Loading...
83-04-19MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, April 19, 1983 7:30 P.M. - Council Chambers CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota AGENDA 1. Approval of Minutes of April 5, 1983, Regular Meeting 2. Request to Speak to the Council - Mr. Paul Young 4785 Richmond Road 3. PUBLIC HEARING - Delinquent Utility Bills 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - Lot 37, Block 3, Shirley Hills Unit "F'~ 2337 Wilshire Blvd. Commercial Recreation Use 5. CASE #82-115 - Charles & Orlando Pugh 6201 Red Oak Road Variance of Ordinance 60.02 - Signs. a[opg public thrp~ghfares 6. CASE #83-117 - Keith & Debi Kullberg 1736 Shorewood Lane Lots 20 & 21, Block 4, Shadywood Point Street Front & Sideyard Variances - Parcel Split 7. CASE #83~119 - Joseph W. Nelson Suite 390 - 3585 N. Lexington Ave. St. Paul, MN. Sign Variance - 5205 Shoreline Blvd. 8. CASE #83-118 - Valerie Swenson 2463 Black Lake Road - Spring Park 5505 Avon Drive Side Yard, Front Setback, Lot Width & Lot Size Variances 9. CASE #83-121 - Jacci Segnor 2260 Bayview Place - Spring Park 4574 Denbigh Road - Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Avalon Parcel Spli't - Variance, Recpgnize Encroachment, Side Yard, plus other conditions 10. Richard A. Olexa - 6609 Bartlett Blvd. Subdivision - Lot 9 and the West 1/2 of Lot 10, Halsted Heights. ll. Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present 12. Request for Additional 60 Day Option - Streetcar Boat Center, Inc. 13. Letter from P.C.A. Regarding Issuing Open Burning Permits 14. Final Payment to Hardrives for 1981 Street Project Pg. 755-763 Pg. 764-765 Pg. 766-773 Pg. 774-778 Pg. 779-786 Pg. 787-789 Pg. 790-796 Pg. 797-806 Pg. 807-814 Pg. 815-816 Pg. 817-818 Pg. 819-823 Page 753 15. Report from City Engineer on Bartlett Blvd. - John Cameron 16. Consideration of 1983 Street Seal Coating Bids 17. Petition for Hard Surfacing of Halsted Ave. 18. Approval of Plans & Specifications for 1983 Water System Improvements - John Lichter 19. Report on Arcade - City Manager 20. Set Date for Public Hearing for "On & Off Sale Beer Licenses" for Three Points Tavern - Suggested Date: May 3, 1983 21. Palm Readers License Renewal 22. Renewal of 1983-84 City Licenses: A. Off Sale Beer B. On Sale Beer C. Restaurants D. Bowling Alley E. Games of Skill F. Pool Tables G. Juke Box H. Arcade 23. City Insurance Package for 1983 - Earl Bailey - Total Cost $75,422. 24. Proclamation of June 10, 11, 12, 1983, as "The Westonka Weekend for Kids" - Request from Shoreline Early Childhood Development Center, Inc. 25. Proposed Development Contract 26. Payment of Bills 27. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Chamber Waves B. Revised Policy Statements on Insurance Coverage - City of Mound C. Application to LMCD from A1 & Alma's D. American Legion Gambling Report - March E. Article on "Civil Service GiantsI' F. AMM Meeting April 28th G. Citizens League Memo on Property Taxes H. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Agenda Pg. 824-825 Pg. 826-828 Pg. 829 Pg. 830-831 Pg. 832 Pg. 833-834 Pg. 835-836 Pg. 837-851 Pg. 852 Pg. 853-862 Pg. 863 Pg. 864-865 Pg. 866-869 Pg. 870-875 'Pg. 876 Pg. 877-884 Pg. 885-886 Pg. 887-891 Pg. 892-896 Page 754 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL April ~5, 1983 Pursuant to due calt and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on Apri'l 5, ~983, at 7:30 P.M. THose present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Gary Paulsen, Russ Peterson'.and Gordon Swenson. Also present were: City Attorny Curt Pearson, City Manager don Elam and City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: Mrs. John Wagman, Ron Gehrlng, John Rocheford, Paul Young, Bob Veilleux, Marie George, Larry Connolly, Richard 01exa, Janet Snelgrove, Joyce Clark, Dorothy McQueen. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance, PROCLAMATION - AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY' Mayor Polston read and presented a Proclamation proclaiming April as Cancer Control Month to three representatives from the Amercian Cancer Society, Joyce Clark, Janet Snelgrove and Dorothy McQueen. M I NUTES The Minutes of the March 45, 1983, Regular Meeting were presented for consideration. Paulsen moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the March 15, 1983, Regular Meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Minutes of the March 21, 1983, Special Meeting were presented for consideration. Swenson moved and Paulsen'seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the March 21, 1983, Special Meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The'City Manager reported ba6k to the Council on Paul Young's complaint from the March 15th Meeting that City tFucks are dumping debris on a City lot near his home and washing their equipment and leaving mud in the street. Public Works is dumping the sweepings from the street cleaning on the lot, but that consists only of dust and dirt. They use this lot to wash the sweepers because it has two catch basins to collect the run off from the cleaning. They clean the sweepers in the afternoon and return the next morning and sweep the street. Public Works also uses this lot to dump dirt from watermain breaks. Mr. Paul Young, 4785 Richmond Road, presented a notorized statement and some pictures he has taken of the s'treet and the loader on the lot. The Mayor informed Mr. Young that this was not an Agenda item, merely a report from the City Manager and if he wanted to speak he would have to wait until Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present or asked to be put on a future Agenda. Mr. Young asked to be put on the next Council Agenda, April 19, 1983. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS A. CASE 83-113 - OUR LADY OF THE LAKE CHURCH - LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8, GUILFORD'S RGT. OF LOTS IN MOUND BAY PARK - FINAL SUBDIVISION 53 April' 5, 1983 ~ The City M~nager expla'ined that this is the first of three items r. egar'ding the Westonka Elderly.& Handicapp'ed Housing Project. 1. Final Subdivision of property 2. Public Hearing on a Conditional Use Permit 3. VarianCes -.unit size, parking lot size and number o'f parking spaces He reported that the applicants, Our Lady of the Lake Church and. the Westonka Elderly & Handicapped Housing, Inc. have requested that all the.zoning filing fees on' the above be waived. The staff recommendation would be not to waive the fees because of the staff time that has been involved in preparation. The Council agreed with the staff recommendation that the fees not be waived. The City Manager explained that the subdivision has been approve bY the Planning Commission and they have recommended the Council approve also. Peterson moved and Charon seconded the following ~esolution. RESOLUTION #83-50 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8, GUILFORD'S RGT. OF LOTS IN MOUND BAY PARK (2461 COMMERCE BLVD. - PID #23-117-24 11 0023/0024 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. B. CASE 83-109 - WESTONKA ELDERLY & HANDICAPPED HOUSING - PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - LOTS 4,5,6,7 & 8, GUILFORD'S RGT. OF LOTS IN MOUND BAY~PARK The City Manager explained that the proposed 42 unit multi-family project is a Conditional Use in the B-1 Business District. The Mayor opened the public hearing and asked any comments for or against from the citizens present. There were none The Mayor closed the publ.ic hearing. Peterson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #83-51 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE FORA 42 UNIT MULTIPLE DWELLING AT 2461 COMMERCE BLVD. ON LOTS 6, 7, 8 AND PART OF LOTS 4 AND 5, GUILFORD'S REARRANGEMENT OF LOTS IN MOUND BAY PARK The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. C. CASE 83-109 - WESTONKA ELDERLY & HANDICAPPLED HOUSING - VARIANCES, UNIT SIZE, PARKING LOT SIZE AND NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS - LOTS 4,5,6,7, & 8, GUILFORD'S RGT. OF LOTS IN MOUND BAY PARK April 5, 1983 The City Manager explained that the Zoning Ordinance requires: unit size for a one bedroom apartment o~ 640 square feet; the parking space is 2½ spaces per unit, one of which is to be enclosed; and each stall is to be 10 feet by 20 feet. The applicant has requested'the unit size be reduced to 530-539 square feet; the'parking spaces to be all outside in the amount of 23 stalls with provision for 10 future park stalles, if'needed; and the stall sizes to be 10 feet by 18 feet with (2) 12 x 18 handicap stalls. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of these variances. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #83-52 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES AS REQUESTED FOR LOTS 6,7, 8 AND PART OF LOTS 4 AND 5, GUILFORD'S RGT. OF LOTS IN MOUND BAY PARK (2461 COMMERCE BLVD.) PID #23-117- 24 ll 0023/0024 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CASE 83-102 - ROBERT J. VEILLEUX - 5042 TUXEDO BLVD. - LOTS 5 & 6, WHIPPLE SHORES - (PID #24-117-24 43 005'4) ~- VARIANCE IN. LOT WIDTH The City Manager explained that this item is being brought back to the Council from the February 15th Meeting when it was .tabled in order to give Mr. Veilleux and Mrs. George an opportunity to discuss the.placement of a new home on Lot 6 that would'not be objectionable to Mrs. George. Mrs. George, owner of Lot 7, Whipple Shores, was present and objected to any home being built on this property'because it would not meet the criteria in the Zoning Ordinance in lot width 60'. Also allowing the di'vision of this property into two sites would make two non-conforming parcels. She also objected because granting the variance would be detrimental to the value of her property and when a home was built it would block her view of the lake. Councilmember Swenson stated that he didn't think the Council should allow the varlance because we would be creating two non-conforming lots. Mr. Veilleux was present stating that all the houses along Whipple Shores are close together so'he would not be setting a precedent. He has tried to accomodate Mrs. George by moving the proposed house back from the lake as far as reasonably feasible. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 83-53 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING C~MMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE LOT WIDTH VARIANCE AS REQUESTED FOR LOTS 5 AND 6, WHIPPLE SHORES (5048 TUXEDO BLVD. - PID #24-117-24 43 0054) A roll call vote was 3 in favor with Councilmembers Charon and Swenson voting nay. Motion carried. 55 April 5, 1983 COND~IONAL USE PERMIT - SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE - CASE 83-120 - JOHN R. DREWS - 2337 WILSHIRE BLVD. Peterson moved and Paulsen seconded.a motion to set the date for a public hearing on allowing a commercial recreation in a B-1 Zoning District for April 19, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor'. Motion carried. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY The City Manager explained that the Building Inspector has asked that the Council adopt a resolution approving the form as presented which spells out the specific information required on Certificate of Survey. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded the fOllowing resolution. RESOLUTION #83-54 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FORM ON PAGE 623 OF THE COUNCIL PACKET ENTITLED "INFORMATION REQUIRED ON CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGES The City Manager explained that the City charges $125.00 each for water and sewer availability per residence. These funds help cover future maintenance costs and the Water and Sewer Dept.'s time in locating water and sewer lines, etc. The MWCC charges a flat $425 per unit for the Sewer Availability Charge (SAC). The question is when dealing wi'th a multiple dwelling, such as an apartment building, do we charge by unit or should we be charging by lot area or usage. The MWCC, on public housing units, charges 75% of a unit for the SAC charge. The Council indicated they would like to charge by the unit. They asked the City Manager to write up a policy for these charges. COMMENTS & SUGGESTION FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked if there were any comments or suggestions from the citizens present. There were none. The City Manager referred, to the ~.roblem that Paul Young had brought up earlier and said that maybe a blacktop mat could be put on ~e City lot and with proper drainage that would solve the problem. BINGO PERMIT Charon moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to authorize the issue'of a Bingo Permit to the Westonka Seniors, Inc. for the following dates: 4/15/83, 6/17/83, 7/15/83, 8/19/83, 9/16/83, 10/21/83 and 11/18/83 for the hours of 7-9 P.M. and waives the permit fee and bond requirements. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. GAMBLING PERMIT & PARADE PERMIT - SHORELINE EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT CENTER, I NC. April 5, 1983 The City Manager explained explained that the ~horeline Early Childhood Developmeht CenteF~ Inc. i.s a non-profit, tax exempt organization and is requesting a Gambling Permit for June 10, 11 and 12, 1983, for the Giant Sale. Paulsen moved and'Pete~son seconded a motion to authorize the issuance oF a Gambling Permit for June 10, 11, and 12, 1983, for the Shoreline Early Childhood Development Center, Inc. with the permit fee being waived. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Shoreline has also asked for a Parade Permit but the City Manager suggested that the Council not issue this permit until Larry Connolly, representative for Shoreline meets with the downtown business people and works out the details of holding the parade on Saturday morning, June 11, during the 'peak shopping time. Peterson"moved and Swenson seconded a motion authorizing the issuance of a Parade Permit to Shoreline Early Childhood Development Center, Inc. when the City Manager is satisfied that all the problems for the businesses in downtown Mound have been resolved. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. STREET LIGHTING ITEMS A. NSP REQUEST TO CONVERT STREET LIGHTING- FROM .MERCURY VAPOR TO SODIUM VAPOR The City Manager explained that NSP has approached the City on converting ' our mercury vapor lights to sodium Vapor. This would give 12.3 percent more light for 5.4 percent more in monthly cost. They would do this over a 3-4 yea.r period. An initial payment of $5 per unit or $1865 total 'would be required for'the group replacement of these lights. The COuncil discussed the changeover and decided not to take any action on this item because they could see no reason to change... B. STREET LIGHTING POLICY The City Manager ha§ cheCked several cities and enclosed 5 different Street L.ighting Policies. He is recommending that we write a policy based on Brooklyn Center's PoliCy. The Council agreed. C. STREET LIGHT. PETITION - TYRONE LANE AND CARRICK ROAD The.City Manager presented the Council with a petition signed by 8 persons in the area of Tyrone Lane requesting that the City place a street light between Carrick Road and Kildare onTyrone Lane. The staff has checked this area out at night and are recommending that the Council approve the installation of a street light where it has been requested. Polston moved and Peterson seconded a motion to approve the installation of a street light between Carrick Road and Kildare on Tyrone Lane, as requested in the petition. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 57 Aprii. 5, 1983 ; REQUES~ ~O~'EXTEN§ION - RESOLUTION #81-270 SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - RICHARD OLEXA The ~ity Manager explained'that Mr'. Olexa is requesting an extension on this subdivision approval because he failed to file it within the 1 year time limit. Both the City Engineer and the City Attorney have questioned this subdivision because it appears to be solely for creating ownership of lake access, is not an appropriate use of the City's subdivision ordinance and the parcel created would not meet zoni.ng code requirements. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #83-55 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED EXTENSION ~ROM AUGUST 11, 1982 TO AUGUST 11, 1983 The Council questioned why this was approved in the first place, based on the Engineer's letter and the City Attorney comments tonight. Councilmember Swenson stated that'he and two others on the Council now voted in favor on August 11, 1981, and he would vote for the extension.' A roll call vote was I in favo~'with Mayor Polston, Councilmembers Charon, Paulsen and Peterson voting nay. Motion failed. MINNEHAHA WATERSHED DISTRICT NOMINATION TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS The City Attorney stated ~hat he had heard that the appointments had already been made. The Council questioned why the Board of County Commissioners sent this letter on March 16, 198.3 for people whose terms had expired on March 8, 1983, because the letter states, "These nominees must be submitted to the County Board at least 60 days prior to the expiration of term of office of that particular manager~'. Charon moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 83-55 RESOLUTION NOMINATING BRUCE CHARON Tb SERVE ON THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND REQUESTI'NG THE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERATION The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Council directed the City Manager to submit this nomination and ask why the letter was sent out after, the expiration date. . REVISED'DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM GUIDELINES The City Manager stated that there has been one change in these Guidellnes. The following has been added, "Interest subsidy amounts cannot exceed 25% of the loan amount". Councilmember Paulsen suggested that we define in the guidelines who the Downtown Loan.Qualification Committee consists of. The City Manager will add this information. It consists of The Downtown Advisory Committee Chair, the Planning Commission Chair and the City Manager. April .5, 1983 Charon moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to approve the revised Downtown Commercial Rehabilitati0n Loan Pr~gram'Guidelines with the additions suggested. This gill be Draft #5. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SHORELINE EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVEL6PMENT CENTER REQUEST FOR HUD FUNDS The City Manager explained that this request for $4800 came in after the approval of the 1983-84 uses of HUD Community Development Block Grant Funds and their submission to.Hennepin County. In order to consider this request, the Council would have to hold another public hearing and amend the plan already submitted. He exPlained that there is IO% of the total money available for this type of grant, but that there are 4 other day care centers in Mound that also could request funding and that would make all the grants smaller. Council.member Paulsen moved that the Council reconsider the uses that have al'ready been apprOved and submitted to Hennepin County and include Shoreline's request. The motion died for lack of a second. RADIO'PURCHASE REQUEST. The City Manager reported that the Park Director has done a study of our present radio'system and is recommending the following modifications which should help eliminate most of the problems we now have. 1. Trade in 10 year old Street Department radio on new one; re-crystal four other radios for two channel operation. 2. Purchase a control station for Public Works office. 3. Install extension at City Hall from Police Control Station to Administrative Office. 4. Remember to budget in.1984 for trade-in of older radios. Total cost for'the above improvements - $2,O51.OO. Swenson moved and Peterson seconded a motion to approve the radio purchase as requested' Money to be paid out of 1983 Revenue Sharing Funds. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. LIQUOR STORE FINANCIAL REPORT The City Manager went over the financial report with the Council. Profit was down slightly from 1981. The Council discUssed the possiblity of Nels developing an advertising and marketing plan for the Liquor Store. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion that an advertising and marketing plan be developed for the Liquor Store. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of $63,510.78, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. April 5, 1983 INFO~ATION AND MISCELLANEOUS H.F. 522 - LIQUOR LAW PROPOSA[ - 5 cents per drink excise tax to reimburse local government units and other state agencies for a portion of enforcement costs, including additional patrolling costs b~tween 9:00 P.M. and 3:00 A.M. MEMO ON THE ANNUAL VOLUNTEER FAIR - April 9, 1983 at Westonka Community Center in Downtown Mound - 10:OO A.M. to 4:30 P.M. Ce Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded a motion to designate the week Of April 4, 1983, at Volunteer Week in the City of Mound. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. HEARING NOTICE ON AL &'ALMA'S NEW DOCK LICENSE AND SITE LINE VARIANCE - L.M.C.D. - Set for April 6, 1983, at Tonka. Bay City Hall, 7:30 P.M. TONKA/CETA PROPOSAL - A copy of the Job Placement & Training proposal on Tonka that Hennepin County CETA submitted to the State and got funded in the amount of $75,000. The Council discussed the fact that CETA went off on their own with this proposal and is not coordinating their efforts with the City so that duplication does not happen. The City Manage'r Kill write to CETA and point out how coordination would lead to the best use of their Grant and the City's State Grant of $20,000. E. METRO REVIEW- from March 18, 1983 F. TWIN CITIES LABOR MARKET INFORMATION - March 1983 G. HENNEPIN COUNTY SPECIAL REPORT - on solid waste disposal and recovery. H. BREAKDOWN OF NEW JOBS FILL (HR 1718) - which was passed and signed last week. I. UPDATE ON WATER SHUT-OFF PROBLEM J. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT - Agenda from March 17, 1983 Minutes from February 17, 1983. K. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT - Annual Report for'1982. WESTONKA ELDERLY & HANDICAPPED HOUSING MEETING NOTICE - Set for Tuesday, April 12, 1983, to tour the South Shore Park Apartments in Excelsior. . M. AMM - BULLETIN N. IND. SCHOOL DIST. #277 MINUTES - from March 14, 1983. O. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ON CARL POHLAD ~ from the Corporate Report March, 1983. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to adjourn at 9:45 P.M~ The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. City Manager City Clerk Air comm. 96. O'O All Star El~trlc 1,169.16 Earl F And.ersen. 189.55 An thong/s. Floral 25.00 Acro Minnesota 102.63 Blackowlak & Son 56.00' Holly BoStrom' , 350.00 Burllngton Northern .533.33 Bradley Exterminating 19.OO Blue Cross 427.42 Bloomington Explorer Post 145.OO James Bloom 35.00 Continental Safety Equip 117~O3 Fran Clark 175.00 Commiss of Reve~ue 3,421.63 Dependable Services 33.00 D.R.I. Industries 150.48 Dock Refunds (ll) 468.O0 Jori Elam 16.O8 Empire Crown Auto 12.25 Feed Rite Controls 195.65 First Bank Mpls 16.OO Govt Training Service 25.00 Group Heal th 135.18 Henn Co. Treas. 150.00 Wm Husbands 4OO.OO Henn Co. Planning 3,384.82 Internatl Conf Bldg Offlc 50.00 Jenkins Equip Co. 263.15 Internatl Inst. Munlc Clrks I85.OO LOGIS 1,497.95 League of MN Municip. 11.50 Lamba Systems 515.11 · M.F.O.A. 65.00 MacQueen Equip 647.39 Minnegasco 3.14 Mound Explorers 210. OO Minnesota Fire Inc 85.28 Meta Resources P.A. 65.00 Mound Medical Clinic 58.00 McCarthy Well' Co. 95.00 Metro Fone 23.60 MN City Mgmt Assn 25.OO MN Recreation & Park Assn 85.00 Minnetonka Sportsmen 70. O0 Minn Comm. 28.75 State of MN Documents 5.50 Mpls Oxygen Co. 44.40 MN Form Printing Serv 752.00 McLean Trucking 29.44 Mound Fire Relief 2,750.00 Med Center Health 129.88 Moun~J Postmaster MN Chiefs Police Assn Mutual Benefit Life Natl Crim.inal Justice N.S.P. Northland 'Electric Old Dominion Brush Permatop Popham, Haik Schnobrick Pioneer Enterprlses Pitney Bowes Credit Pierceys Auto Body Ellora Perron P.E.R.A. Curt Pearson J. Rushtons Real One Acquisition Shepherds Rental Rugs Don Streicher Guns St. Paul Stamp Works SOS Printing Smoke-Eaters Stern. Levine & Schwartz State Treas Travel ers Ins Thrifty Snyder Drug Twin City Garage Door Uniforms Unlimited Water Products Co. Westonka Sewer & Water Bruce Wold Wall in Heating Western Life Ins Xerox Ziegler Inc State Treas P.E.R.A. Physicians Health Plan Griggs Cooper & Co. Johnson Bros Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Ed Phi'.llips & Sons TOTAL BILLS 600.00 4o.oo 718.48 16.90 4,158.44 463.14 591.OO 120.00 2,OO0.42 95.00 26.OO 115.00 1,5OO.OO 2,500.08 1,400.OO 18.65 698.78 53.00 121.30 148.55 142.30 156.OO 4,773.68 1,354.90 689.31 6.21 88.19 128.15 1,001.13 100.00 6.OO 31. OO 44.47 1,688.72 52.81 1,368.80 2,~83.22 4,630.88 2,455.O5 3,866.38 1,154.10 185.O1 2,176.43 63,510.78 ~9,6C+ 56-49+ 11~'08+ 125'10+ ?3°92+ 49.78+ 65~91+ 151olC+ 51.33+ 1G4olG+ 44.54+ 14~,4~+ ?6,60+ 54o0C+ 110,49+ 161o5C+ 54°94+ 62,92+ 42.48+ 21o62+ 54.40+ 08°09+ 14o29+ 14o28+ 36,32+ 92°52+ 65o~9+ 81~90.+ 85~02+ 19o9~ 41 Ol Ol 31 Ol 81 51 O1 51 141 ~11 ~ Ol ~ 71 5 81 6 91 4 41 8 81 i 81 2 41 ~1 71 ~6 51 33 590 5110 31 33 590 5111 11 Delinquent water and sewer $ 59.60 56.49 113.08 125.10 73.92 49.78 151.10 51.33 104.10 44.54 83.64 143.46 76.60' 63.38 54. O0 110.49 73.90 97,o~, ~ ~, oo 161..50 54.94 4-13-83 ~33 596 472'4 91 -33 59~ 4817 11 33 596 5137 31 33 599 4747 41 33 599 4781 31 33 620 3018 51 33 620 4649 61 33 620 4720 51 33 620 4738 71 33 620 4828 61 33 620 4865 81 33 623 5246 41 33-635'5227--81 33 641 5251 61 33 647 5222 41 33 647 5223 21 142.48 1 22.44 121.62 54.4O 54.60 ~l.l~ 108.09 -t~41.29- ~,~ ~u, 20 114.29 263.48 114.28 S2.52 81. 85.02 CiTY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota CASE NO. 83-120 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL USE (TANNING STUDIO) AT 2337 WIL- SHIRE BOULEVARD NOTICE 'lis HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, April' 19, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. at the Mound-City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minne- 'sota,.a hearing will be held on the application for a Conditional Use Permit for a commercial recreational use to be used as a ' tanni'ng and exercise studio. Location: 2337 Wilshlre Boulevard; legal description: Lot 37, Block 3, Shirley Hills"Unit F (PID # 13-117-24 34 0059). All persons appearing at said hearing wl]l be given an oppor- tunity, to be heard. Francene C. Clark, Cit-y-i;leFk Published in The Laker April 5, 1983. CITY OF HOUND Mound, Minnesota CASE NO. 83-120 Planning Commission Agenda of March 28, 1983. Board of Appeals Case No. 83-120 Location: 2337 Wilshire Boulevard Legal Desc.: Lot 37, Block 3, Shirley Hills Unit F Request: Conditional Use Zoning District: B-1 Applicant: John R. Drews 695 County Road 19 Mound, MN. 55364 Phone: 472-4733 The applicant is requesting to start a "$unlife of Mound" tanninq studio with three tanning beds to start his business. He plans to add to the future business some exercise equipment with possibly a sauna or spa at a later date. The present plans only involve carpeting and painting the existing structure, placinq signage; parking to remain as is. He will also run his electrical contracting business from this location. Pursuant to Section 23.625.2 Service Shops and Offices are a permitted use in the B-1 Zoning District. Section 23.625.3 allows commercial recreation as a condition- al use in the B-1 Zoning District. Section 23.302(23) defines Commercial Recre- ation as "Recreational facilities such as bowling alleys, tennis courts, race tracks, etc., constructed and operated for profit, by Private enterprise". Section 23.505.1(1-12) and 23.505.2(1-8) set up the criteria for qranting a conditional use permit. The Planner, Mark Koegler, and I feel that this type of operation depicts a Com- mercial Recreation type use of the property and does require a conditional use be granted. At the present time, I believe Mr. Drews will not intensify the present use of the property which is SOS Printing and Green-T Accounting. The present structure has a 1,O22 square foot~ floor area with approximately 2 parkinq stalls and no inter-circulation on the site. The survey indicates the building is en- croaching onto Lot 36. The lot area is 2,966 square feetS. The three tanninq beds which he proposes plus one employee would indicate a parking need of four stalls±; office use would require 3 parking stalls. Attached is a parking a~ree- ment and Resolution 78-221. The parking agreement should be transferred to the new owner of the site and written out to address the property and not the owner. The agreement should be approved by our City Attorney. A notice to patrons should be posted noting the location of additional parking to the rear. He intends to present signage concept for the building at the meeting. Tentative public hearing date of April 19th at the City Council Meeting. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms Case No. 83-120 Condit'ional Use Permit for 2337 Wilshire Boulevard Lot 37, Block. 3, Shirley Hills Unit F. John R. Drews was present. The Building Inspector explained that Mr. Drews has bought and will be movin~ into what is now SOS Printing. Asking for permit for.Commercial Recreational Use. Plans for property use include 3 tanning beds and some exercise equipment. Office use is-permitted and Mr. Drews would have his electrical business and some'storagq7-' also in the building. Site has only 2 parking stalls(right in front). Tanning f', ' Studio would be.a 4 or 5 month winter operation and the electrical business tendsi · to be a summer business. Mr. Drews does not plan to expand building size because of the small lot. Discussed some conditions of the Commercial Recreational Use: l) Proposed hours would be from 6 A.M. to 10 P.M. (not later'than 10 P.'M.); 2) Have an attendant on duty at all times; 3)"Would have 3 tanning beds; 4) Would have 2 pieces of exer- cise equipment to start: A) Motorized Exercycle and B) Trotter tread mill; 5) Parking needed would be approximately 6 parking spaces (5 customers and 1 atten- dant); and 6) Applicant would come back to Planning Commission for any expansion of this use (for added equipment, more'parking or any use at all). Reese moved and Vargo seconded a motion to recommend approval of the condition, use permit for 3 tanning beds'and 1 exercycle and 1 trotter tread mill .conditioned upon the satisfactory approval of a parking agreement with the Legion by the City Attorney for parking spaces (2 would be on-site and 4 off-site) and further to allow the wall mounted sign. The vot~ was: Byrnes against, all others in favor. Byrnes voted against as he feels use will grow and'he sees.a conflict with the Legion.on parking and he al'so thinks the commercial recreational classification · put on this may be asking for trouble, in the future; doesn't want City to get into same problems as with.the Arcade. !SUnllfe .of MOUnd · '] :,,':., 1T/atc, h' or · Klafsun Tanning Beds ' A I . II exerci== · ,Meteriz®dTre~er ortannin- bed' ' -. I Treadmill . . g ~orjust. I 'MotorlzedExercycle® ' $~ ' ' . . ' . i 'Exerciser . .. v persesslon I 'Mini gym power rack $ 4 ~1~ $ ~"~ ~ " Ik. Call 472-4733 for temporary location & appointment ,. Street Address of Property ~ ~ ~~ ., . .. Lagal Das~rip~ipn of Prop~r~y: Lo~_ ~ _ Block Applicant '(if other than Name Day .Phone No. -Address Type. of Request: ( other, specify: .)l.Vari'ance (J~) Conditibnal Use Permit Zoning Interpretation & Aevlew Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ) Amenamen t ~ Sign Permit )*Other Present'Zoning Distr.lct yi~ _/ Has an application ever ~een made for zoning, variance, or conditionB1 use permit other zoning procedure for this p~operty? ~'Y~ If sa, .list d~te(s) of list ~ate(s) of ~pplication, actio~ taken and p(ovid~ Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained In any required apers or plans to be submitte6 herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the eh.try in ,r upon the premises described in .this application by any authorized official of the City ,f Mound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such ,otices as may be-required by law. ;ignatur~ of Ap)>licant/~ 'lanning Commission Recommendation: Date :oancil Action: Re§olutlon No. Procedure for Condi'tional Use Permit Case # 83-120 D. 12~cation of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indicate North compass diredtion. F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. , Ill Request for a Conditional Use A. All information requested below, a site plan as described in Part II,'and ' a development schedule providing reasonable guarantees for the completion'. of the construction must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. i Type of development for which a Conditional Use Permit is requested: Current Zoning and ~esignation in the future Lan'd Use Plan for Mound Development Schedule: l. A development schedule shall be attached to thi's .appllcation.provlding reasonable guarantees for the completion of the'proposed development... 2. Estimate of cost of. the project: Density (for residential developments only): 1. Number of structures: 2. DWelling Units Per Structure: a. Number of type: Efficiency. 2 Bedroom 3. Lot area per dwelling unit: Bedroom Bedroom 4. Total lot area: IV. Effects of the Proposed Use A.,. List impacts the proposed use'wil'l have on property in the vicinity, in- cluding, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, and, describe the steps taken to mitigate or ~liminate the impacts. 770 ILL pu~ aa .'l.i:u[l gTT.[H -<oI.-tSqi-; '[. ~,;,o[~ ~Lg ",to'i jo sa.cart ua.