the above lot. I spoke with Curt and he feels that it should-not be necessary to rescind the earlier Resolution. Rather, w~ will use the enclosed to supplement the earlier Resolution. Please let me know if there are any questions. Enclosure RESOLUTION' A 'RESOLUTION RELATING TO TAX FORFEITED LANDS, REQUESTING 'THE COUNTY BOARD TO SELL SAID TAX FORFEITED LAND 'TO THE CITY OF MOUND WHEREAS, the City of Mound has previously acquired for an authorized public use, certain tax forfeited land described as. Lot. 1, Block 38, Wychwood, and WHEREAS, said land does not comply with the City's zoning Ordinance or building codes because of a lack of minimum area, and WHEREAS, the City deems it to be in its best interest to acquire fee title ~to said premises; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound: 1. That the County Board is'hereby requested to sell the above, land to the City of Mound at private sale. 2. The'Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to release the aforementioned, land for sale, subject to. the County imposing the aforestated conditions on said sale. OFFICE OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT C-2353 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 (612) 348-6418 September 9, 1982 Ms. Linda Henning U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Minneapolis-St. Paul Area Office 220 South Second Second Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 Re: Urban Hennepin County Slum and Blight Determination Waiver Year VIII/Proj~ct.)~2/Mound Downtown Dear Linda: Hennepin County is requesting the assistance of the Area Office in securing a waiver from 570.302{e)(1), to allow the 'City of Mound to implement the Commercial Loan Interest Write Down element of its Downtown Revitalization Program. Pursuant 'to 570.302(e}{1), to be eligible for CDBG funding, assistance projects which aid in the prevention of or elimination of slums and blight are limited to only those areas designated as blighted in accord with state or local law. : Although revision to the program regulation, under review, may provide greater flexibility in funding projects aimed at preventing or eliminating slums and blight, the current situation represents a hardship in terms of the City of'Mound's ability to utilize its-available resources in response to an identified community need on a timely basis° The City of Mound in preparation for implementation of the Commercial Loan Interest Write Down program has: '- prepared and adopted a Compcehensive Evaluation of and Plan for Down- town Mound - in cooperation with local business owners, prepared guidelines for implementatidn of the loan assistance program - initiated a matching grant program for the funding of design assis- tance for exterior building modification - coordinated these activities with local lenders to ensure their acceptance of tn~ program. HENNEPIN COUNTY on ~quol opPortunity ~mploy~r MS. Linda Nenning September 9, 1982 .Page Two On August 23, 1982, the Area Office was provided with a copy of the Com- prehensive Evaluation of and Plan for Downtown Mound and the adopting City Council Resolution.- It i's requested that these materials be viewed as supporting documents for this waiver request. In that several business owners, within the downtown area are expressing a high level of interest in initiating capital improvements, hopefully with- in the current exterior building season, a response to the waiver request is needed as soon as possible to facilitate program implementation. If there are any questions or additional information needed please contact me at 348-5859. Sincerely, -~..... ..~-:.. Lar~y Blackstad, Senior Planner lW cc: John Elam Rob Chelseth Law, Dragging Cities into Court Generous jury awards'are draining municipal treasuries. paw Paw, w. Va. (pop. 650), is a small town with a big problem. The trouble began in 1978 when the town's lone police~ officer pulled a speeding truck driver over to thc side of the road. The driver said that when he refused to cooperate, the po- · liceman smashed his windows and tried to spray Mace inside. Thc startled driver put his truck in gear and drove off as thc officer shot at the tires. A federal jury con- eluded that the patrolman had gone over- board and ordered Paw Paw to' pay the truck driver $10,500.' That would have been a financial catastrophe for 'a town with a budget of $25,500 and no insur- Paw Paw, W. Va.: trying to get out Of hock ~t rude awakening to new legal realities. ance. Fortunately, the plaintiff h~s agreed to take $3,000, and the town hopes to raise the necessary cash 'by throwing a benefit rock concert later this month. Paw Paw is not the only community hamstrung by litigation. Once protected by "sovereign immunity," a derivative of the rule that "the King can do no wrong," municipalities have become increasingly vulnerable to lawsuits in recent years. In 1978 the Supreme Court ruled that local governments were liable for civil rights vi- olations. Two years later the court elimi- nated the common defense that a city, or its employee, had acted in "good faith." Says Barton Russell, executive director of the National Association of Towns and Townships: "It's a whole new world, and it's an expensive world." Most of the suits involve police brutal- ity or personal injuries resulting from mu- nicipal carelessness: a faulty traffic light, .a poorly marked curve, a dangerous side- walk. South Tucson, Ariz. (pop. 6,500), may have.to disincorporatc because of a $3.6 million judgment in a suit brought by a man who was paralyzed from the waist down after being mistakenly shot by a po-' liceman. Cashion, Okla. (pop. 550), faces bankniptcy because of a $157,000 award to family members injured in a sewer gas explosion.' Mound Bayou, Miss. (pop[ 2,.900), was hit with a $59,000 judgment for injuries suffered by a woman who fell into a hole outside city hall. ' ' - ' '£ · Big cities are being stung' too. "The number of lawsuits has b~e.n growingas- tronomically," .says a spokeswoman for the National League of Cities. Even if the plaintiff wins nothing, the cost of mount- ing a defense can .