~o'4 :ou',t .jo OZL-E9 'ON ':I.SV3 SON ~ 0^-18 CASE 8.3-120 o 0 ~"o PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case No. 83-120 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR A COMMERCIAL RECREATION FACILITY AT 2337 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, LOT 37, BLOCK 3, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT F PID # 13-117-24 34 0059 WHEREAS, the applicant, John R. DrewS, is ~equesting tO start a "SunLife of Mound" tanning studio with three (3) tanning beds and two (2) pieces of exercise equipment: 1) motorized exercycle and 2) trotter tread mill, and WHEREAS, pursuant to the B-1 Central Business Zoning District, a Commercial Recre- ation facility operated for profit by private enterprise is permitted by Conditional Use, and WHEREAS, pursuant to due and proper notice according to taw and Chapter 23 of the City Code, a public hearing was held on the 19th day of April, 1983, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does recommend approval with certain conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate "Sunlife of Mound" commercial recreation facility located on Lot 37, Block 3, Shirley Hills Unit F,.2337 Wilshire Boulevard, is approved subject to the following: 1) Three [3) tanning'beds, one exercycle and one trotter tread mill will be used as the equipment.t~~w~,.~.~~*c~J~. 2) Six (6) parking stalls shall be provided either on-sil~e.and/or a con- tinuation of the parking agreement with the American Legion (5 customer and 1 employee).. 3) Hours of o.peration will be 6 A.M. to 10 P.M. .4) An attendant will be on duty at all times. 5) The present wall mounted sign will be repainted to designate "Sunlife of Mound" as per Exhibit "A". 6) The present structure will be painted and carpeted only and that the applicant will come back to the Planning Commission for any expansion of this use (for added equipment, more parking or any use at all). Y). Remcrve rear wooden stairway and block door; install directional exit si~gE to lower exit door, Case No. 83-I15 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of March 28, 1983. Board of Appeals Case No. 83-115 Location: l) Cty. Rd. 15 & E. of North- ern Road; 2) City Rd. 15 & Southview Drive; 3) $outhview Dr. & Clover Circle~ 4)Red Oak Rd. & Clover Circle; 5) Red Oak Road @ 6201 Request: Variance of Ordinance 60.02; Signs along public throughfares Zoning District: Commercial B-2 & Residential R-1 Applicant: Charles & Orlando Push 6201 Red Oak Road Phone: 472-1585 The applicant is requesting to place 2 foot by 2 foot size signs along the public right of ways in five locations, possibly, from Thursday morning to Saturday eve- ning before 6:00 p.m. each week. She will be advertising for a home occupation at 6201 Red Oak Road. I have discussed the home occupation definition, Section 23.301(54) with her which states, "Home occupations which shall be defined to mean any occupation or profes- sion of a service character which is clearly secondary to the main use of the structure as a one-family private dwelling and does not change the character there- of. Any activity resulting in noise, fumes, traffic, light or odor to such an extent that it is noticeable that the property is being used for non-residential· purposes shall not constitute a home occupation. The use shall be confined to one room within the principal structure; shall be engaged in only by persons residing in the dwelling; and shall not have special parking, lighting, advertising, or other facilities which would indicate its use for purposes other than a one-family, private dwelling." This Zoning provision does not allow advertisinq to identify a home occupation in a residential district. City Code Section 60.02(n) states, "The erection and maintenance of any advertising sign or billboard along a public thorouqh- fare or over a public walk or street without authority of the City" It is difficult to have the applicant understand the City provisions as she has stated she has been doing the sign advertising for some time. 1. The location of County Road 15 east of Northern Road is on a County road which I explained would require Hennepin County Department of Transportation approval or approval of the adjoining property owner. 2. County Road 15 and Southview Drive is approximately the same situation as Loca- tion # 1. (Southview Drive is a 60 foot right-of-way.) 3. Clover Circle and $outhview Drive is a City right-of-way and park. 4. Clover Circle and Red Oak Road (60 foot right-of-ways). Applicant stated she would try to obtain written permission from the property owner. 5. Red Oak and 6201 is placed on the applicant's property. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms 7?7 " CITY OF HOUND Fee P.a APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING coMMISSION. (Please type the following information) feet AddresS Of ProPerty Owner's Name ~plcS ~'~OgL~ · DaY Phone No. Applicant '(if other than owner): Name Day .Phone No. )' Variance (') Conditional Use. Permit ) Zoning interpretation & Review ) Wetland Permit ,( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment (~Si~n Perm~it ( )*Other CITY MOUNG, ~,esent Zoning Dist'r.ict . ._ Existing U~e(s) of Proper~y ~t.~, A~~' ~ ~ u ' ' ' ~ other zon~g procedure for this property? ~ If so, list date(s) o list date(s) of application, ~ction t~ken and provide Resolution Mo.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contaj.ned In any required p~pers or plans to be.submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the en. try in or upon the premises described in .this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Signature of Appl'icant Date Case No. 83-115 Variance of Ordinance 60.02 - Signs along public thoroughfares Planning ,6201 Red Oak Road and various locations. Orlando and Charles Pugh were present. The Bu.~lS~Xnq fnspector.expla~ne8 teat tee applicant ims requesting permission-to locate 5 (2~ ~ 2'). ~real estate~'type stgns~ four on publi'c right-of-way, from ThuFsda¥, through SatarOa¥. for a home occupation,- Mrs, Pugh stated that the signs ~?e moFe directional ty. pe s['gns than adyert~si'ng, Coancil A The Bo~e ~ccupat~on ~ef~nj't~on of t~e City Code was di'scussed and that sign advertising for a home ~ccupati'on i's j'11ega1, I't was also discussed that this operatton m~ght Be more retaj'l than of a service nature. Vargo mo~ed and Mtchae,1 secon~e~ a m~tion to recommend denying the request for Case No. 83-1~5 ORONO NUISANCES SECTION 60.01 a. b. do Nuisances Prohibited No person shall cop~mit or maintain a public nuisance. No person shall =.wilfully omit or refuse to perform any legal duty relating to the removal of a public nuisance. No person shall let or permit to be used, any premises, building or portion thereof knowing that it is intended to be used for committing or maintain- ing a public nuisance. No person shall wilfully prevent, hinder, oppose or obstruct a public offic- ial in the performance of his duty in carrying out the provisions of this ordinance or in removing or abating a public nuisance. SECTION 60.02 Nuisances Defined The following are declared to be public nuisance~' affecting property, public and private, and public peace and safety: ae Definition - in General. A public nuisance is a crime, punishable as a deameanor, and consists in unlawfully doing an act or omitting to perform a duty, which act or ommission shall: 1. Annoy, injure or endanger the safety, health, comfort or repose of any considerable number of persons: 2. Offend public decency: 3. Unlawfully interfere with, obstruct, or tend to obstruct or render dangerous .for use or passage, a body of water adjacent to, or a public park, square, street, alley or highway in, the City: 4. Render any considerable number of persons insecure in life or obstruct their free use of property. All trees, hedges,~illboards., fences or other obstructions, except build- ings, erected in accordance with City ordinances,'which prevent persons driving vehicles approaching an intersection of public highways from hav- ing a clear view of traffic approaching such intersection from cross streets for 1OO feet along such cross streets measured from the property line, 100 feet from such intersection, measured from the property line. All branches o[ trees closer to the street surface than 15 feet and all branches of trees closer to the sidewalk surface than 8 feet. All excessive growth of weeds, and any noxious weeds as fefined in Section !8.171, Subdivision 5 Minnesota Statutes shall be considered a nuisance and controlled or destroyed by the City's weed inspector pursuant to this ordinance and Chapter 18 of the Minnesota Statutes.. The regulatory pro- visions of Minnesota Statutes 1976, Sections 18.171 to 18.272 are hereby adopted for the control of noxious weeds within the City of Mound and three copies of said sections of the Minnesota Statutes are on file in the office of the City Clerk and marked "City of Mound Official Copy." Said state regulations are incorporated in and made a part of this or- dinance as completely as if Set out here in full. In addition to the aforedescribed regulations, it shall be the duty of every owner of private property abutting on any public street or alley to cause the grass and weeds to be kept cut to the center of such platted street or alley. If the grass or weeds in such a place are 12 inches or more in height it shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this section. The City weed inspector is authorized and directed to abate said nuisance on.private property in the manner set forth in Section 18.271 of the Minnesota Statutes. It shall be his duty to cut all grass and eliminate weeds when the same are not cut by the property owners as required in this section. It shall likewise be the duty of the weed inspector to keep an accurate account of 72} ~al)~r o 0 - Page 2 the cost of such cutting opposite each lot and ~ertify the same to the City Counuil to be 'specially assessed against the abutting property in accordance with the authority established by M.S.A. 429.101 and 18.271 Subd. 4. (Ord 380- 5-31-78) e. The allowing of water,- rainwaCer, ice or snow to fall from' any building or structure upon any street or sidewalk or to floW'across any sldewa!~: f. Dense smoke, noxious fumes, fas, soot or cinders in such quantities as to render the occupancy of property uncomfortable to a person of norm'al s ensibility. g. Al/ places where intoxicating liquors are manufactured, .'sold, bottled or given away in violation of law or, ~vhere persons are permitted to resort for the purpose of drinking intoxicating liquors as a beverage violation of law, or. where intoxicating liquors ~re kept for sale, b ".: distribution ~n violation of law, and ~_ll liquors, bottles,' keg~, pu bars, and othe~ property kept at mhd used for' maintaining suchap!.~:--c. h. The drLnking of intoxicati~g liquors or non-intoxicating malt liquors on the streets, alleys, parks, parking lots, commons or other public land= in the village. . i, Any structure ~r premises used for the illegal keeping or selling of .." n~rcotic drugs, or resorted to by narcotic drug addicts for the purpose . · of using the same. 3, Betting or bookmaktns and all apparatus used in similar occupat{on,, k. Any public dancing operating without permission of the Village Council, 1, Any scheme for the dlstrlbutlon of proper~y by chance among person~ who have paid, or agreed to pay, a valuable consideration for the ~hance. m. Ail wire's, except clothesline wires, which are strtung less than 15 feet ~ n, ,The er¢ctior~ and maintenance of any.advertlsing sign or billboa~& ( ~a public thoroughfare or over 'a public Walk or street without authority- J . o. Anyth~clared to be a public nuisance by an ordinance of this v~lag'e. p. Any fence, or other structure, maliciously erected or maintained for purpose of annoying the. owners or occupants of adjoining property. /~'. All walls and other which have been buildings, structures damaged by fire, d~cay or otherv~se, and which are so situate..d as to endanger the safety of the public. .-' r. Any building or structure erected, altered, repaired or used in violation of ~.ny ordinance of this village. s. Any buildings open to the public which is overcrowded ~th occupants or which is not provided w~th adequate ingress or'egress ~o and from the ~ grneo ~').. Any building open to th'e public which ~s'not sufficiently.veniilated, severed, drained, cleaned 'or lighted in reference to its actual use, u, .Any buildings, conveyance or place where contagion, infection, fifth or other source of cause orpreYent~ble disease exists. v. Polluted public wells or cisterns, streams, lakes, channels or bodies of water by sewage, industrial wastes or other ~ubstances. w. - Privy vaults and garbage cans which are not fly tight. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota CASE NO. 83-117 Planning Commission Agenda of March 28, 1983. Board of Appeals Case No. 83-117 Location: 1736 Shorewood Lane · Legal Desc.: Lots 20 & 21, Block 4, Shady- wood Point Request: Variance Zoning District: R-2 Applicant: Keith & Debi Kullberg 1736 Shorewood Lane Phone: 472-5848/471-9663 The applicant has received variance apprOval in the past. Resolution 78-425 allowed a foyer to be built on the non-conforming structure. Resolution 81-308 and the time extension under Resolution 82-220 required the removal of the building from the right-of-way. The setback, after removal would be 8 to 11 feet from the front prop- erty line. The applicant is also requesting to sell Lot 21 which would require re- locating his existing driveway to Lot 20. He intends to place an attached garage over the existing foundation 8 to 11 feet from the front property line and be 2.5 feet to the side property line. Pursuant to the R-2 Zoning District Section 23.605.1, single family homes are per- mitted. Section 23.605.5 lot area required is 6,000 square feet. Lot 21 proposed to be sold off is approximately 5900 square feet~ from the Mean High Water elevation; the lot width and depth of the vacant lot meet the requirements. The Sunrise Landing is an 0nlmproved lake access. parcel, has conforming lot width, depth and area. the structure itself--see attached variances. Lot 20, if considered as a separate The non-conformance of Lot 20 is Recommend: I would recommend denial of the garage addition to be added over the existing foundation. Also, major building modification would be required as the U.B.C. Section 1105 states "In areas where motor vehicles are stored or operated, floor surfaces shall be noncombustible materials or asphaltic paving materials." The present floor system is wood and the possibility of maintaining a waterproof barrier to the living area be- low is very difficult, even with precast concrete. Removal of the en- croachment should still be accomplished. I would recommend that.L~; 21 could be sold as a buildable site with the lot area to be within 10% of the 6,000 square feet required. Al'so, it will be difficult to place a structure on the property with the required setbacks of a side yard of l0 feet, corner lots 20~to both Sunrise Landing and Shorewood Lane, and a lakeshore setback of 50 feet. I would recommend that the surveyor place the monuments, mark the possible building site location, and elevations be marked as well as utilities for Lot 21. The abutting neighbors have been notified. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms · · c TY 0F HouND Street Address of--P;operty ~F~'e Paid J~. ~ c~ Date Filed ~'/~ APPLICATION'TO PLANNING & ZONING COHHiSSlON' (Flease type the following information) .. Legal Descripti.on of Pfc;perry: Lot -'~-0 -~ ~/ O~ner's Name/~/~ ~ .~~/' ~'~ ApPllcant '(if other than owner): Name Day.Phone No. -Address 5'. Type. of Request: V)l.Vari'ance ( ) Conditibnal Use'Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) ~etland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment (' ~ Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: .. '*~, Present Zoning Olstr.i. ct~~P~:P 7. Existing Use(s) of Property.. '~as an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property?.. ~//~--~'~ If so, ·list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution. No.(s) ~] ~D~ ' t Case No. 83-117 VarianCe ~eques~ -'%736 Shorewood 6~E~ ...... ~- Lots 20 and 21, Block h, Shadywood Point Keith and Debi Kul'lberg were present. The Kullbergs presented a letter dated March 28, 1983 from Howard. and Carol Schulz (owners of Lot 19) which the Chairman read to the Commission encouraging a positive vote on this item. The Building Inspector stated that the $chulz's were granted a 5 foot street front variance to place their garage; they also have a lot size variance and a sewer easement on their property. The Planning Commission.discussed construction of the existing structure, pro- posed garage addition.over existing foundation, waterproofing deck and also the existing 2.5 ~oot side yard. Visitor parking was also questioned. Reese moved and Vargo seconded a motion to approve the variance reqUested for the garage additibn. The vote was unanimously in favor. Discussed the subdivision of Lot 21; lot size comes to within 10% of the required 6,000 square feet. Reese moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to recommend the approva) of the sub- division of Lo.ts 20 and 21, Block 4, Shadywood Point. The vote was unanimous- Reques't for :Zoni.ng Variance Proced6re (2) Case # D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indicate North compass direction .F. Any addltional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and appli'cable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. III. Request for a Zoning Variance A. All.i~formation below, a site plan, as descr'ibed in Part il, and general application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled. B. Does .the' present use of. the property'conform to ~11 use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes (~x) No ( )' If !'no", Specify each nbn-conforming use: Do .the existing--structures comply, with all area height and bulk.regulations for the zone district in'which it is.located? Yes (-x~) No ' ( ) .... If !'no", specify'each non-conforming use: Z D. · Which unique physical characteristics of the subject'property prevent its reasonable'use for any of the.uses.permitted in that zoning ~L~strlct? ,' ( ) .Too narrow · ( . ) TopOgraphy . ( ) Sol 1 ~ ~J~-~ (~ Too.~mall :- ( )' Drainage.. · · ( ) Sub-s~e~q~ ( )~Too shallow ( ) Shape (~) ....0~: Specify: [..Was .the hardship describe~ above created by the action of'anyone having property interests in the land afte~ 'the Zonin( Ordinance was adopted?, ,- Yes F. ~as the hardship cre~. by any'o~her man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of 8 road2 Yes (~) No ( ) If yes, explain: 8. Are the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition2 Yes ( ) No (~') If no, ho~ many other properties are similarly affected2 O~JY ,n~A~ H..~hat is the minimum ~d-~f~cat~on (varianc~ from tB[ area-'B~ regulations that ~ill permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans ~ith dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional ~heets, .if necessary.) ~_ ~.~ ~ g I ~ "b~[~6~ ~T -'~ h~ I. ~il1 grant'ing of the variance be materially detrimental to property ~n same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? Case 83-117 Keith ant Debi Kullberg 1736 Shorewood Lane Mound, Minn. 55564 472-5848 March 16, 1983 Dear Planning Commission and City Officials, We are interested in possibly- selling Lot 21 which is currently part of a parcel we bought 4~ years ago from Lew Dunham. The a~dress is 1736 Shorewood Lane, Mound; Lot 20 and 21, Block 4, Shadywood Point. In order to conform to city code, we need to apply for a variance. We are in a 6,ooo sq. ft. zoning area. According to Roy Hansen, our surveyor, Lot 21 falls no more than 85sq. ft. short of the total area needed to deem this a "buildable" lot. We have contacted the city offices and confirmed the fact that Mr. Dunham, the original owner of Lot 20 and 21, had, in fact, been assessed for 2 sewer services to the 2 lots years ago. In addition, in order to get our current driveway of~ of Lot 21, we would like to build a garage on top of our existing flat-top/car port roof (of which is level with the road). We currently have a one year extension on a street setback variance to remove part of this car port area and wall that sits too close to the street. We would like permission to complete all of this work at one time along with doing any necessary redesigning of the roof to give the house a total "blending in" appearance. The garage would then line up with our neighbors garage. Mr. Howard Schultz, our neighbor, has agree to this idea and feels it would greatly contribute to amending this black, flat roof that is currently an "eyesore." We are currently getting plans draWn up from contractors for the desired addition and can present ~. more detailed information at the Planning Commission meeting. ~'~e thank you for your time and consideration concerning Lot 21 and the building of a badly needed garage onto our existing structure on Lot 20. Sincerely, Keith and Debi Kullberg ROY J. 'HANSEN Land Surveyor AND Civil Engineer PROPERTY OF' : ~ Case 83- ! 13~07 Spring Lake Road PLAT OF SURVEY" · . T,lepho,.ne 933-~67~ LOCATION OESCRIB'EO AS FOLLOWS CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING I hereby certify that on .. 19~ I made ~ su,rvcy of thc location of the building(s) on the above described property ~nd that the location of said building(s) is correctly shown on thc above plat. CERTIFICATE OF. SURVEY I hcrcby certify that on /7~ ~ ' 19 7~ I surveyed thc property described above and' thai/thc above plat is a correct rcprcscntation of said survey. ,r&_.. ~ --) I ON 2 S¥3 ( W~V 15 ~'8-- QNQO~ ?$-/! ~,~.arch 28, 1983 ~ound Planning Commission' 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, Minn. 55364 Re: Garage variance application for Keith and Debi Kullberg Dear Planning Commission, Our neighbors, Keith and Debi Xullberg~ave applied for a variance to build a garage atop their black, Plat-topped roof. We totally agree with this projeet as we feel it would 1)greatly improv~ this eyesore 2)add value to the neighboring homes 3)come in line with the other properties in distance from the city street. We encourage you to work with them in recommending to the city council a positive vote to built this badly needed garage. Sincerely; Howard and Carol Schulz 1730 Shorewood Lane Mound, Minn. 472-3833 · RESOLUTION PROPOSED RESOLUTION Cas~ No. 83-117 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE STREET FRONT AND SIDE YARD VARIANCES AS REQUESTED FOR LOTS'20 AND 21, BLOCK 4, SHADYWOOD POINT (1736 Shorewood Lane) WHEREAS, Keith Kullberg, Owner of property at 1736 Shorewood Lane- PID 13-117-24 11 0020, has applied for an approximatel'y 9 foot to. 12 foot front yard · setback and a 3.5 foot to 3.63 foot side yard variance, and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested.to relocate his driveway to Lot 20 and con- struct a garage over the existing structure and remove a portion of the structure which is encroaching into the public right-of-way by 5.65 feet, and WHEREAS, the owner would rectify the encroachment by taking down a wall and buildlnq a new wall 12.4 feet from edge of the dwelling overhang at a right angle and with the side yard to remain at 2.5 to 2.37 feet from the lot line, and WHE ,. then separate the ~--~rc~.~ ~-Lot =be ~ld ~s : ~'~!!d~b!e ~r ,~ze is within I0~ nf the-~,~square ~,;,..~-~ ~foot ~.~?-~ ...... ~ eetZ)wi~Ict ,.,;dtl]_~nd depth i,, con- ,~ forma~nce~-2 Zonin.cj District, and ~ WHEREAS, the City Code requires the existing structure to be l0 feet and 6 feet to the side yards and 20 feet to the. front property lines, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission'recommended approval of this vari.ance due to topo- graphy and the paved right-of-way, location being approximately 6 feet from his property line. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City Councll does hereby concur with the Planning Commission recom- mendation to approve thes~,,~ oF the'~arc~l 'L~ allow Lo.~ 20 ~,,d 21 ~e- ~ so,~ ~cp~.~a.t~..Ly~ relocate ~e exmsting driveway onto Lot 20; grant the l~r '~_, side yard and front yard variances as stated in the aforementioned described request; require a new survey to be submitted with information supplied as required by the 'City Resolution. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission A~enda of March 28~ 1983. Case No. 83-119 Board of Appeals Case No. 83-119 Location: 5205 Shoreline Boulevard Burger Chef Legal Desc.: tots 3-6 Incl., Lot 3~ and Part of 2 and 37, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit F Request: Sign Variance Zoning District: B-1 Applicant: JOseph W. Nelson Suite 390 3585 N. Lexington Ave.. Phone: 484-8452 The applicant is requesting to place a 4 foot by 6 foot temporary sign and replace it in July with a permanent reader board attached to and within the current sign requirements. He stated'-he wi1'1 try to have a drawing of the new permanent sign the night of the Planning Commission meeting. Pursuant to the Sign Ordinance Section 55.38, a sign over 9 square feet requires City Council approval processed.as per a variance. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms e Case No. 83-119 Sign Variance for Burger Chef, 5205 Shoreline Boulevard Lots 3,4,5,6,36 and part of 2 and 37, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit F .Joseph Nelson was present. Mr Nelson is requesting permission for a temporary portable sign and plans to replace it in July with a permanent reader board. Had wanted to have drawing of the permanent sign with him at this meeting, but it was not ready. Byrnes moved and Michael seconded a motion to recommend allowing the temporary portable sign until July. The vote was unanimously in favor. CITY OF MOUND Fee Paid . _ Owner's Name Address ~_~;-/~ Date Filed ,.~-,,Z~'-,P$ ' APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COHHISSION (Please type the followlng information) .. .Day Phone No. ~/~/- ~'5/S,~Z.~" Applicant '(if other than owner): -Address ~'-/~. ,Pgo '..~-.q~- Type. of Request: Day .Phone No.. (.)'.Variance .( ) Cond.itibnal Use Permit ( ) Zoning interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. .. ) Amendment (~ Sign Perm{ )*Other *If other, specify: ou~ ~ Present'Zoning Oistr.ict ' 'Ce,.,'~.....,.,-~c,~/ Existing Use(s) of Property Y~sz-'~,~ Be, Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property?.. ~_~ If so, .list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contai, ned in any required papers or' plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry In or upon the premises.described in this application by any authorized official of the 'City of Hound for the purpose of inspecting, or of' posting, maintaining~and removing such notices as may be.required by law. Signature of Applicant PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case No. 83-119 RESOLUTION'NO. RESOLUT[ON TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE PLACEMENT OF A TEMPO- RARY SIGN PERMIT ON lOTS 2 - 6, INCL., LOT 36, BLOCK 1, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT F (5205 Shoreline Blvd.) WHEREAS, the manager, Joseph W. Nelson, of Burger Chef, PID 13-117-24 43 Olll, at 5205 Shoreline Boulevard has requested a 4 by 6 foot portable sign be placed on the property until July 31, 1983, and WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Code, Section 55.38, no sign larger than 9 square feet may be placed without City Council approval, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does recommend approval of the temporary sign placement until July 31, 1983. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City Council does concur with the Planning Commission recommenda- tion to approve the'temporary 4 foot by 6 foot siqn placement as requested for Burger Chef, 5205 Shoreline Boulevard. CASE NO. 83-118 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of March 28, 1983. Board of Appeals Case No. 83-118 Location: 5005 Avon Drive Legal Desc.: Lot 2, Block 3, Shirley Hills Unit B Request: Variance Zoning District: R-1 Applicant: Valerie Swenson 2463 Black Lake Road Spring Park, MN. Phone: 471-9092 The applicant is proposing to add a 20 foot by 20 foot attached garage to the north- east corner of the existing house and a 20 foot by 20 foot addition to the lakeside. Pursuant to the R-1 Zoning District Section 23.604.2 single family homes are per- mitted. Section 23.604.5 a lot area of 10,000 square feet, lot width of 60 feet, and depth of 80 feet. Lot 2 has a width of approximately 33 feet at the buildinq setback of 30 feet, lot area is approximately 8,884.3~ square feet, and lot depth average is 214 feet. Pursuant to Section 23.604.5(2) a front yard of 30 feet, side- yards of 10 feet and 6 feet for lots of record, and a lakeshore setback of 50 feet to Mean High Water as per Section 23.408(7). The present structure has a front set- back of 39 feet to 20.2 feet to the closest front property line, the side yards of 2.1 to 2.3 feet and 6.6 to 9 feet, and a lakeshore setback 150 feet plus. The lake- side addition is proposed to be 3.8 feet from the east property line and 13 feet± from the west property line. The street front garage is proposed to be 1.9 feet to 19 feet from the property line with a side yard to remain at 2.1 feet. The topography of this lot makes it difficult to place a garage attached or detached from the present structure. The narrowness of the lot at the street side also makes the garage placement difficult. The actual street curb line is plus 31 feet from the proposed garage as Avon Drive at the northeast is a lake access unimproved. Avon Drive paved street right-of-way curves away from the present structure. I have not seen plans for the remodeling, but I do . believe the applicant intends a second story over the garage. The lakeside addition requires only a side yard vari- ance of 2.2 feet. Recommend: I believe that the present structure should and will be remodeled along with the proposed additions. The existing structure has several append- ages now as well as roof lines. I would, however, recommend maintaining the required side yard setback of 6. feet on the lakeside. The garage, I would presume, if setback 6 feet on the east, would require more yard excavation to place it. The front yard setback could be granted as the narrowness of lot, topography, and the road right-of-way surface curving away from the property poses undue hardship to the property owner. The abutting neighbors have been notified. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms CASE NO. 83-118 BOARD OF APPEAES Case No. 83-118 Variance Request for 5005 Avon Drive Lot 2, Block 3, Shirley Hills Unit B Valerie Swenson was present.. The Building Inspector explained that the applicant today asked to be on this aqenda instead of the April 25th agenda. They have a hand out of the revised site plan. The proposed garage is relocated another 2 feet from side property line. The Chairman asked how far proposed garage had been brought back from the right-of-way, if at all? Not back from the right-of-way. Chairman asked applicant if this was their proposal they wished considered. Applicant.agreed. Chairman asked if anyone wanted to act on this with the information available to us. Vargo moved to add.to the agenda. The motion was seconded by Reese. All in favor. Vargo moved to deny the request. Motion was seconded by Reese. Vargo stated that his feeling is that it is simply.too much construction for lot size and sees the problem of this property utilizing all of the neighbor's green, space. Doesn't fe~. this lot will accommodate in this manner this kind of construction. The vote on the motion was unanimously in favor of the denial. Reese asked if there could be some problems with the building p~rmit. The Buildinq Inspector stated that the building would have to be brought into compliance. .The owner has not suE~itted drawings to i~ndtc~te how much they intend to bring into compliance with the Building Code. CITY 0F MOUND Applicati'on No. Fee Paid ~ .~ ~PLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the following information) Date Filed 1. Street Address of Property ~'OOC~ 2. Legal Descripti.on of Property: Lot Addition Shirley H~ll,. gnit B-' 3. 'Owner's Name RoB eft Mack Address 5600 Twin' Lake Terra'ce Block Day Phone No. ~_m~oo Crystal, M~nn, ~ll~g 4. Applicant (if other than owner): Name Valerie Swenson Address .2463 Black Lake Road, Spring Park Day Phone No. 5. Type of Request: (x) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. \ ( ) Amendment ( ] Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: Present Zoning District R1 Existing Use(s) of Property Rent~l, with intentions of ~ermanent re~fd~n~ Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? ~o If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises'described in this apFJication by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Signature of Applicant Date Planning Commission Recommendation: Date Council Action: Re~olution No. '' Request for'Zoni.ng Variance Procedure; (2) Case # .D. [ocatlon'of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. lndlcate North compass' direction F. 'Any additional', i.nformation as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sectlons of the Zoning Ordinance. III, Request for a Zoning Variance A, All information below, a site pian, as described In Part II, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled· B.' Does the 'present use of the properEy'conform to all use regulations for the zbne district In which it Is located? Yes (~'~ · If "no", specify ea~ non-conforming use: Do the ex.istlng'structures comp!y, with all area height and bulk..regulations for the zone district ln'whlch, l't Is.locate.d? Yes ( ) No' (X) ~; ' If ."no", specify'each non-conforming use: ~-~__..