~u'ain an already taut budget. All told, federal' court claims pending against towns and cities are a numbing $7 billion[ Says Kenneth Court- ney, finance director of Troy, Mich., which is trying to pay a $5.75 million award: "Everybody and his brother is su- lng the city. They feel that theY are going to get easy money." . :. U unicipalities are usuaUy il/prepared IVlfor the whopping awards. In South Tucson only $100,000 of the $3.6 million judgment was covered by insurance. Now premiums are rising, and many budget makers are finding that they cannot afford the protection they need. One partial solu, tion is a policy purchased jointly with neighboring toWns; it spreads the risk and thus costs less. Another is a statutory limit on thc amount plaintiffs can recover, like the $300,000 cap imposed in Utah. Many. lawyers WelCOme the shift away from sovereign immunity for municipal- ities. Argues Detroit Attorney Robert Dinges: "A city is no different from Gen- eral Motors. If it commits a wrong, it should be just as liable as anyone else." Other lawyers, however, fear that the le- gal gains are outweighed by the l°sses. "A city is not like General Motors," says Wil- liam Dietrich, Detroit's assistant corpo- rate counsel. "If GM gets hit with .a $I million claim, it raises the price of its cars. When the city gets hit with $1 million, it lays off ten policemen. The people are going to lose." Some munici- palities, especially small ones, have to raise taxes. Troy intends to hike property taxes an average of $200 per household. Concedes Steven Berry, the winning law- yer in the Troy suit: "Citizens can end up footing the bill for mistakes by people they have either elected or hired to act competently. There is a problem there." · TI ME. SEPTEMBER 13.1982 A, T~OMA$ WUR'ST. P.A. CURTIS A. PEARSON. P.A. JOSEPH E. HAMILTON. THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, P.A. ~AMES ~), I.ARSON, P,A. .JOHN .J. BOWOEN WURST. PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 September 13, 1982. TELEPHONE {612} 338-4200 Honorable Peter J. Lindberg Hennepin County District Court Government Canter Minneapolis, MN 55487 ~ Re: Priscilla Smith Anderson and Charles P. Smith v. City of Mound Your File No. 784753 Dear Judge Lindbe~g: It is my understanding that the above entitled case has been set for trial sometime late in September, but there has never been confirmation of that from the Clerk's office. .Mro William F. Kelly and I have been participating in the discovery procedures, and we have recently opened negotiations which could possible lead to.resolving this case without a trial. Mr. Kelly's clients are out of state, and I represent a municipality and need time to advise them of proceedings and to get approval to proceed. Mr. Kelly and I have therefore agreed and hereby jointly petition the Court to continue this case until some time after November 15, 1982. Hopefully the interim period will be used to seek to resolve our differences. I would very much appreciate it if the courC could grant this continuance, and I know Mr. Kelly and I will both work diligently toward resolving the mat ter. Very truly your,~, Curtis A. Pearson, City Attorney City of Hound, H±nnesota CAP:Ih cc: Mr. William F. Kelly Hr. Jon Elam LAKE MINNETONKA 402 EAST LAKE STREET BOARD MEMBERS September 13, 1982 CONSERVATION DISTRICT WAYZATA, M IN N ESOTA 55391 T E LE PHON E'6121473-7033 FRANK MIXA. EXECUTIVE D!RECTOR Robert T;pton Brown. Chairman (.~reenwood Frank Fi Hunt. Jr.. V~ce Cl~airn3am Spring Park Robert P. FtascoD. Secretary Shorewood EOward G. Baun~an. Treasurer Tonka Bay Atan Fasching Uinnetrista Orval R. Fenstad Mound Richard J. Garwood Deephaven Jo Ellen Hurr Orono Lois C, Johnson ~ Minnetonka Beach M. Jerry Johnson Excelsior Robert S. UacNarnara Wayzata Robert K. Pillsbury Uinnetonka Robert E. Slocum Woodland Richard J, Soderberg Victoria Lt. William Berry Civil Division, Sheriff's Office Room 6, Courthouse Minneapolis, MN 55415 Deac Lto Berry: Enclosed are copies of Lake Minnetonka Conservation District variaDce orders for service on Driftwood Shores Association and o~'th~affected property owners: Driftwood Shores Association c/o Inez Buboltz, President 1735 Lafayette Lane City of Mound Rodney Wilkens i772 Lafayette Lane City of Mound Rodney L. Pitch 1768 Lafayette Lane City of Mound Harry Steckel 1776 Lafayette Lane City of Mound Please call us if there are any questions. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Executive Director - FM:jm Enc. 5 cc: City of Mound/ Sheriff's Water Patrol LMCD Inspector Other members Of the Association via Certified Mail Re: LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Application of Driftwood Shores Association FINDINGS Applicant is an association of twelve (12) homeowners owning tw~ lots, Outlots 1 and 2, riparian to Harrison Bay, LMCD Area 15, in the City of Mound. On February 17, 1982, at 8:00 p.m., at the LMCD office in Wayzata, a public hearing was held to consider the application of Driftwood Shores Association for a new dock license and a DUA variance to provide for continuance of existing dockage in addi- tion to 12 slips to serve the 12 lot development. Inez Buboltz, President, and Qther members of the Association appeared for applicant. The hearing was continued to March 17, 1982, to allow completion of the requested certified survey and other needed information. On March 17, 1982, at 8:00 p.m., the public hearing was continued. Applicant presented the requested certified survey, attached hereto, showing a shoreline of 510+ feet on the island (Outlot 2), a shoreline of 25 feet on Outlot 1, and the location of all existing dockage. To meet LMCD limitation of one watercraft/50 feet continuous shoreline, applicant may provide eleven (11) WAU's without need for a variance. LMCD Code §3.02, Subd. 9a. The dock attached to Lot 2, Block 3 is in the setback area adjacent to the lot line, but to move it would mean further closing of the channel and is undesireable. The ll-slip main dock between O~tlots 1 and 2 presently extends into the setback areas and across the extended lot lines on the east and west sides. The owners of Block 2, Lot 3, and Block 3, Lot 1 abutting Outlot 1 are members of the Association and d° not object to the setback variances requested for Outlot 1. The DNR may, in the future, open the channel if access is needed. The DUA and setback variances sought would not adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare or interfere with reasonable access to, or use of, the lake