~_~-/~ o~_0 t- . · {/ .' ' -"'-. '. U - v O. Whicl~ unique physlc~l character,stlcs~of the subject property pr?v. ent its~ ~easonable use for any of the.uses.permitted in that zoning district?..'' .Too narrow ~-~ Toppgraphy ( ) Soil ." ' ~ Too. small - ( ) Drainage.. (' ) Sub-surface Too shallow ( ) Shape'' · ( ) 'Other: Specify: ,. E. iWas the hardship described above'created by the action of anyone having property Interests. in the.lan'd after. ~he Zoning Ordinance w.as adopted?. · '.. Yes (.) No ~') 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 only to the property described in this peti'tlon? Yes ( ) No ( ) If nb, how many other Properties are slmIl.arl¥ affected? - i,.~, .Vhat Is the ""minimum"~ ~dlficatlon'(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.) Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to'property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? Lot 2, Elock'3. Shirley. Hill's Uni'~ CASE NO. 83-118 Valerie Swenson 09~W~q I(] ~' NOA~/~ ~)u!pJ0330 aU!l C~IiY of MOUND Case No. 83-121 PlanninQ Commission A§enday of April 11, 1983: Board of Appeals Applicant: Case No. 83-121' Location - 4574 Den~igh Road Legal Desc.: Lots I & 2, Blk. 3, Avalon Request: Variance Zoning District: R-2 Jacci Segner 2260 Bayview Place Spring Park Phone: 471-0148 The applicant is requesting the split an existing two (2) lot parcel into two (2) separate parcels with the lot area, width, and depth conforming to the R-2 zoning district requirements of 6,000, 40 feet, and 80.feet minimums respectively. The existing house on Lot 2 indicates an encroachment of .2 feet (5 inches) onto the fire access lane to the east. Lot 2 indicates an existing garage which she has agreed to remove from the site. Pursuant to the R-2 zoning district the setback to the side yard for a "lot of record" is 6 foot and 10 foot. Pumsuant to 23.407 "(1) No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any residential lot prior to the time of constructior to which it is accessory. ,, The'slde yard setback variance of 6 ft. 5 inches would be required for Lot 1. If the unimproved access lane was considered as a public right-of-way, the structure would require a 20 foot setback. Pursuant to the definition for an "al'ley- A public right-of-way which affords'a secondary means of access to abutting property." As per the definition, I feel this is a secondary access, if any, and should only comply with the side yard setback requirements not the setback for a corner lot. The"as-built" drawing attached indicates that the sewer service to LOt 1 is from the east side of Lot 2. The owner should field locate the service a~d indicate it on the survey or be required to give the owner of Lot 1 an easement over that portion of Lot 2 to service the sewer line. The accessory building demolition permit should be obtained with removal of the garage within 180 days. Two (2) off-street parking stalls should be provided for Lot 1. The area of which should be 650 sq. ft. (stall~ of 10'X20' each) pursuant to section 23.716.5. '??? Planning Commission Minutes April ll, 1983.- Page 2 Case No. 83-121 Variance Request for 4574 Denbigh Road Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Avalon Jacci Segner was present. The Building Inspector explained that both Lots 1 and 2'are legal lots as far as width, depth and the area of them. The existing house on Lot 1 shows an encroach- ment onto the 15 foot fire access lane. of about 5 inches. They have a purchaser for Lot 1 and wish to divide the lots. They have agree~ to remove the garage from Lot 2 and also they will have to relocate on-site parking on Lot 1 for the new owner. The Planning Commission discussed that fire accesses were rarely vacated and the City Manager advised that unimproved Stratford (on north side of this property) i~. mostly underwater and treated as commons with a number of people having docks there so access needs to be retained. It was also noted that the deck variance approved by Res. 81-309 was never used and no longer valid. It was questioned what is dif- ferent from request in 19817 Same request. Discussed that most homes in immediate area are located on double lots and that there is.serious topography problem which limits the use of the lots; extremely hard to get'a garage on this site; would have to do grading and build a retaining wall. Reese moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to'approve the 6.2 foot variance for the existing structure. The vote was M'ichael and Weiland against; all others voted in favor. Motion carried. Vargo moved 'and Reese seconded a motion to recommend denying the division. The vote was. Michael, R~ese, Vargo and Weiland in favor of the denial; Byrnes, Je~,o~,, and Mierzej'ewski voted against denying. Motion to deny car'ried 4 to 3. Reason given by Chairman Weiland was Resolution 81-39 and topography makes placement of structures very hard. Street Address of Property CITY OF MOUND APPLICATION TO PI~ANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the"following information) Le. gal'Des~riPtl.on.of Property: Lot Owner's Name Appllcant '(if other than owner): Fee pal d Date Filed Block' ,~. · PID No. .Day Phone No. Name Day.Phone No. -Address Type. of Request: ( f other, specify: ~-~.Vari'ance ( ) Conditibnal Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ' ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ) Amendment ] Sign Permit )*Other Present Zoning Distr.,ct Existing Use(s) of Property Has'an application ever been m, ade for zoning,~va~ance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure fo.r this'.property? ~ \l~ If so, .list 'date(s) of Ii'st date(s) of applicat,on, act,on taken an~ provide/Resolution NO.(s) ~1-~ '' 'Copies of~revious resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained In any-required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. or upon the premises described in .this apF~ica~ion by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, malntain~ng and removing.·such notices as may be required by law. Signaturo of Applicant Planning Commission Recommendation: Council Action: Date Re~olution No. Date Requ6st fok-Zoni.ng Variance Procedure ; (2). D. Location of: S.igns, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indica.te North' compass direction F. Any additional i'nformation as ma); reasonably be required by the City Staff and applidable. Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. III. Request for a Zoning Variance . A. All.informatlon below, a site plan,.as descr'ibed in Part II, and general application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled. B. Does.the 'present'use of. the pr~pert~'conform to,ali use regulations, for the zone district in which it ss.located? Yes (~'/~) No ( )' If !'no", specify each ~on-conforming use: Ce De Do'.the existing 'structures comply, with all area height and bulk.regulations for the zone district'ln'which i't'ls.located?- Yes (. If "no" specify each non-conforming use: . ~ich unique physical characteristics#of the subject property prevent.its reasonable'use for any of the uses.permitted in that zoning district? (. ) ..Too narrow (.) Topography (') ( ) Too. smal I m' '( ) Drainage.. (,) ( ) Too shallow (m) ShaPe'. ~ ) Soil Sub-surface. Other: Specify: Was ~he hardship described above 'created by' the action of anyone having property interests in the land after 'the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (~,) If yes, explain: tion of aI road? Yes ( ) No(~) if yes, explain: Are the ~onditions' of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes (~ 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.) · CASE NO, 83',121 My In;e..tim;s ix a.:,klng for th~s are to make the existing house aacept~b].e in llgh~ of the c'ur'~-ent zonin~ setb~cks,. to faci]its'te the division of lots 1 an~ ?. Thereis curremtly al~ o]~ garage on lot ?, which has a certain value if tine property were to remain a single parcel. However, if lots ! and 2 were to be 8ivided, them the garage would be a detriment to lot 2, as well as an eyesore in the neighborhood. The property is currently sold to a buyer who does not want lot 2. My hopes are to sell him lot 1 and then remove the old garage from lot 2., all of w~ich would upgrade the neighbor- hood. RD ;'), CARLOW ~2 3O ~_.,~ KELLS CASE N,O~ .83-121 4 3",q% ,';j'..'%J~,a ,C'.,j;zoq : t..'o,',.zt:.~ jo a%~-,'[j t (:),/ -,o.o /o/~'., : CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" CASE 83-121 PERMANENT EASEMENT COUNTy ROAD e 125 A V HYDRANT __ ¢,, ,.:,~ COUNTY ROAD~-125 EASEMENTDENE Counci lmem'ber S. Wenson moved th;' roi'lowing resol~Jt'ion, '. RES'OLUTION NO. Rl-~.q '. ~ESqLUTION DENYING T,HE SUBDIVISION OF LAND WHEI~EAS, Jacquei~hn S~gner., owner of property described as Lots 1 and 2, Bl:ock ~. Avalon, Plal: 37850, Parcel 0480, PID 1Ft-117-23 2& OO12: has applied for for subdivision of property, and ~HEREAS. although said property if divided would meet the square footage require- ment for property zoned A-2~ 6,000 sQ. ft. single family ~esidence, and ~.IHEREAS, proposed subdivision Eot 1. with structure on property, is encroaching on City property with said building, and WHEREAS, division would result in extremely narrow lots making for undesirable placement of structure or possibly requiring variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND. MOUND. MINNESOTA: .... , That Council does hereby DENY the request for subdivision of land, Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Avalon, PID 19-117-23 24 0012. A motion for the adoption of'the foregoing resolution was .duly seconded by Council- member Charon and upon vote being taken thereon: the following voted in favor there- of; Charon, Lindlan and Swenson, the following were absent, Polston and Ulrlck, where- upon said ~esolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the Cit~y Clerk. AttestS/ City Clerk CHC s/L.L. Lindlan Mayor Councilmember Charon moved the following resolution, September 22, 1981 RESOLUTION NO. 81-309 RESOLUT'ION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE DECK AND RECOGNIZE THE EXISTING NONCO'~FORMANCIES - PID #19-117-23 24 OO12 WHEREAS, Richard C. Haley, owner of property at 4574 Denbigh Road, described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Avalon, PID #19-117-23 24 OO12, Plat 37850 Parcel 0480, has requested a 10' side yard variance, and WHEREAS, said variance is requested to replace.cracked concret and build a 12 x 16 foot deck, and WHEREAS, there are existing nonconformancies, i.e. dwelling is encroaching on City property, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recognized the nonconformanci'es and recommended approval'of the building of a'deck, granting a lO' side yard variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE I.T RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE'CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: ' That the Council concurs with the Planning Commisslo~ recommbndatlon and does. approve the building of the 12.x 16' side yard variance. A mo~ion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly. seconded by Councilmember UlrJck and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof.: Charon, Swenson,..Ulrick and'Lindlan;" the following voted against the same: none; with the following being absent: 'Polston; whereupon.said resolution was' declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Manager. Mayor Attest~ City Manager April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: RE: CITY COUNCIL CITY HANAGER RICHARD A, 0LEXA SUBDIVISl0N OF LAND As you may recall the Council denied the applicants subdivision because he wished to string a 15 foot wide piece along his Mother's property so he could retain lake access. It was the City Attorney's desire that this be done by private easement. Mr. Olexa agrees with that and wishes only a simple subdivision by shifting his lot line back 20 feet. All setbacks and lot size requirements are met. recommendation that this be approved. It is the Staff's JE:fc :~Id pue suo!%dl.tos~? jc ~:~ -oa~ pins jo 'OI ~ jo jioq :jo sot~p~,o~ oq~ jo fa~s z 3o uot~uos s~q3!oH. PO~ZI~H ¢0I pu~ 6 s%oq u! 9 jo au!i %~ p!~.uo %u$~ ~ mo~j OI %~ jo JT~ %~"'. pt~s jo ~uiT -..~ eq% ol a~oipu~ %s~.,.I u~ euli 2 jo 4;nos pu;~ ~e~j '4T ~ ~ :%"q~aos~p~Aoq~ p[~s jo %~'.~ 9u7~10i ~ jo jlv4 %so,~ pI~'s 70 ~4~ &JEOX20TEY ~,~ su!q. pI~z jo II=oq%noS ~uiZI 0i.%~ jo jl~q jo .<I~%nos pu? ,V oujq. ,p!~ jo Llao~%aoN puTfI'6 1~ $o %a~- ' '. -- ~ jO Xlaeq%aoN 2u!~I 6 q.~ p~s jo %~ ~q% jo %eoj p[~s jo ~ulI %'kal5 ~4'$ uo %~ v ~5 ~%oI P!~S jo OUTI XI~ey%~oN ' e~:~ qqW, IeTIn~d AI~%s~q%~ON ~p ~uii ~ 3o rT~q.4no~ ~uI,C~ ~',,u~,'~,, i-,e~i~~ :.::':~ ',' ": - .'Of ~o7 jo Jim{ %~ ~:~ pu~ 6 ~ jo ~a~ ~y~ ,- ~ 1~4J , ,r,, ,~ ~OI %~ jo 3T~q %s~,t~ py~ Jo ~eu~oo %~e~q%aoN ~q% ~oaj ~$~-;:.J ~.,~,.. . . osw/~ l?Jl ~.,. ~oI P!~'= jo ~ouaoo /i~%~-qq. aoN ~q~ mo~y q%n~ %005 ~0~ %u~%~!P 5o7, {:~ ,-,' ~ ,,., ' pie~ jo ~u!1%s~ ~q2 uo %u]~ ~ m~j ~oI pI~;s jo euIi X'[asq~aoN( '? '-' :, aw~o,~ ;7i~.~a,~qgzo~i ~:{% ~oa,; q;nos %o05 ~OJ %uc-~slp 6 %~ pT~s jo , ~ . ' :;'~ 1{'4715 l.~ITt~aw] 2I~'%~aq'4zq.~ u~n~p ouTi u jo Al~eq%noS 3u!XT :::a,.: ~tiq aaAo sas~aac X~'~-~ap aoj ~u~aesea ue o~ ~ooFqn~ "6 %~ ~ ,~.. "l ~ ,r,T:'s j.o a~uaoo .<Iaa',s~:'~q~aoN aq~ ~ozj q'znoe %Cad ~T ~ut~sto A ~ ' .b "' ~.-...- ,'~ % . ~ . J .~oI p~s jo ~u~t xI~ay~aoN ~,'f',',2 N[ . . ,.~.lbl,,~ -,~ , , I'l 1' aU) ~~-' .~~ ~os:-wa~ X~hno3 uTdauue~ / ~ H ~ / to I I OEO/ ...... ~'F'~r-- " ~;'-'.. ..'~ O, : 1'4'='"' ,: :.- z~'~, 996~'2 '"' I Councilmember RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SUBDIVISION AS REQUESTED - THAT PART OF LOT 9 AND THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 10 LYING SOUTHERLY OF NORTHERLY 185 FEET, BALSTED HEIGHTS WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the .City o~ Mound, and WHEREAS, said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning 'Commission and t.he City Council, and WHEREAS, it is determined that there are special circumstances affecting said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; that the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property'right; and that g~antlng the waiver will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other owners; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: l) That the request of Richard A. Olexa for the waiver from the provisions of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request to subdivide property of less than five acres, described as Lot 9 and West 1/2 of Lot }0, Halsted Heights, Plat 61605, Parcels 1825 and 1850, PID #22-117-24 43 0011/0012 is approved to be divide~ as follows: PARCEL "A" - That part of Lot 9 and the West half of Lot 10, "Halsted Height~", lying Northerly of a line drawn North- easterly parallel with the Northerly line of said lots from a point on the West line of said Lot 9 distant 210 feet South from the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 9, subject to an easement for driveway purposes over the West 10 feet thereof; PARCEL "B" - That part of Lot 9 and the West half of Lot 10, "Halsted Heights", lying Southerly of a line drawn North- easterly parallel with the Northerly line of said lots from a point on the West line of said Lot 9 distant 210 feet South from the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 9, together with an easement for driveway purposes over the West 10 feet of that part of said Lot 9 lying Northerly of said above described parallel line 2) That any deficiencies on said property resulting from division are to be paid in full or waivers signed. 3) It is determined that the foregoing division will constitute a desirable and stable community development and it in harmony with adjacent properties. 