by the public or riparian owners. ORDER By reason of the foregoing, it is ordered that a DUA and setback variance be granted to Driftwood Shores Association to continue: existing parallel docks at Lots 1 and 2 in Block 3, and at Lot 3, Block 2; and the el. even (11) slip main dock between Outlots 1 and'2; in agreement with the survey, attached hereto, subject to the condition that the main dock will be opened for channel access in the future if needed. The variance issued hereby shall grant no vested right to the use of Lake Minnetonka. Such use shall remain at all times subject to regulation by the District to assure the public of reasonable and equitable access to the lake. By order of the Board of Directors of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District this 25th day of August , 1982. ~ctor LOCATION SURVEY FOR DRIFTWOOD ASSOCIATION IN OUTLOT :;', DRIFTWOOD SHORES I I L~ I ', I i SCALE .I~'I'E DA'IrUM : I INCH · 20 -FEET : MARCH 4, F382 :MEAN SEA LEVEL ( N.G.V.D. 1929) GORDON R. COFFIN CO. INC. ENGINEERS 8 LAND SURVEYORS LONG. LAKE, MINNESOTA league of minnesota oities Federal L~gislative Information To: Mayors, Managers, Administrators, Clerks Prom: Don Slater, Executive Director; Cathy Qui~gle, Research Assistant RE: Effect of the new tax legislation on the municipal bond market The recently passed Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 includes~'$everal provisions which affect the municipal bond market. One provision of the new law which will directly affect the municipal bond market is the so-called minimum tax for corporations. After December 31, 1982 Corporations will have to reduce by 15 percent the interest they deduct from their taxes on borrowings that are used to buy or carry tax-exempt bonds. Corporations most affected by this provision are banks which currently hold 45 percent of all tax-exempt bonds. This is likely to drive up interest rates to issuers by reducing bank demand for bonds. The Act also makes several changes in the Industrial Revenue Bond legislation. Attached is a summary of the provisions affecting industrial revenue bonds. DS:CQ:lw Attach. 2/~7 183~niversityavenueeast, sc. paul, minnesota55101 (61 2) 227-5600 SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS IN TAX EQUITY AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1982 AFFECTING TAX-EXE>i?T BONDS Industrial Revenue Bonds A public hearing and approval by an elected official or legislative body or voter referendum are required by both ~he issuing jurisdiction and the jurisdiction where ~he facilities are located. e Facilities financed with bonds must be depreciated on a s~rai~ht-line basis using accelerated depre- ciation (ACRS) lives. Full ACRS.deductions would still be pe_-mitted for low-income rental housing, munici'~ai ~ewage or solid waste, facilities, pollution control facilities for plants placed in service prior to July !, 1982,'and facilities for which UDAG grant has been awarded. Infor~_.~tion regarding the amount of the lendable proceeds,' ~e interest rate, term of the issue, and principle users must be reported to the IRS for bcnds issued, during the preceding calendar quarter. (This requrement also applies to student loan Dcnds and bonds for tax-exempt organizations under Sec. 501(c)(3) of IRC.) e Se Thea'-___~_v=~=c= term for maturity of bonds would be llm' .... ~=~ to a perio~ no greater than .120 percent of ~he average economic life of the assets financed by the bonds.. Small issue IRB's (under $10 million) are not permitted where 25 percent or more of the bond proceeds are used to finance retail food and beverage services (except grocery stores), auto- mobile sales or service, and the provision of recreation or entertainment. No portion of the proceeds may be used to finance any private or commercial golf course, country club, massage parlor, tennis club, skating facility, racquet sports facility, hot tub facility, suntan facility, or race track. - 2 - TAX EQUITY AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1982 e 10. 11. 12. Small issue composite bonds are explicitly permitted as long as all facilities in an issue are located in the same state and no user (in- cluding franchises) finances more than one facility in the~same issue. Certain research and development expenditures are excluded from the calculation of the capital expenditure limits for small issue IRBs. Bonds can additionally be used for the following purposes: (a) gas distribution facilities in ' service areas consisting of no more than a city and a contiguous county; (b) local district heatinc ~ ~..~.~ cooling facilities; (c) acquisition of exis~n~'~ollution control facilities by a regiOnal pollution control authority which it will operate; (d) advance refunding bonds for certain ~cnds of the Port Authority of St. Paul; and (el ferries used in providing mass trans- Dorta%5on services. $1 mi!2ion or smaller "Clean limit" bonds cannot be issued as part of any other tax-exempt obli- gations. Small issues IRB's cannot be issued after December 31, 1986. In general, the above provisions apply to bonds issued after December 31, 1982. Item 92 applies to property placed in service after December 31, 1982 to the extent it is financed'by.bonds issued after June 30, 1982. Items #6,8,9, and 10 are effective after the date of enactment of the Act. Certain exceptions are made for refunding bonds. After December 31, 1982, all tax-exempt obligations must be-issued in registered form except those not offered for public sale or less than 1 year in maturity. - 3 - Metropolitan Council 300 Metro Square Building Seventh Street and Robert Sffeet Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 -.. Telephone (612] 291-6453 . Office of the Chairman .. . :~,. T, '~Z~~. -, ,,- (. ~, ~ . .... -.. '" ' ' ' -'".':.'.,:i ....... SeptembeF 1982 "~' ' ~:~''~ : '" - ~; '- TO: NETROPOL[TAN AREA CITIZENS ANB . .. . ~ ' ..: _ . . - . _.,-... .... . . .-.- . -,, -.. . .... -;-..;~...~-' . , .~,'~..~-~ ,~.,~; . ~.... Pol~c~ Plan for 2000 (TPP) ~s_in[ended for d~scuss~on and co~en~,~ ~s. revisedplan ~11 r~plac~ th~ [990 TPP adap[ed in [976. ;.:' ~ .; ;-~-.~::~L'~;~::'~:~';'' "?'