4) .The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the applicant for filing in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the subdivision regulations of this City. CITY of MOUND MEMO 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 April 15, 1983 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Enclosed is a request from Buzz Sycks, President of the Streetcar Boat Center, Inc. for an additional 60 day extension. As you may recall this project is working under a 60 day extension and prior to that had nearly of five month option. I would strongly oppose the granting of another extension without requiring a cash deposit of at least $1,000. Nowhere have I heard of a group requesting an option on a piece of property the value of Lost Lake without putting down an option payment. The status of this development, I think, is very much up in the air. Not one time have I or anyone in the community been given or shown any hard evidence that this project has proceeded from its drawing stage of last Fall. A positive alternative would be to leave the land unoptioned and open for bid. I think there may be a number of people who could have an interest in the site. If along the way, the Streetcar Boat project gets its act together and the City Council feels that is the best use of the land, then you can approve an option agreement on the site. I mention this because I think they have taken the City as being a soft touch. For their option agreement with Tonka (a site half the size of the City's), they have paid without any question $2500 twice and within the next 45-60 days have another renewal option payment of $2500 due. Clearly, I think the taxpayers deserve at least equal compensation. JE: fc WILLIAM R. KOENIG JAMES G. ROBIN PETER W. JOHNSON JOHN W. WOOD, JR. LI~GAL ASSISTANT: JOANN B. JACOB LAW OFFICES KOENIG, ROBIN, JOHNSON & WOOD 2305 COMMERCE BLVD. MOUND, MINNESOTA $5364 (612) 472-1060 240 CENTRAL AVENUE OSSEO, MINNESOTA 55369 (612) 424-$612 REPLY TO; April 11, 1983 The Honorable Mayor R. Polston Mound, MN 55364 RE; Proposed Streetcar Boat Shopping Center Dear Mr. Mayor: This letter is written to confirm our continuing interest in the purchase of the City of Mound and/or Lady of the Lake Church Lost Lake property. I am sure that you realize the multitude of meetings and intricate negotiations necessary to put together a multi-million dollar center and, although we are proceeding well, our plans are not yet complete. We are, therefore, eompelled to ask you and the Couneil to grant to our group another 60-day option to puchase above-mentioned land from April 15th, termination date of our present option. Thank you for this eonsideraOon. Very truly yours, STreetear Boat Center, Ine, MLS/ms April 19, 1983 2305 Commerce Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364 Honorable Mayor Robert Polston Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Mayor: Since my last correspondence with you, I have met with my associates in the Mound Trolley Boat Center, Inc., and decided that the following action should be mutually satisfactory to the council and our group: 1.) We enclose herewith, a check for $500 as a 60-day option payment. 2.) This payment is to be deducted from the purchase price when our purchase is completed (same as we have with Tonka Toys). 3.) In the event that a Court case is necessary to clear title and the property is awarded to the former owner, this option payment will be returned to the Mound Trolley Boat Center, Inc. 4.) If it is necessary to extend our option for additional periods, it is hoped that this same formula will be applied. Trusting that this meets with you and the Council's approval, I remain, Very truly yours, M. L. "Buzz" Sycks, President Mound Trolley Boat Center, Inc. MLS/jmw April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Attached is a letter from the PCA regarding "Open Burning". It discusses appointing someone locally to be responsible for issuing Burn Permits with PCA approval. I would like to have Bob Cheney, Fire Chief, authorized to handle this responsibility in the City. JE:fc cc: Bob Cheney Minnesota Pollution Control Agency To Whom It May Concern: Numerous inquiries regarding the delegation of authority to issue open burning permits have been received by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. This letter is intended to provide information concerning delegation of that authority. Open burning in the State of Minnesota is regulated under the provisions of Minn. Rule APC 8 "Open Burning". In accordance with section (f)(3) of the rule, a person or persons designated by a county board of commissioners, or either a fire chief or a person designated by a township or city, may accept applications and issue open burning permits upon authorization by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. In order to receive this authorization, the governmental unit must submit a written request to the Director, Division of Air Quality, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, requesting the authorization. As part of the formal request, a copy of the meeting minutes indicating the motion passed to designate a person (name and position) to be approved by the Director and a copy of an ordinance adopting Minn. Rule APC 8 by the governmental unit are also requested. In situations where the governmental unit contracts for fire protection, a requirement of the authorization will be that co-approval be received from the fire authority prior to issuing any burning permit. Governmental units desiring authorizaton to accept applications and issue open burning permits or further information, are requested to contact Mr. Raymond Bissonnette of the Division of Air Quality in writing or call (612) 296-7300. RegulAtory Compliance Section Division of Air Quality PJG:Jfd Phone: 1935 West County Road B2, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-2785 Regional Offices ,, Duluth/Brainerd/Detroit Lakes/Marshall/Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER RE: FINAL HARDRIVES PAYMENT & BARTLETT BLVD. REPORT On the Agenda last month we had a recommendation to pay Hardrives, Inc. $16,411.92, as a final payment for work performed in 1981 on Three Points Blvd. and Tuxedo Blvd. This amount was the negotiated resolution of an original bill they submitted, in the amount of $48,000. It was felt by the City Attorney, City Engineer and myself that this is a fair resolution of this matter and should be approved. Unfortunately, a separate issue derailed this (that being Bartlett Blvd.) and unless we act on this soon, the agreement being proposed might be cancelled and we will be back at point A, and probably having to resolve it in court. Although I don't think any of us are looking the other way at the problem on Bartlett Blvd., I think it's important we don't force a showdown where it may not be reasonable to do so. The Engineer will attend the meeting to present his report on the status of Bartlett Blvd. and what he would recommend. JE:fc McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LANO SURVEYORS · PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 March 1, 1983 Mr. Oon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound 1981 Street Improvements MSAP 145-101-06 Tuxedo Boulevard MSAP 145-106-01 Three Roints Boulevard Files #5387 & 5388 Dear Oon: Enclosed is a copy of Payment Request No. 8 for the above projects. As you will note, there is still a l~ retainage shown which will be paid to compeltely final the projects after the repair work on Bartlett and Tuxedo is completed early this summer. The amount which we are recommending for payment is the result of a years negotiating with Hardrives. They were initially asking for extra quantities of blacktop and gravel in the amount of $48,099.60. This number has been reduced down to $16,577.70 as a result of these extended negotiations. Basically, Hardrives contended that much more material was used on the project than we were willing to pay for. It is true that the material was used on the project; however, with our inspectors' reports, project photos, and other data, we were able to convince them that the material was actually wasted or used on other parts of the project. We believe that the payment request recommended repre- sents a fair finalization of this project. You will note that even with this change, the total cost of both projects is only $6,964.67 over the already ap- proved contract amount. The following is a breakdown of the construction costs for both of these projects: Mr. Oon Elam March l, 1983 Page Two Tuxedo Boulevard Three Points Blvd. Totals Original Contract $330,442.02 ~494,036.20 $824,478.22 Change Revised Final Orders Contract Construction Cost $23,463.27 $353,905.29 $354,558.09 $ 4,409.27 $27,872.54 $498,445.47 $852,350.76 $~04,757.34 $859,315.43 If you need any additional information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, HcCOH8S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. William H. McCombs, P.E. WHM.so Enclosure HARDRIVES, INC. · MAPLE GROVE EXECUTIVE CENTRE P.O. BOX 57g 7200 HEMLOCK LANE NORTH ST. CLOUD, MN 56302 MINNEAPOLIS, MN $$369 (612) 251-7376 {612) 424.4424 RR. 3. BOX 120 SHAKOPEE, MN 35379 (612) 445-5633 January 28, 1983 McCombs-Knutson Assoc., Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, Mn. 55441 Attn: Chuck Wilson Dear Mr. Wilson: Per our phone conversation on January 28, 1983; Hardrives, Inc. agrees to complete the following items during the 1983 construction season once Final Payment has been received on Project No. MSAP 145- 101-06 - Tuxedo Blvd., and Three Points Blvd.; MSAP 145-106-01. 1. Bartlett: Patch cracks and joints and seal coat same areas patched. 2. Tuxedo: Patch all areas in need of patching and seal coat ravelled areas, approx.~ ~ ~ ~,.,-. ~-~. Sincerely, ,,") ,']'Z Kenneth R. Hall President HARDR IVES, INC. KRH/cam PREL IH INARy CONTRACTOR F'AY ESTIMATE NO. 08 PAGE 5387a88 ~O~D, HN - T~EDO ROAD ~ THeE POINTS ~ M~ 1981 Oi ENOINEER: McCOMBS-KNUTSON CONTRACTOR: HAP, DRIVES, INC. ]2.800 M~Y SS 7200 MEKLOCK LANE ........... PLYHOUTH, HN MAPLE GROVE, DATE: 11/30/8~ -- CONT~C~'~ E~TIflA~E'SUHflA~Y--£~ ............................. THIS PERIOD TO DATE COMPLETED TUXEDO BDD[EVARD -i~sA~' J.-~SJ'iO~-O6 .... THREE POINTS BOULEVARD MSAP 145-106-01 MATERI~.LS ON SITE TUXEDO BOULEVARD MSAP 145-101-06 THREE POINTS BOULEVARD HSAP 145-106-01 16,577.70 S~4,558.09 O. O0 504, '/57.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL ........ LESS RETAINAGE - PREVIOUS, CURRENT .... ~'i6,5'77.70 165.77 8,593.15 TOTAL A~OUflT DUE FOR ~ORK COHPLE'-TE~"~O"DA~[E.- LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS 83~,310.36 - -71"OTAL AHOUflT DUE 16,411.9e 16,411.98 -- SUHHARY OF* PREVIOUS PAYMENTS -- ESTIMATE ND. DATE 1 05/31/81 8 06/30/8i 3 07/31/81 4 08/31/81 5 09130/81 6 10/31/81 7 1E/31/81 ' --~)i~'PROYED:' '--~-~~ . ' LNG INEER: McCOltBS-KNUTSDN ..................... -AMo~T ............... TOTAL'" 104,149. B1 104,149.81 137,109.89 841,859.70 PO4,175.~.9 445,435.09 113,809.39 559,844.48 · 109,764.98 ' 669,009.40 45,145.75 834,310. SIS APPROVED: CONTRACTOR: HARDRIVES, INC.. 'NO!SI08 !~B80~ :A~ :lSB!±~ ~!OSSNNiW 'GN~OW HO AIi3 'OBNB80 B~ SOI8 BH£ B~£~ SAgO 018 WO '>{3~H3 OBI~I!WB3 W 0!8 SIH HIIM B~I~ 9~HS W~O01E HJWB 'O~NB~O B~ S0!8 ~H£ ~Bl~ SAgO NB!~. (8;) NiHiI~ S~OIi~3I~iOBSS ON~ SN~]8 BH£ ~0 N~iB~ NOdO BH£ HilM 018 W oB]i~ SWH ONW ilSOWBO W BOWN SWH OHM ~BOOI8 H3WB' ~O'I!S08BO N08~ ~BBNI~NB BH! ~0 BOI~BO'BHi l~-OBNI~180 · 'A~W S018 ~NI~SB~8. NI ssn ~0~ SNOII~3I~IOB8S ON~ SN~]8 ~IOSBNNIW 'H£ROWi]8 'O~^B]RO~ ~8 ]~i~IS~ONI 808~ ON~ S~BBNI~NB 8NI£]BSN03 ''3NI 'SBi~I30SS~ NOS!ON)~-SS~03 3W ~0 SB3IB~O BH£ l~ ON~ 1~393 lilO 3H£ HilM B]IB NO BB~ S±N3~0300 £3~BIN03 0BS080~8 ~B~£O. ON~'SNOI£~3I~I3BSS 'SN~]8 BH~ ~0 SBIC03 'iOBFO~d ~Hi ~0~ BOISIOO BHI NO OBS~OONB B8 ~UHS ~OBqUBS I~B~OSS ~8 ~qUHS ON~OW ~0 ~!IO 'S'1~83~ 1~03 ]~BS ~0 SNO~ 0g8I ON~ -!~W S~ONiW~II8 ~0 SNO]]~O ~00'l~ A]BI~WiXO~88~ ~0 NOI!~3I]88~ ~!OSBNNIW McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES' INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS Il LAND SURVEYORS [] PLANNERS April 19, 1983 Reply To: 12/300 inclultri~l Perk Boub~vard Plymoutl% Minnesota 55441 (612) 5~)-37DO Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound 1980 Street Improvements - Section 2 Bartlett Boulevard File #5248 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: As requested, we have completed an extensive evaluation of the condition of the bituminous paving on Bartlett Boulevard. Braun Engineering Testing took borings and did tests on the wear course. A copy of their report is attached for your information. The asphalt content and aggregate gradation are both within the recommended range to meet the Mn/DOT specifications. The moisture content of the subgrade in Bartlett is high in the Glendale Road area. The ma- terial in the Rubgrade is consistent with that in other areas of the job. The problem area between Norwood Lane and Fernside Lane is in the two joints. We would recommend the following: / 1. Approximately 200 feet of the north joint should be cut out and patched. Also one larger area approximately 3' x 6' should be patched. J 2. Remainder of the north joint and most of the south joint to be cleaned and filled with joint sealer. v/~3. Seal coat a minimum of 4 feet wide entire length of both joints from Norwood Lane to Fernside Lane Station 19+75 to 24+75, which is 500 feet. In addition to this work, a few small areas between Fernside Lane and Fairview Lane need to be cut out and patched and with joint sealer applied in a number of spots. These areas along with previous patches should be seal coated. The section of Bartlett from Norwood Lane to County Road 15 is in good condition and should not need any further work until it is seal coated in the normal schedule. From the letter submitted by Hardrives and our conversation with them, we feel that they have already agreed to do all of the above mentioned work. prir~ted on rec¥cted paper City of Mound April 19, 1983 Page Two On Bartlett Boulevard, at the intersection with Glendale Road, construction was done in the usual manner. The material mupplied by the contractor and the work done by him meets the specifications. There was a field judgement made at the time that th~ area would be okay. In a project of the mize of Mound's street improvements, there are many instances where there is some risk. In this one situation, the result of the risk was unfavorable. As the report noted above, moisture content is high in the subgrade at the inter~ection of Bartlett and Glendale Road probably caused by unidentified sources of water getting into the subgrade. There is storm sewer in this'-~_, I~,~ intersection and we propose that the corrective action consist of constructi~g~ an underdrain system, shaping the subbase to drain into the underdrain system-// which would empty into the storm sewer and then backfilling with three feet of granular material. This would then be paved with five inches of bituminous base and 1-1/2" wearing course. The length of this corrective action is ap- proximately 180 feet. We see no reason why the cost of these repairs could not be paid out of the M.S.A. Maintenance Fund. The Council should consider if they want to proceed with this corrective action at this time, or if they want to defer it until the sealcoat is scheduled. We would recommend delaying any repair until 1985 or the year be- fore the scheduled seal coat. John Cameron will be available to answer any questions you may have regard- ing the repair of Bartlett. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. William H. McCombs, P.E. WHM:sj Enclosure ~IESOTA: Minneapolis, Duluth. Hibbing, St. Cloud, Rochester St. Paul TH DAKOTA: Affiliated 01~fices in Williston and Hazen April 7, 1983 Teshng Services Since 1957 J $ BRAUN P £ G U KLUEMP~E P E P H ANDERSON DALE R ALLEN P E CG KRUSE PE JAMESJ CRALG JR FE D R HAUSLER P E LOUIS P MR'IlS P ~ Reply to: P.O. Box 35108 Mpls , MN 55435 (6 2i McCombs-Knutson Assoc., Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55~41 Attn: Mr. John Cameron Gentlemen: RE: 83-055 BITUMINOUS CORING Bartlett Blvd. and Tuxedo Blvd. Mound, MN As requested on March 25, 1983, we have completed the bituminous coring, power auger borings and laboratory analysis of the bitu- minous for the above referenced project. The purpose of this investigation was to obtain samples of the bituminous wear course at various locations and to determine the subgrade soil types. SCOPE A total of 4 locations were tested on Bartlett Boulevard and two locations were tested on Tuxedo Boulevard. Locations for the tests were located in the field by representatives of McCombs-gnutson. At each location, bituminous samples were obtained using a coring machine and a 6-inch diameter core barrel or by retrieving chunks of the loosened wear course. Tabulated below are the location and types of samples obtained. CONSULTING ENGINEERS / SOILS AND MATERIALS Affiliated Company for Chemical & Enviromental Testing and Consulting -- Braun Enviromental Laboratories, inc. 83-055 McCombs-Knutson Assoc., Inc. -2- April 7, 1983 Location #1 Bartlett Blvd. Station 4+00 #2 Bartlett Blvd. Station 3+55 #3 Bartlett Blvd. Station 5+05 #4 Bartlett Blvd. Station 19+75 ~#5 Tuxedo Blvd. Station 31+OO #6 Tuxedo Blvd. Station 41+00 #7 Tuxedo Blvd. Station 49+00 Sample Type Core Core Core Bag Bag oore Bag At locations 1, 2, 3 and 6, power auger borings were put down through the core hole to evaluate the soil type. The auger was advanced to the desired test depth. Soil samples were then obtained by retrieving cuttings on the flights of the auger. It should be noted that power auger borings do not provide an index of compressibility or settlement characteristics of the soils encountered. LABORATORY TESTING As requested, a total of 5 bituminous samples were tested to determine the gradation and asphal, t content. These tests were conducted on March 30, 1983 in accordance with ASTM procedures. RESULTS Log of Power Auger Borings indicating the depth and iden- tification of the various soil strata are attached to the appendix of this report. Also included in the appendix are the results of the laboratory tests conducted on the bituminous samples. As indicated on the results, the percent of extracted asphalt from each sample was found to be within the recommended range based on MN/DOT specifications. In addition, ail gradations met specifications as established by MN/DOT. gR lUfl ENGINEERING TESTING 83-055 McCombs-Knutson Assoc., Inc. -3- April 7, 1983 It has been a pleasure to have assisted on this project. If we can be of further assistance in analyzing the data contained in this report o~ conduct additional tests on the bituminous samples, please contact us at your convenience. Very truly yours, BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Michael M. Heuer, P.E. Project Engineer MMH:bmb Attachments The content of this report and supporting documents are for the exclusive use of the addressee In the absence of our prior written approval we make no representation and assume no responsibility to any other parties regarding such content [BR,qun] MINNESOTA: Minneapolis, Duluth. Hibbing St. Cloud, Rochester, St. Paul ~ly to: Bil/iun Testing Services Since 1957 Affiliated Officea: Williston, North Dakota Hazen, North Dakota LABORATORY TEST OF BITUMINOUS HOT MIX Project: 83-55 Various Streets Mound, Date Reported: 4/1/83 Copies To: Reported To: McCombs-Knutson 12800 Industrial Park Plymouth, ~ln 55441 Blvd. Attn: John Cameron FIELD DATA: Sample # Date Sampled: Date Received: Date Tested: Sampled By: Bituminous Supplier: Sample Location: ~2 3/29/83 3/29/83 3/30/83 Braun. Engineering Testing Station 3+55 Bartlet Ave. MN/DOT Specification ~: 2341 Course' Wear LABORATORY RESULTS Asphalt Content (%): 4.5 - 7.5 Extracted 5.1 Project Specifications ~---~MN DOT S_pecifications Aggregate Gradation % Passing 3/4" 100 5/8" 100 3/8" 89 #4 65 #10 43 ~40 15 ~200 5 100 95-100 65-90 50-70 35-55 10-30 1-7 REI.~RKS- Asphalt retention factor not included. Meets MN/DOT Specificationg BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, ~.~ichael ~.~. Heuer, P.E. Project Engineer INC. MINNESOTA: Minneapolis, Duluth, Hibbing, St. Cloud, Rochester, St. Paul Williston, North Dakota ~ly to: Hazen, North Dakota LABORATORY TEST OF BITUMINOUS HOT MIX Project: 83-55 Various Streets Mound, Minn. Date Reported: 4-1-83 Copies To: Reported To: McCombs-Knutson 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, Mn 55441 Attn: John Cameron FIELD DATA: Sample # Date Sampled: Date Received: Date Tested: Sampled By: Bituminous Supplier: Sample Location: MN/DOT Specification #: 2341 #4 3/29/83 3/29/83 3/30/83 Braun Engineering Testing Station '19+75 Bartlet Ave. Course: Wear Asphalt Content (%):4.5 - 7.5 LABORATORY RESULTS Extracted 5.5 r-1 Project Specifications ~-IMN DOT Specifications Aggregate Gradation % Passing 3/4" 100 5/8" 97 3/8" 77 #4 58 #10 42 #40 16 #200 5 100 95-I00 65-90 50-70 35-55 10-30 1-7 REt~RKS: Asphalt retention factor not included. Meets MN/DOT Specifications. BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. ~lichael M. Heuer, P.E. Project Engineer ,ly to: Testing Services Since 1957 Affiliated Offices: Williston, North Dakota Hazen. North Dakota LABORATORY TEST OF BITUMINOUS HOT MIX Project: 83-55 Various Streets Date Reported: 4/1/83 Mound, Mn. Copies To: Reported To: McCombs-Knutson 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymou[h, Mn 55441 Attn: John Cameron FIELD DATA: Sample # Date Sampled: Date Received: Date Tested: Sampled By: Bituminous Supplier: Sample Location: #5 3/29/83 3/29/83 3/30/83 Braun Engineering Testing Station 31+00 Tuxedo Ave. MN/DOT Specification #: 2341 Course: Wear LABORATORY RESULTS Asphalt Content (%): 4.5 - 7.5 Extracted 6.3 [] Project Specifications [-~MN DOT Specifications Aggregate Gradation % Passing 3/4" 1 O0 5/8" 99 3/8" 91 #4 67 #10 45 #40 18 #200 7 100 95-100 65-90 50-70 35-55 10-30 1-7 REt.~RKS: Asphalt retention factor not included. t4eets MN/DOT Specifications. BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Michael H. Heuer, P.E. Project Engineer MINNESOTA: Minneapolis, Duluth. Hibbing. St. Cloud. Rochester. St, Paul ,ly to: Testing Serwces Since 1957 Williston. North Dakota Hazen, North [~akota LABORATORY TEST OF BITUMINOUS HOT MIX Project: 83-55 Various Streets Mound, Minn Date Reported: 4/1/83 Copies To: Reported To: McCombs-Knutson 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, Mn 55441 Attn: John Cameron FIELD DATA: Sample # Date Sampled: Date Received: Date Tested: Sampled By: Bituminous Supplier: Sample Location: #6 3/29/83 3/29/83 3/30/83 P, raun En.qineering Testing Station 41+00 Tuxedo Ave. MN/DOT Specification #: 2341 Course: Wear LABORATORY RESULTS Asphalt Content (%): 4.5 - 7.5 Extracted 7.3 Project Specifications ~-'~MN DOT Specifications Aggregate Gradation % Passing 3/4" 100 5/8" 96 3/8" 80 #4 64 #10 45 #40 15 #200 5 100 95-100 65-90 50-70 35-55 10-30 1-7 REF~RKS: Asphalt retention factor not included. Meets MN/DOT Specifications. BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Michael H. Heuer, P.E. Project Engineer ' P ' g c este St Paul =ly to: Testing Services Since 1957 Affiliated Offices: Wiliiston, North Dakota Hazen, North Dakota LABORATORY TEST OF BITUMINOUS HOT MIX Project: 83-55 Various Streets Mound, tin. Date Reported: 4/1/83 Copies To: Reported To: McCombs-Knutson 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, Hn 55441 Attn: John Cameron FIELD DATA: Sample # Date Sampled: Date Received: Date Tested: Sampled By: Bituminous Supplier: Sample Location: MN/DOT Specification #: 2341 #7 3/29/83 3/29/83 3/30/83 Braun Engineering Testing Station 49+00 - Tuxedo Ave. Course: Wear Asphalt Content (%): LABORATORY RESULTS 4.5 - 7.5 Extracted 6.0 []Project Specifications ~-~lMN DOT Specifications Aggregate Gradation % Passing 3/4" 100 5/8" 98 3/8" 74 #4 52 #10 35 #40 16 #200 7 100 95-100 65-90 50-70 35-55 10-30 1-7 RE~,~RKS: Asphalt retention factor not included. Meets MN/DOT Specifications. BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. lqichael lq. Heuer, P.E. Project Engineer LOG OF BORINGS PROJECT: 83-055 soil BORINGS and BIT~MIi;OUS CORING DATE: 3-29-83 Bartlett Blvd. & Tuxedo Blvd. Mound, X~ SCA[E: 1,,=1, ~BORING: PAB ~3 LOCATION: BORING: PAB ~,:4 LOCATION: SURF.EIEV: centerline of Bartlett, SURF. ELEV: centerline of Tuxedo Sra. 5+05 Blvd., Sra. 41+OO o, twater,olS D~]~I~ WL Depth uescr, pt~on )o~'~::l)'erioJs ~{J~ WL Depth ~5" of Bituminous Pave- 6" of Bituminous Pave- ment. ment. SIL"fY SAi~D, fine to mediun S/H~D, SLIGHTLY SILT~, fin~ SP-SH -grained, with some fine SM 9" to medium-grained, with * 10" to medium Gravel, dark * SILTY CLAYEY SAi~D, fine- SC SILTY SAi,~DY CLAY, gray CL grained, with a trace of and brown, witi~ lenses fine Gravel, brown, of SIL]]~ CLAYEY SAi~D, waterbearing. moist. (Glacial Till) · a trace of fine Gravel, brown, waterbearing · (Possible Fill) · brown, wet, oil odor. ] (Possible Fill) J Bi /lUi , LOg Of BORINGS r. PROJECT: 83-o55 SOIL BORINGS and B, ITb~iINOUS CORING u~,,~: 3-29-83 Bartlett Blvd. & luxedo Blvd. CAtE ~ORING: ?AB #1 tO.lION: BORINO: p~ #2 rOGatiON: ?"~= =L~ centerline of Bartlett, SURF EL~. ' ~centerline of Bartlett~ 3.7 ~' I;e;It ,lcum:nous ~ave- ; . 5" merit. 5A;~D, SLIGHYLY StLi~, SP-SM ; SIL~ C~YEY S~D, fine SM-SC wit,~ a trace of fine 9" to medi~-grained, * Gravel, ~ark brown, moist~, SIL~ S~D, fine to SM 12'; wit,~ c~ical odor. * ~ ~ ...... ~ned with a SI~I~ SAdDY CLAY, with a CL trace of fine to medium trace of fine Gravel, Gravel, brown, moist. ' dar~ brown to gray and ~ (Possible Fii ) brown, winn a few lenses of SILIh' CLAYEY SAND, I brown and gray ~oi~t. ~ (Glacial Till) ! *with a trace of fine · (Possible Fiii) i to medium Gravel, dark brown, moist, with oil ~' ~ ~ °o°r~Possible Fill) PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION Boulders over 3" Grav~ Medium 1/2" - 1" Fine No. 4 - 1/2" S~nd Colrts No. 4 - No. 10 Medium No. 10 - No. 40 Fine No. 40 - No. 100 Very Fine No. 100 - No. 200 Silt No. 200 - .005 mm Clay less than .005 mm RELATIVE DENSITY OF COHESION LESS SOl L$ very loose 0 -- 4 BPF Ioo~ 5 - 10 8PF medium dense 11 - 30 BPF den=, 31 - SO BPF very dents 50+ BPF RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF GRAVEL a trace 0 -- 6% a littll 6 -- 15% tome 16 -- 30% and 31 -- 50% DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY SOIL INTRUSIONS THtCKNE~ lents 0 -- 1/8" ~e~m 1/8" - I" laver 1" -- 12" ver~d alternating ~earm or lenses of clays and silts in lake delX~it MOISTURE CONTENT Dry le~s than 5% Moist under optimum moisture Wet over optimum moisture Waterbearing saturated sand RELATIVE PROPORTIONS with I few 0 -- 10% with ~orne 11 - 2~ with over 20% ORGANIC CONTENT 0 - 5% non to slightly organic 6 - 10% slightly organic 11 - 25% organic 26 - 65% muck 65+ peat CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOl LS PLASTICITY OF SOl LS WITH LESS THAN 20% CLAY very soft 0- 1 BPF soft 2 - 3 BPF rather soft 4 - 5 BPF medium 6- 8 BPF rather stiff 9 - 12 BPF stiff 13 -- 16 BPF very stiff 17 - 30 BPF hard 30+ BPF non plastic gritty, cannot thread slightly plastic rough to smooth, hard to thread plastic smooth to waxy, easy to thread LABORATORY TESTS DD Dry Density, ;:)cf OC Organic Content, % WD Wet Density. pcf S Percent of Saturation, % MC Natural Moisture Content, % SG Sgecific Gravity LL Liquid Limit. % C Cohesion PL Platic L~mit, % I) Angle of Internal Friction Pi Plasticity Index. % clu Unconfined Compressive Strength DRILLING NOTES: CLASSIFICATION: GROUND WATER: SAMPLING: BPF: WH: NOTE: Standard penetration test bormgs were advanced by 2'/," or 37," I.D. hollow-stem augers unless noted other- v~ts. Jetting water wes used to clean out auger prior to sampling only where indicated on logs. Standard penetration test borings are designated by the prefix "ST" (Split Tube). Power auger borings were advanced by 4" or 6" diameter, continuous-flite, solid stem augers. Sod classificatton and strata depths are snferred from disturbed samples augered to the surface and are therefore somewhat al:N;xoximate. Power auger borings are designated by the prefix "S". Hand probings were advanced manually with a 1 7," diameter probe and are limited to the dap'th from which the probe can be m=,nuallv withdravv~. Hand probing~ Ire indicated by the prefix "H". Classification on logs is made by ins~oection in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System (lee attached chart) using visual-manual procedures unless noted otherwise. Obeervations were made at the times indicated. Porosity of soil strata, seesortal weather conditions, site tolx)grlphV, etc.. may cauts changes in the water levels indicated on the logs. All tsmedes are taken with the standard 2" O. D. split-tube sam;ger, except where noted. TW indicates thin- will undisturbed sample. Numbers indicate btov~ per foot recorded in standard penetration test, also know~ es "N" value. The tsmoler is tat 6" into undisturbed soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resistances ere then counted for second and third 6" increments and added to get BPF. Where they differ significantly, they are reported m the following form - 2112 for the second and third 6" increments resoK:tivelv. WH indicates that samg4er penetrated toil under weight of hammer Ind rodi alone, driving not requtre<~. NI tats run in 'cx:ord~nce with alXgicabla ASTM StlnCtIKtl. BR/lUn"' UN I F I ED SYSTEN CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR [NGINEERIItG PURPOSES ASTM D£$I6NATION D-2q87 Major Dlvl stons Group Typical Symbols Names C1 assl fi carl on Crt teri a sw Well-graded gravels and gravel-sand mi xtums, little or no fines Poorly graded gravels and gravel-sand mi xtures, little or no fines Silty gravels, gravel- sand-slit mi xtures Clayey gravels, gravel- sand-clay mi xtures Well-graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines Poorly graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines Cu ' DSO/Dio Greater than 4 (D3o) 2 Cz'0m X O~£ Between I and 3 Not meeting both criteria for OW Atterberg limits plot below "A" line or plasticity index less than 4 Atterberg limits plot above "A" line and plasticity index greater than 7 Atte~erg limits plot- ting in hatched area are borderline classifications re- quiring use of dual symbols Cu" D60/Dio Greater than 6 (D,t,q)£ Between I and 3 Cz = D~o X O~o Not meeting .both cri teri a for SW Atterberg limits plot Silty sands, sand-silt below "A" line or SH mixtures plasticity index less than 4 Atterberg limits plot Clayey sands, sand-clay above "A" line and $C mixturesplasticity in.dex greater than / Inorgmlic silts, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sand Atterberg limits plot- ting in hatched area are borderline clas- si fi cations requi ri ng use of symbols Inorganic clays of low to medi ~n plasti city, grav- 60 elly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays 50 Organic silts and organic silty clays of low ~ plasticity ~ 40 Inorganic silts, micaceous ~ 30 or diatomaceous silts, '~ elastic silts '41 2D Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays Organic clays of medium to high plasticity 4 0o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Highly organic soils Peat, muck and other highly organic soils Visual-manual i denti fi cati on BIb[IUff' 1983 SEAL COAT PROGRAM MOUND, MINNESOTA APRIL 19, 1983 BID TABULATION BID PLANHOLDER BOND AMOUNT COMMENTS ~LLIED BLACKTOP CO, IO503 89th AVE. NORTH 4APLE GROVE, MN 55369 10% $39,386.50 ~ATZER CONSTRUCTION 3OX 1025 NO BID ;T. CLOUD, MN 56302 ~ITUMINOUS ROADWAYS !825 CEDAR AVENUE SO. 10% $41,902.50 I INNEAPOLIS, MN 55407 II -WAY SURFACING CO. 17 F. STREET 10% $39,590.00 IARSHALL, MN 56258 '.O. BOX 501 ~ J lDWEST PAVING & .ECYCLING, INC. 10% $41,033.00 .350 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE DEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 LEHAL BLACKTOPPING .- 460:4. 130th STREET NO BID HAKOPEE, MN 55379 H 1 P M E P 3 S YEAR TWO 1983 SEAL COATING PLAN MOUND', MINNESOTA ~a-~-~woT-l~83, of this schedule would encOmpass the streets 1976~i978 a,nd.tQtal about'8.2 miles, Using the medium rates 1,850 tons' of.aggregate and 37,000 gallons of emulsion would 1983 built from of appllcatlon, be used. Avocet Blubird Canary Dove Eagle Finch Gull Heron Jennings Crestview Woodland Breezy Waterside Harrison Tonkawood Spruce Balsam Nobel Belmont Fern Church Basswood Cedar Villa Pike Overland Centerview Ashland Cardinal Tuxedo Evergreen Rosewood Beachwood Garden Grove Longford Wexford Carrick Kildare Carlow Kerry Black.Lake Clare Shannon Tyrone Cavan Galway Suffolk Bedford Essex Montgomery Denbigh Cardigan Cardiff April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Enclosed is a petition from three of the four property owners on Halsted Avenue. Their houses are located on the boundary line with Minnetrista. In 1981, the other property owners asked that their street be hard surfaced. Somehow the message never got through to Mound so we could do a simple add-on to the street project and have the work the petitioners are requesting done. Thus we are now back at point A. The next step is to d~rect the City Engineer to develop a preliminary engineering report on this project. Following the acceptance of that we will need to hold a public hearing and if everything is O.K.,order the project. It is a good time to do this work because I would like to put an overlay on the Cemetery road (paid for out of the Cemetery Fund) and we will need to have a machine lay in bituminous mats where a couple of water- mains broke this Winter. If we are able to tie this work together, it will result, hopefully, in better prices for all of the various pieces. JE: fc PETITION FOR CURB AND GUTTER, PA¥ING~ AND STORM SEWERS TO: The Honorable City Council of Mound: We, the undersigned property owners, respectfully request the Construction (street to be/improve~) - \ troa Lot & Block Subdivision #22-117-24 43 0024 Lot 16 Halsted Park #22-117-24 43 0025 Lot 17 Halsted Park #22-117J24 43 0023 Lot 15 Halsted Park f RESOLUTION #83- RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: 1. A certain petition requesting the improvement of Halsted Ave. from the Minnetrista Boundary on Halsted Ave. to where it abutts Lot 1, Halsted Heights, filed with the Council on April 15, 1983, is hereby declared to be signed by the required percentage of owners of property affected thereby. This declaration is made in conformity to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.035. 