~' The He[~opol~t~n Counc~ 1 ~eque~ts' you~ co~ents by Nov, 15, ~982, T:~e'.counc~ 1: T~anspo~at~on Subco~t[ee ~11 take tes~monya[ a public hea~n~ Oct,' ~982. ~e hea~ng ~11 beg~n at 7 p.m. ~n ~he Council Ch~be~s, 300 Re[to ....... Square S ve, h and .:::." The TPP ~s'a s[atemen[ Of the d~e~[~on tha~ ma~ transpo~a[i°n;~nves'~en[~ a~e ~o take be[~een no~ and the yea~ 2000 ~n [he T~n C~[~es Re[~°pol~tan ..... · -. Area. ~e policies of the TPP are ~n~ended to support the Counc~l*s ~" . .... Development F~ame~o~k plans, making affic~ent Use of ex~st~ng meL~opol~tan and. loc~1 ~nvestmen[s ~n public f~c~l~es. ~e Council ~11 also use the TPP as a guide ~n ~ev~e~ng va~ous [~anspor[a[~on r~ferr~ls and p~oposals Submitted ~ by othe~ agencies as required by slate and federal la~, ' . .:.::~:;..~.' Please note that thi~ ~ugUst araft"'~s an Update of the ~ril 1982 draft~ It reflects coments received f~om the T~ansportation Advisory Board and othe agencies. A separate document, TPP Background Paper, which details technical studies, will be available in early October, To obtain a copy, contact the Council's Public Information office at 291-6464. . SUMMARY OF MAJOR CHANGES The 2000 TPP differs from the 1990 TPP, adopted in 1976, in several important respects. The new plan contains a broader definition of the term "transportation," fewer policies, more flexible policies and fewer transportation subregions. However, the plan continues its emphasis on making maximum use of existing transportation facilities before con, hitting resources to major new investments. A'summary of the major ~ifferences follows. In the new draft policy plan, the term "transportation" has been broadened to include not only highways and transit but also rail and water transportation facilities and services. The 2000 plan has 39 policies, reduced from 53 policies contained in the 1990 plan, plus its amendments. Organization of the policies has been simplified into three categories,."general," "urban," and "rural," instead of seven categories in the former plan. The 39 policies include five entirely new ones dealing with: auto occupancy (one policy), parking (two policies), ride- sharing (one policy) and pedestrian trails in rural areas (one policy). Transit policies have been made more flexible. The revised policies allow the MTC to make regional transit more responsive to changing economic conditions. Transit services will be more closely governed by considerations of demand and revenue. -'~ ' The number of transportation subregions in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) has been reduced from 12 to 11. Former subregions three and five now contain parts of former subregion four..,v;~- ,-<- -' ' ....... '.~.:"' . ~ .... :~- ._..:...-~ .'.r.: - · - ...... The functional classification of roadways'has changed. Principal have been reclassified as interstate freeways, and intermediate arterials as ~- major arterials. These two classes still make up the metropolitan highway ' system. - The draft TPP projects regional transportation needs to the year 2000. The new plan assumes demand for travel in the year 2000 will not exceed 3.0 trips per person per day. This is approximately 10 percent fewer trips per person than were assumed for 1990 and reflects the impact of reduced energy supply. The tOtal number of planned miles in'the metropolitan highway system'for the year 2000 is smaller than had been planned for 1990, 580 instead of 595 miles. The 15 deleted miles come from four roadway segments proposed for removal from the system: 1. Hwy. 610 from 1-94 to Hwy. 169 (Old TH 52) 2. Hwy. 65 from Hwy. 10 to 1-694 3. Hwy~ 55 from Hwy. 100 to 1-94 4. Hwy. 55 from 1-94 to Hennepin Co, 6~ The 1990 TPP has been"amended~'$eVer~l times since it wasadopted by the Metropolitan Council in 1976~ draft. ~ The amendments have been incorporated in this Sincerely, Charles R. Weaver Chairman AGENDA Minnehaha Creek Watershed District September 16, 1982 st. Louis Park City Hall 7:30 p.m. Call to order; present, absent, staff. Reading and approval of minutes of regular meeting of 8/19/82 and special meeting of 8/30/82. Approval or amendment of 9/16/82 agenda. Public ~earing on proposed 1983 Administrative Fund and Water Maintenance Fund budgets. Hearing of permit applications. Be 81-119 Alvin Quist - lakeshore setback variance request, intersection of County Rd 125 and Marlboro Lane, Emerald Lake, Mound. 82-57 John Hrkal - fill on private lot, drainage improvements, County Rd 24, Plymouth. Ce 82-74 Jack Overman - wood retaining wall alOng creek, 5109 Wooddale at Minnehaha Creek, Edina. De 82-75 Robert E.' Dykoski - lake dredging and wooden seawall, Halstead Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Minnetrista. Ee 82-76 Paul Erickson - "Erickson Tonkawood Addition," 4-lot single family development, Tonkawood Rd, Minnetonka. 82-77 City of Mound - extension of existing storm sewer from County Rd 110 to Harrison Bay, Mound. Ge 82-78 E and M Company - grading and drainage plan for commercial site on 2.84 acres, Plymouth Rd and Hwy 12, Minnetonka. 82-79 Edna H. Albee - "after the fact" shoreline erosion protection using concrete block, north shore of Long Lake, Or·no. 82-80. Peter Van Beek - rip-rap shoreline erosion' protection, West Arm Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Spring Park. 82-81 Frank W. Worms - 107 feet of rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Upper Lake, Lake Minnetonka, Shorewood. 82-82 City of Long Lake - storm drainage culverts and watermain utilities, Long Lake. 82-83 Don HesS-Landplan, Inc. - grading and drainage for a proposed office building, 1000 Superior Blvd, Wayzata. e 10. 11. M® 82-84 Nobel Company - 400 feet of sanitary sewer and gravel road base, 'Oak Ridge Estates," Shorewood. Ne 82-85 Rockvam Boat Yards, Inc. - grading and drainage for the construction of two 60' x 100' warehouses, West Arm Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Spring'Park.. Correspondence. Hearing of requests for petitions by public for action by the Watershed District. Report~ of Treasurer, Engineer and Attorney. A. Acting Treasurer's Report - Mr. Thomas B® (1) (2) (3) (4) Fund transfer resolutions Budget resolutions 1983 Tax levy resolutions Administrative Fund report Engineer's Report - Mr.. Panzer (1) Headwaters Control Structure Management Policy and Operating Procedures - Final approval of July 8, 1982, draft (2) Hydrodata collection and billing - Memorandum dated September 16w 1982 (3) Permit application form/fees ~ Memorandum dated September 1, 1982 (4) Galpin Lake ~Petition (5) 1982 Water Maintenance and Repair Fund - Galpin Lake, City of Excelsior (6) Status report - volunteer lake level monitoring (7) StatUs report - CP-7 West 44th Street dredging (8) Status report - Painter Creek engineer's report C. Attorney's Report - Mr. Macomber Unfinished Business. A® B. C. D. Rule and Regulation Revision/Chapter 509 District Initiated 'Maintenance Projects Bridge Obstruction Draft Permit Application Guidelines New Business. Adjournment. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT August 30, 1982 A special meeting of August 30, 1982, of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was called to order by Vice Chairman Lehman at 4:45 p.m. at the St. Louis Park City Hall, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Managers Present: Cochran, Lehman, Gudmundson and Carroll Manager Absent: Thomas Also present were board advisors Panzer and Peterson and Jim VonLorenz, Stanley Peterson, and Shirley Taylor, interested citizens. The managers considered the 1983 administrative fund budget worksheet which was-distributed and made tentative allocations according to line items. The managers also considered a proposed 1983 budget for the water maintenance and repair fund with tenta- tive allocations to line items. There was further discussion regarding whether the managers should authorize the one-time levy for a survey and data acquisition fund authorized by the statutes and the special levy for metropolitan watershed management planning authorized by the recent Chapter 509, 1982 Laws. The managers requested the staff to meet with Treasurer Carroll to refine the tentative allocations by the managers for final action by the Board of Managers at the public hearing to be held September 16, 1982 at the St. Louis Park City Hall. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the meeting, Chairman Cochran declared the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara R. Gudmundson, Secretary MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT August 19, 1982 The regular meeting of August 19, 1982, of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was called to order by Chairman Cochran at 7:30 p.m. at the Wayzata City Hall, Wayzata, Minnesota. Managers Present: Cochran, Lehman, Gudmundson, Carroll and Thomas Also present were board advisors Panzer, Reep and Peterson. Approval of Minutes- The minutes of the regular meeting of July 15, 1982 were reviewed. Following discussion, with revisions noted, it was moved by Gudmundson, seconded by Carroll that minutes be approved as amended. Upon vote the motion carried. APproval of Permit Application The managers reviewed a memorandum from the engineer dated August 12, 1982 indicating that the following applications comply with the applicable standards of the district and recom- mending approval on the terms and conditions as set forth in his written memorandum: Ed Yeager - rip-rap shOreline erosion protection, Gideon Bay, Lake Minnetonka. 82-62 Frank Beddor, Jr. - beach sand blanket, sout~ shore of Christmas Lake, Chanhassen. 82-66 Frank Beddor, Jr. --beach sand blanket, right-of-way easement, Christmas Acres, south shore of Christmas Lake, Chanhassen. 82-67 Richard Douglas - rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Clay Cliffe Addition, Tonka Bay. 82-69 Larry Hendrickson - rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Bay Cliffe, Upper Lake Minnetonka, Minnetrista. 82-70 Following discussion it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Gudmundson, that the foregoing applications be approved subject to 177 August 19, 1982 Page ~ all terms and conditions as recommended by. the engineer. vote the motion carried. Upon Tabling of Permit Applications · It was moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the following application be tabled as. recommended by the engineer until such time as all required exhibits have been received: John Hrkal - fill on private lot, drainage improvements, County Rd. 24,.Plymouth. 82-57 Methodist HOspital - 11,000 sq. ft. 'building addition, Excelsior Blvd. adjacent to Minnehaha Creek,' St. Louis' Park. 82-22 Appearing on behalf of the applicant was.Harold Erickson. The engineer reviewed--this application for approval of a grading and draining plan for construction of an 11,000 square foot addi- tion to the hospital in the floodplain of Minnehaha Creek. The plan proposed 50,200 cubic feet of encroachment into the~flood- plain for the construction of the building. To mitigate this encroachment, 52,000 cubic feet of material will be excavated below the projected regional.flood elevation. Concept approval had been granted by the Board at the June 17, 1982 meeting, with the direction to minimize the extent of the cut and fill. The engineer reported that the plan had been revised to reduce the size of the excavation in accordance with the Board's direction. The engineer recommended that the district waive its requirements for storm water management for the following reasons: It is not feasible to provide ponding due to site limitations. There is insignificant increase in the peak rate of run-off to the creek since the existing run-off rate is already high due to the close proximity of the creek. Run-off from the new building roof top will be rela- tively clean. 'The engineer recommended approval on the basis that the project has no adverse.effect on flood levels at this reach of the creek, with the condition that an erosion control plan be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. Following discus- sion it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the plan be approved, subject to the engineer's recommendation. Followinq further discussion, it was moved by Manager Gudmundson that the motion be amended to add language that the district's action should not be used to obtain the assent of other agencies. This motion failed for lack of a second. The vote on the original motion passed, with Manager Gudmundson voting nay~ August 19, 1982 Page 3 Ronald Pelarski - lake setback variance for construction of single ~.amil~ home, Jennin~s Bay, Lak'e Minnetonkat Mound. 