2. The petition is hereby referred to the City Engineer and he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Hickok & Associates have now completed their work in preparing the Plans and Specifications for the following: A. Watermain Extension B. Booster Pump C. 250,000 Gallon Water Storage Facility They will present them to the Council and you will need to accept and approve them, then pass a resolution setting a date for the bid to be opened and considered by the Council. JE:fc April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER RE.' ARCADE REPORT As a part of the rejection of Tom Watson's expanded conditional use permit for his dance hall/teen center, was a request by the Council to investigate the possibility of setting a date to begin proceedings to revoke his existing Arcade License. The Police Department and my office have put together the material that would be germane to those proceedings. That information is: Ae A copy of the certified check that was used to pay the back rent on the entire facility from Howard Thompson, Jr. This clearly indicates his economic interest in the existing Arcade beside the fact that he is supplying the machines. Be A count, last week, noted 14 machines in operation, a continuing violation of his license, which shows he has licenses for just 10 machines. A review os Mr. Thompson's criminal record, which shows two misdemeanor convictions including one for the possession of marijuana in 1982, which cast doubts on his moral character. On the other side is a discovery by the City that the Licensing Department forgot to send out his Arcade License application when it was due for renewal on January 1, 1983. This does not show the greatest of competence. The License Clerk thought that when we denied the conditional use permit we had denied continuation of the existing Arcade and thus didn't need to send out the License application. Thus he is operating without an approved License. His machine licenses come up for renewal April 30th. We just this week forwarded the necessary applications to Mr. Watson. Because of these administrative blunders, I agree with Police Chief Wold that at this point the City should go slow in any attempt to revoke his currently approve conditional use permit. His feeling is that if the INTEROFFICE MEMO TO: City Manager; Jon Elam FROM: Police Chief; Bruce Wold SUBJECT: Mound Arcade DATE April 15. 19..~ At your request, I went to the Mound Arcade to find out why the games of skill were being removed from the building. I was hoping to meet Paul Pond, but Mr. Pond apparently had to go elsewhere. The concern of Mr. Pond was that the operators of the arcade may attempt to strip furnishings from the building which would be in violation of the lease. Mr. Pond also expressed some concern for lein holders who may not be protected if some of the fixtures were removed from the building. I arrived to find a U-Haul truck backed up to the door, and the Corvette belonging to Howard Thompson Jr. parked in front of the truck. Two persons were loading electronic games into the U-Haul truck. I asked one of those persons to find }~. Thompson for me. Hr. Thompson came out of the arcade and spoke with me for a few minutes. I asked him what was going on, and he told me that the games weren't returning a big enough profit out here and that they were being moved. He also said that~the arcade needed another attraction, a dance floor, in order to provide enough traffic to make the machines pay. I. advised him not to disturb any of the fixtures in the building and he said that everything else was going to stay. ~. Thompson added that he intended to continue to pay the rent on the building, ~until he settled with the City". I didn't bother to ask what he meant by that statement. By removing the machines from the building, the arcade is now vacant and no longer in use. I think that raises the question of licensing any machines that may again be moved into this location. Whoever may wish to operate an arcade on this site will have to sub- mit license requests to the City and bear the scrutiny of a backround investigation~ Page 2 April 15, 1983 Arcade Report Council wishes to pursue this in the future we would be on better footing by monitoring all phases of the Arcade operation; any drug rela'ted events and any acts of maliciousness by patrons of the Arcade. If we can zero in on those issues rather than saying Howard Thompson is involved, an easier case can be developed and stronger community support would result. I have th~ Police Chief's recommendations available if the Council would like to analyze them. JE:fc CITY OF MOUND Hound,. Hinnesota' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF "ON AND OFF SALE BEER LICENSES'" NOTICE IS HEREBY GI. VEN THAT on Tuesday, May 3, i983, at 7:30 P.M. at the City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, a publi'c hearing will be held to consider the issuance of "On and Off Sale Beer Licenses" to Robert Hilstrom DBA Three P0'ints Tavern, 5098 Three Points Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, described as: Lots 12, 13, 14 .and 15, Block 2, Dreamwood. Property identi- fication numbers are: 13~117-24 12 0019/00~0/002i and 0022. All persons appearing at said heari'ng will be given an oppor- tunity to b~ heard. Fr~andene C-. Cl~rk, Ci[y Clerk CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 April 12, 1983 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Licensing Department Palm Reader's License Renewal We have received application for the annual license renewal for Palm Reading. Attached is a copy of the application. The City Code of Ordinance provides that the amount oF the fee for such license be fixed by the Council. The last few years, the Council set the annual fee at $15.00. The ordi- nance states that "the clerk shall thereafter issue such license upon payment of the amount fixed by the Council" Ma rj d4- i e Stutsman CITY OF MOUND 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE - SECTION 38.O1 OF THE MOUND CODE OF ORDINANCES 1. Date of Application~ Original: ~__~' Renewal 2. Name of Applicant.i-. F~lrsti iddl--e Last 3. Present Address City:/J~Uj~J _ _ Zip: 4. How long at this address ~ V J~',.~i · 5. Previous Address 6. Home Phone No.~_~ ' ' y .:~ 7. Date of Birth:J~lL~l~~ Drivers Lic. 8. Address of where art or business will be practiced: Phone No. :~ 9. Check or write specific areas covered by your business: 10. 11. 12. 13. A. Clarivoyant B. Palm Reader C. Phrenologist D. Fortune Teller E. Mind Reader F. Astrologer G. Other Length of time for which license desired:~~_~ How long (past history)in this business~~ ~i~rS ~l~J'~J~l~~-- Last location of business Have you ever been denied a license? JlI~j~ Have you ever been convicted of a crime as a result of practice of this business? Note: License is required for each person. If more space needed for answers, use other side of this form. Department Approval/Denial  (Submit memo if denip~p~" Ap 1 Police Dept. Administrative ~ Denial CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Licensing Department April ]3, 1983 License Renewals Various licenses expire the last day of April. The renewal period for these will be from May 1, 1983 through April 30, 1984. Off Sale Beer: On Sale Beer: Restaurants: A1 & Alma's Supper Club, 5201 Piper Road Grimm's Store, 3069 Brighton Boulevard Mound Super Valu, 2240 Commerce Boulevard "No Frills" Grocery, 5229 Shoreline Boulevard PDQ Food Store, 5550 Three Points Boulevard Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Boulevard Tom Thumb Superette, 2222 Commerce Boulevard A1 & Alma's Supper Club, 5201 Piper Road House of Moy, 5555 Shoreline Boulevard Mound Lanes, 2346 Cypress Lane Surfside, Inc., 2670 Commerce Boulevard Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Boulevard A1 & Alma's Supper Club, 5201 Piper Road Burger Chef, 5205 Shoreline Boulevard Donnies on the Lake, 4470 Wilshire Boulevard Hole-in-One Bake Shop, 5309 Shoreline Boulevard House of Moy, 5555 Shoreline Boulevard Martin & Son Boat Rental, 4850 Edgewater Drive Mound Lanes, 2346 Cypress Lane Mound Legion Post 398, 2333 Wilshire Boulevard Surfside, Inc., 2670 Commerce Boulevard Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Boulevard Tonka Toys Restaurant (Servomation Corp.), 5300 Shoreline Blvd. V.F.W. Club # 5113, 2544 Commerce Boulevard Bowling Alleys: Mound Lanes, 2346 Cypress Lane Games of Skill: Al & Alma's Supper Club, 5201 Piper Road Donnies on the Lake, 4470 Wilshire Blvd. Mound Lanes, 2346 Cypress Lane No Frills Food Market, 5229 Shoreline Blvd. Surfside, Inc., 2670 Commerce Boulevard Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Blvd. -To~ec~. 55~8 A_ualt~'.~ Road- V.F.W. Club # 5113, 2544 Commerce Blvd. Pool Tables: Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Blvd. V.F.W. Post # 5113, 2544 Commerce Blvd. R Bowling Lanes 1 Machine 5 Machines 14 Machines 1 Machine 2 Machines 5 Machines 2 Machines 2 Tables 1 Table Memorandum to: Jon Elam, City Manager License Renewals - Page 2 Juke Box: Mound Legion Post # 398, 2333 Wilshire Blvd. Donnies On The Lake, 4470 Wilshire Blvd. Surfside, Inc., 2670 Commerce Boulevard Three Points Tavern, 5098 Three Points Blvd. V.F.W. Post # 511:3'; 2544 Commerce Blvd. 1 Juke Box 1 Juke Box 1 Juke Box 1 Juke Box 1 Juke Box Also, an arcade license is needed by Tomco for the period from January 1 through December 31, 1983. Marjorie Stutsman Licensing Department 196 June 22, 1982 Councilmember Polston moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 82-174 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING THE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR WELL NO. 8 - BID OPENII~G TO BE dULY 27, 1982, AT lO:O0 A.M. WHEREAS, it was decided in Resolution #82-1, that the City needed more than one well in Island Park, and WHEREAS, test holes were drilled to determine the best possible location for this well, and WHEREAS, the Engineer, Eugene A. Hickok & Associates, have provided plans and specifications for this well. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MN.: That the Council does hereby approve the plans and specifications for Well No. 8 and authorizes the advertisement for bids - bid opening to be July 27, 1982, at 10:00 A.M. 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, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan; the following voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the Acting City Clerk. Mayor Attest: 'Acting City Clerk CITY OF MOUND SUMMARY OF COVERAGES March 1983 COVERAGES PROPERTY me Building & Contents 1. Perils Insured Against a. "Ail Risk", Subject to Company Forms b. $100.00 Deductible c. Replacement Cost d. Blanket Coverage e. 90% Co-Insurance f. Agreed Amount Endorsement Be Contents'@2324 Wilshire Blvd. 1. Perils Insured Against a. "Ail Risk", Subject to Company Forms b. $100.00 Deductible~ c. ACV d. Monthly Reporting Form e. 100% Co-Insurance $2,018,642 $ 180,000 II. BUSINESS INTERRUPTION A. Loss of Earnings 1. At Location 2324 Wilshire Blvd. 2. 25% Monthly Limitation 3. "Ail Risk", Subject to Company Forms 4. No Deductible $ 65,000 III. CRIME me Insures money against actual disappearance, distruction, or wrongful abstraction. Location - 5341Maywood Road a. Loss Inside Premises b. Loss Outside Premises Location - 2324 Wilshire Blvd. a. Loss Inside Premises b. Loss Outside Premises 3. Depositors Forgery $ 19,000 $ 3,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000. COVERAGES con' t IV. COM]~REHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY me Limits of Liability 1. Bodily Injury 2. Property Damage $500,000 $5OO,OOO Premises Medical Payment 1. E'ach Person 2. Each Accident $ 1,000 $ 25,000 e 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Premises/Operations. 1. Auto Garage @ Lot #3, Block #20, Island Park a. Based on 3,582 Square Feet 2. Auto Parking Lots a. See Attached Schedule 3. Office Building a. Based on 2,070 Square Feet 4. Office Building a. Based on 9,000 Square Feet 5. Retail Store a. Based on 2,730 Square Feet Building Not Occupied by Insured (Lessor's Risk) a. Based on 544 Square Feet Boats/Canoes For Hire or Premises Used for Storage a. Based on 2 Units Non-Owned Boats a. Based on 2 Units Cemetary a. Based on 10 Acres Parks or Playgrounds a. Based on 5 Acres Playground Equipemtd Including Wading Pools a. Based on 1 Unit Swimming Pools or Bathing Beaches a. Based on 1 Unit Storm or Sanitary Sewers a. Based on 47 miles Vacant Land a. Based on 450' of Frontage Streets, Roads, or Highways a. Based on 47 miles Automobile Parking Garages or Lots a. See Attached Schedule of 14 Locations COVERAGES con~t IV. COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY con't De Manufacturers/Contractors 1. Firemen a. Based on $55,000 Payroll 2. Municipal Employees a. Based on 20,000 payroll 3. Policemen a. Based on $282,000 Payroll 4. Waterworks Including Completed Operations a. Based on $80,000 Payroll b. The Explosion, Collapse, & Underground Exclusions are Deleted 5. Sewer Cleaning a. Based on $43,000 Payroll · 6. Street Cleaning Including Completed Operations a. Based on $92,00 Payroll 7. Additional Insured/Burlington Northern 8. Personal Injury 9. 'Broad Form Property Damage 10. Contractual Liability (See Specific Form) 11. Incidental Malpractice 12. Employees as Additional Insureds 13. Volunteers as Additional Insureds E. Products Liability 1. Water Works a. Based on 462,708,000 Gallons 2. Liquor Store a. Based on $750,000 Sales Ve VI. UMBRELLA LIABILITY A. Limit of Liability B. Self Insured Retention C. Including Liquor Liability D. Including Public Officials E & 0 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY & PHYSICAL DAMAGE A. Liability 1. Limits of Liability a. Bodily Injury b. Property Damage c. Personal Injury Protection d. Uninsured Motorist e. Hired Automobiles f. Non-Owned Automobiles $1,000,000 $ 10,000 $500,000 $500,000 $20,000/10,000 $50,000 $500,000 $500,000 COVERAGES con~t VI. AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY & PHYSICAL DAMAGE con't Be Physical Damage 1. Comprehensive 2. Collision C. See Attached Schedule of Vehicles No Deductible $100/500 Deductible VII. LIQUOR LIABILITY me Limits of Liability (Combined) 1. Each Person 2. Each Accident 3. Loss of Services 4. Aggregate $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 VIII. IX. PUBLIC OFFICIALS ERRORS & OMISSIONS A. Limit of Liability B. Deductible - City C. Deductible - Public Official INLAND MARINE A. Contractors Equipment 1. Varying $100 + $500 Deductibles B. Radio Equipment C. Perils Insured Against 1. Fire 2. Vandalism 3. "Ail Risk", Subject to Company Forms 4. $100.00 Deductible $1,000,000 $1,000 2200 COVERAGES con' t IX. INLAND MARINE con' t Miscellaneous Property Floater 1. 2 - 1980 Yamaha Mopeds 2. 1964 Lund Boat, 7 1/2 H.P., Sears Motor, 1968 Balco Interceptor Trailer 3. Perils Insured Against a. Fire b. Vandalism c. "Ail Risk", Subject to Company Forms d. $50.00 Deductible, Per Occurrence 4. 12' Alumacraft Row Boat 5. 14' Alumacraft Row Boat $600 $1,550 $300 $500 X. WORKER'S COMPENSATION A. Based on Payrolls & Population 1. Volunteer Firemen 2. Municipal Employees 3. Park Employees 4. Policemen 5. Street or Road Construction 6. Waterworks Operation 7. Sewer Cleaning 8. Liquor Store 9. Clerical 10. Auto Repair Shop ($30.29) ($ 2.43) ($ 5.38) ($ 5.41) ($ 8.98) ($ 6.42) ($11.32) ($1.54) ($ .23) ($ 2.43) $ 10,000 $ 20,000 $ 44,288 $282,082 $ 91,706 $ 65,983 $ 43,389 $ 56,800 $195,913 ~ 22~818 XI. EMPLOYEE DISHONESTY & FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND $100,000 3/30/83 Package Auto Liquor Public Officials Umbrella Fee Work. Comp. PREMIUM SUMMARY 1982 $18,869 10,053 4,800 1,833 3,863 3,790. $43,208 36,~69, $79,777 1983 $19,490 10,516 2,355 1,833 3,600 3,000 $40,794 38,476 $79,270 - 3~848 $75,422 (10% WC Reduction) oo'oo~ oo'ooG~ oo'ooz~ oo'oo~ oo'ooz~ oo'oot~ oo'oo~ 00'00I~ 00'00~ oo'oo~ oo'oot~ oo'ooz~ oo'oot~ oo'ootd oo'oo~ oo'ooz~ oo'oo~ oo'ooGd ~lqI3onp~ O0'OOV'L O0'O00'OE OO'OO6 O0'OOV 00'000'~ 00'00~'8 00'00~ O0'OG~'8 00'000'~9 00'000'~ 00'000'9~ OOtO0~'I 00'000'6~ 00'000'9 O0'O00'g9 00'00~'I 00'000'~II~ O0'O00'OLd ~ou~ansuI )o ~unomV &N~g4~Iflb2 SflO2NV772DSIR oo'oo~ oo'oot~ oo'ooz~ 00'00I~ oo'oo~ 00'00I~ 00'00I~ 0o'oot~ oo'oo~ oo'-.oz~ oo'oot$ oo'oo~ oo'oo~ O0'OOZ'E ~ O0'OOV 00'000'~ d 00'00~ oo'oo~ oo'oo~ 00'00~'~ ~ 00'00~'I ~ 00'000'~I~ oo'os~ oo'ooz'~ $ 00'00~'£ O0'O0~'E aomo~ z~3o~ .09 pa~moH I Mu~/M ao2oN pa~oq2no uosuqo£ dM 0I I Oiln~apXH ao~o~ pao~ ao~ ~onR ~p~o~ I a~nv SIOH ~6I ~PwI~ qsnR ~£6I moo~ sa~ 0L6I zo3o~a~ paoM ~Z6I sa~oIq puwH g punidsV - a~ddiqD qsn=~ a~mo~ Ka~3oM .09 a~z~I~-~an~ pa~moH I oo'og ~ oo'og ~ oo'og ~ oo'oot~ oo'oot~ oo'ooz~ oo'oo~ 00'00I~ 00'00I~ oo'oo~ alqI3onp~ oo'o~z oo'oog oo'oo~ oo'o~ 00'00~'9I~ 00'006 00'009 00'000~I~ O0'O0~g 00'00~'~I~ ~ouemnsui Eo 3unourv, a~II~a% ao3d~oaa3nI ooI~ ~96I 96glIggg#S 'ao3o~ sawaS aH g/I Z [~8#S '~eoR pun% ~96I ~u~m3a~daG ~aI~ ao~ (aqolo) ao3~Iosns~M qowR 00'0~g~ ~ s~ow~ air 3~oos I~ 3uwI~ 3q~Ii.~IqW~=o~ ~eM 00~I 0~'I9 ~ ~soH .Z/I I ;o =~oa 0009 09'I~ 8 ~soH .Z/I ~ ~o =~a 000~ ~NflO~ RO 7~ID oo'oo~ oo'oo~ Oo'ooT~ 00~000'~ 00'005 00'00~ ~uTqoeN ~a£ 9L6I I ao3e~ol oT3o~u~eN x~I& TI~H zzeo Z~ I (xTV) x~aoI~ ~TI~mOH I oo.'oo~ v0'00I~ oo.oO~ 00'00I~ oo'oo~ oo'oo~ 0o'0ot~ 00'00I~ 00'00t~ 00'00I~ oo'oo~ oo'ooz oo'oo~ oo'ooz 00'006 00'005 00'00Z'I~ 00'006 00'$~ 00'00~'I~ 00'059 oo'oo~..~ ~oueansuI ~o ~unomv ~T~ 2s~ 9uTaolO - meuagT~ 9 ~TIIe~ 7 OT~T3UaTOS UOTSTOa