82-65 Appearing on behalf of the applicant was Richard Larsen. The engineer reviewed this application for approval of a lake set- back variance to construct a single family home thirty feet from the natural ordinary high water mark on Jennings Bay in Lake Minnetonka. The engineer reported that the district had reviewed a similar request in 1975 which was denied because the application proposed filling below the regional flood elevation. No such filling is required in the proposed permit. The engineer reported that the thirty foot setback is from the main foundation on the south side-yard of the property. The area beyond the thirty feet is covered with emmergent wetland vegetation, and open water is considerably farther than thirty feet from the building. The set- back on the west Side-Df the property is approximately 104 feet and the appearance on the lake will be that this is the setback for the property. The engineer recomended that the approval be granted since no adjacent properties would, be affected. The proposal is consistent with development in the area since some existing houses are even closer to the water. The engineer noted additionally that run-off from. the adjacent property to the north presently flows across the applicant's property. When the property is developed, the district should require a drainage easement across the proposed driveway to insure adequate drainage. Following discussion, it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the variance application be' approved for the reasons noted above and with the condition that a drainage easement be provided in a form acceptable to the district's attorney. Upon vote the motion carried. City of Minnetonka - sanitary sewer, water, storm water and street pro~ects, Red Oak Townhouses, Minnetonka. 82-72 Appearing on behalf of the city was Mike Johnson. The district's engineer reviewed this application for approval of utility plans for the construction of streets, storm sewer, sanitary sewer and water main at two locations, Bent Tree Second Addition and Red.Oak Townhouses. The engineer recommended approval of the utility plan for the Bent Tree Addition because it is in compliance with the approved grading and drainage plan, with the condition that erosion controls be maintained until all bare soil surfaces have been covered or revegetated. The engineer recommended that the utility plan for the Red Oak Townhouses be revised to provide for storage of .25 acre feet of storm water upstream of the 18 inch diameter inlet to S.D.M.H. Number 8. The approved grading and drainage plan had included the pond at this location, but the city's plan did not include this upper pond and apparently was never advised of its location. The engineer also recommended that erosion controls specified in the plan be main- August 19, 1982 Page 4 rained until all bare soil surfaces have been covered or revege- tared. Following discussion, it was moved by Lehman, Seconded by Carroll, that the application be approved, subject to the engineer's recommendations. Upon vote the motion carried. Independent School District ~284 - grading and drainage plan for a central storage ...facility, Oakwood School property, plymouth. 82-63 Appearing on behalf of the applicant was Rick Sathre. The'engineer reviewed this application for approval of a grading and drainage plan for construction of-a central storage facility for the Wayzata School System. The plan proposes collecting storm water run-off in a natural depression to the east of the proposed building and parking lot. The proposed pond will have a normal water level of 974.0. There is sufficient area on the site to contain run-off from ~one hundred year storm. An ~outlet baffle structure will remove floatable materials prior to discharge into an existing storm sewer system. The engineer recommended that the plan be revised to designate the one hundred year event level on the plan and also to change the pond configuration. The'engineer recommended a change in the flow pattern of the run-off to increase the detention time by going a longer route. He. recommended that the pond design be revised tO assure that the drainage pattern would not go directly into the proposed outlet for the ponding area. Following discussion, it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Gudmundson, that the application be approved subject to the recommendations noted by the engineer. Upon vote the motion ~t - lakeshore setback variance request, intersection of Count~ Rd. 125 and Marlboro Lane, Emerald Lake, Mound. 81-119 The engineer reviewed the history of this permit appli- cation noting that the applicant first applied for an "after the fact" permit to fill the property in 1978 (Permit Application 78r115). The application involved filling below the predicted flood elevation of Lake Minnetonka and was tabled on September 21, · 1978 pending DNR action on the matter. No district action had been taken on that permit application although the DNR approved the applicant's' "after the fact" permit. Through this new permit application, the applicant is now requesting a variance from lake- shore setback requirements to allow a residential structure to be constructed on the filled area. The engineer recommended that Permit Application 78-115 remain tabled and that application 81-119 be tabled until all required exhibits had been submitted. The managers agreed that permit application 78-115 could remain tabled, but expressed strong concern about the precedent that could be set and the encroachment of the floodplain that had taken place. After discussion, it was moved by Carroll, seconded by Thomas, that the staff be instructed to draw up a resolution denying the permit August 19, 1982 Page 5 application with the necessary findings. carried. Upon vote the motion T.W. Ess - shoreline erosion protection, railroad tie retaining wall, Halsteads Bay,' Minnetrista. 82-61 The engineer reviewed this application for approval of construction of 54 lineal feet of wood retaining wall on the shoreline of Halstead Bay. The applicant proposes using railroad ties driven vertically into the lake bottom. The wall would be constructed in two levels with the lower level approximately 18 inches above the water surface. The wall would be used as shore- line erosion protection and protection for the exposed roots of a one hundred year old ash tree on the shoreline. The wall would be constructed approximately 10 feet lakeward of the existing shore- line in the area Of the. tree. The remaining 36 lineal feet would be constructed 5 to 9 feet lakeward of the existing shoreline. The engineer recommended tabling the application pending a showing by the applicant why rip-rap would not adequately protect the shoreline. Also the engineer recommended approval by the city before the watershed district took action. It was moved by Thomas to deny the application because of potentia! adverse effect on water quality from the creosote in the railroad ties, the encroachment into the lake, and the vertical reflection of wave action. Following further discussion, Manager Thomas amended his motion to table the application with the direction to staff to inform the applicant that the application as proposed would be denied but that a revised application using rip-rap would be approved. Manager Lehman seconded this motion and upon vote the motion carried. Schlee Builders - "Boni-Highlands," 42 unit townhouse complex, Trista Lane and CSAH 92, St. Bonifacius. 82-64 The engineer reviewed this application for approval of a grading and drainage plan for construction of a 42 unit town- house development on 4.9 acres in St. Bonifacius. The majority of the storm water run-off will be carried on the proposed street, contained by curb. and gutter, and be directed by catch basins and storm sewer to a proposed ponding area in the southwest corner of the property. A CMP T-section stand pipe outlet will be provided to limit the discharge to the existing peak rate and provide water quality. The retention pond will discharge directly to the existing city storm sewer. The retention pond has the capacity to store .23,047 cubic feet. The required storage for this development is 17,000 cubic feet for a one hundred year, twenty four hour storm. A baffled weir designed for a one year storm will be used as the outlet structure from the ponding area. Following discussion, it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the application be approved subject to the engineer's reco~endations. Upon vote the motion carried, with Manager Carroll abstaining. August 19, '.1982' Page 6 Nic annel dredging and riP-rap, Harrison Bay, ~inne t~D]~'Mound.' '82- 68 The engineer reviewed this application dredge a lagoon and channel and to rip-rap the lagoon shoreline ~n the City of Mound. The applicant proposes to dredge 266 cubic yards of-muck from the lagoon area and place the spgils on site. The spoils would, be diked with hay bails to prevent sedimentation into the lagoon. The shoreline at the lagoon would be rip-rapped using natural field stone boulders. The applicant also proposes to dredge the channel area 100 feet lakeward and 28 feet wide, removing. 155 cubic yards of muck and silt. The engineer recommended that the applicant be required to determine whether or not the property is riparian to Lake Minnetonka. He also recommended that final action not be taken until all necessary exhibits had been received. Following discussion it was moved Gudmundson, seconded by Thomas, that the application be tabled in order 3to explore the alternatives for a6cess to the property. Upon vote the motion carried. Kenneth L. Sporre - lakeshore setback variance for garage structure, Black Lake, Lake Minnetonka, Spring Park. 82-71 The engineer reviewed this application for approval of a lake setback variance to move an existing garage structure onto the applicant's property and place it approximately 65 feet from the shoreline of BlaCk Lake. The property has an existing one- story home which is approximately 44 feet from-the natural ordinary high water mark. The garage will be placed to the side and behind the home. The applicant had received approval from the planning commission of the City of Mound and verbal approval from the adjacent property owner. F~llowing discussion, it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the application be approved subject to the engineer's recommendations and subject to the requirement that the staff receive all necessary exhibits. Upon vote the motion' carried. SoUth Shore Communities, Inc. - "South Shore Manor," 67 unit · apartment complex, Excelsior. 82-73 The engineer reviewed this application for a grading and drainage plan for the construction of a 67 unit apartment building and a 34 unit parking area. The plan proposes two storm water detention ponds to contain site run-off. The east pond will primarily collect rooftop drainage and some drainage from grassy areas. The plan does not propose a skimming device for this pond. The west pond will collect rooftop drainage and all run-off from the parking area. ~The plan proposes a baffled structure at the south edge of the parking surface. Run-off from this pond will be discharged down the railroad right-of-way. The engineer August 19, 1982 Page. 7 reported that the applicant requested a tabling of the matter with authorization of administrative approval to the staff after they had received revised calculations of the run-off volume and rate. Following discussion, it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the permit application be approved subject to the staff's receiving and approving calculations of run-off volume and rate, considering the off-site drainage. Upon vote the motion carried with Manager Carroll abstaining. Budget Hearing The managers discussed the need for a working session to prepare the proposed 1983 budget for hearing at the next regular meeting. It was determined that this session would be held on August 30, 1982.at 4~30 p.m. in the St. Louis Park City Hall. The staff was directe~ to send notices accordingly and to publish notice of the public hearing. Treasurer's R~p0.rt Acting Treasurer Thomas distributed the Treasurer's Report dated August 19, 1982. Noted therein were payments to the City of Deephaven and the City of Spring Park for cooperative pro- jects allocated in 1981. The engineer reported that the projects had now been constructed. Following discussion it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Carroll, that the Treasurer's Report be approved and the bills set forth therein be paid. Upon vote the motion carried. Election of Officers Noting the need to establish a permanent treasurer, Manager Carroll's interest in the subject, and his convenient location to the accountant, acting Treasurer Thomas nominated Manager Carroll to be Treasurer of the watershed district. Manager Lehman seconded the motion. Upon vote the motion carried. Following further discussion it was moved by Carroll, seconded by Lehman, that Manager Gudmundson be elected Secretary of the district. Upon vote the motion carried. It was the consensus of the managers that in the future election of officers should be held at the first regular meeting after the annual appointments to the Board of Managers have been made. Minnehaha Creek Chaqqel Improvements at west 44th Street - CP-7 The engineer reported that there were no new developments. The bonding company has stated that it would perform the work during this coming winter. August 19, 1982 'Page 8 Water Maintenance and Repair Fund The engineer distributed a memorandum dated August 17, 1982 regarding requests for funding and payment of approved allocations from the water maintenance and repair, fund. Following discussion of the engineer's recommendations regarding various municipal requests, it was the consensus of the managers that the district fund 50% up to a maximum amount of $2,800 for the City of St. Louis Park creek bank stablization near the C & N railroad bridge and a maximum payment of $5,000 to the City of Tonka Bay for shore- line improvements in the channel connecting Gideon Bay and the backwater area adjacent to the Tonka Bay City Hall. ~ity of Minnetonka. Drainage Plan The engineer distributed a memorandum to the Board of Managers dated August 17, 1982 summarizing his review of-the City of Minnetonka storm water management plan. The engineer reviewed in detail the proposed plan, noting that he believed it to be excellent. FOllowing discussion it was moved by .Lehman, seconded by ThomaS, that the district'approve the storm water management plan, noting the district's appreciation of the excellence and foresight exhibited in the plan. Upon.vote the motion carried. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the meeting, Chairman Cochran declared the meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. RespeCtfully submitted, Barbara R. Gud~undson, Secretary HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this /~--*'~ day of September, 1982, between William Niccum, d/b/a Minnetonka Portable Dredging, ~nd the City of Mound, WHEREAS, the City desires Niccum to remove a fallen tree which is presently blocking the channel from Cooks Bay, Lake Minnetonka~ to Lost Lake; and WHEREAS, the city has represented to Niccum that it is empowered to order the performance of such work and to direct such removal; and WHEREAS, the performance of such. work may require some entry upon lands adjoining the channel; and WHEREAS, Nicc~TM is unwilling to perform said work unless the City assumes all liability for questions of authority to order and perform the aforementioned work and for claims of damages for trespass which may be alleged by adjoining property owners, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Niccum will perform the work necessary to remove the fallen tree in an orderly and Workmanlike manner° 2. The City will pay Niccum for said work according to the terms upon which the parties have previously agreed. 3. The City shall hold Niccum harmless and defend all suits and actions arising out of any claims based upon questions of authority to order and perform the aforementioned work or for claims for damages for trespass made by property owners adjoining the channel. 4. The City's obligation hereunder shall be limited as set forth herein and further limited by Niccum's assurance and agreement that no entry will be made upon lands adjoining the channel except as is reasonably necessary in the removal of the fallen tree. 5. Nothing in this agreement is intended to absolve Niccum's liability for negligent acts of hi~ or his-employees in the performance of the work nor for the intentional acts of his or his employees outside the scope of actions reasonably required to perform the work described herein. Dated this /~/-~day of September, 1982. B~~ - William Niccum, d/b[a Minnetonka Portable Dredging H. QUIE GOVERNOR STATE OF MINNESOTA OF~'ICI~ 012 TIIE OOVEI'I.~OR ST. PAUL September 9, 1982 Dear Mayor: VOLUNTEER FOR MINNESOTA: A Project For Developing Public/Private Partnerships in Communities will be introduced in a conference September 30. I urge you to attend. 'VOLUNTEER FOR MINNESOTA will help our state and local communities to deal effectively with the dilemma of meeting the increased demands for services with decreasing financial resources. At the same time, it will provide a model for government units across our nation. I am committed to the concept of the VOLUNTEER FOR MINNESOTA project and am eager to see the project implemented. ~ Anticipated ben'eTit~'of the program include: enhancement of a community's ability to meet its needs with available resources, development of community coalitions which are self-sustaining and active on local issues, creation of incentives which enhance citizen involvement in their community, and development of a cooperative partnership between public and private resources. The planning for the project has been accomplished by a fifty member planning committee. Its membership includes representatives from state and local government, non-profit agencies, civic and religious organizations, labor and business, media, and the academic and volunteer communities. Implementation of VFM will begin with a "Kick-off Conference" on September 30, 1982, at the Thunderbird Motel in Bloomington. Focusing on the development of public/private partnerships, national and state overviews will be presented. Workshops, to give the participants the tools to begin developing self-sustaining and active partnerships, wil.1 be held. Leadership from the local and state level have been invited to attend. Up to 600 people are expected to register. For your convenience, a brochure and registration form for the conference are enclosed. This is the first project of its kind in the nation. Given Minnesota's traditional commitment, it is only fitting that such an exciting co, ncept should begin here. I hope that you or your representative will be able to attend this most important conference. Sincerely, ALBERT H. QUIE GOVERNOR AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER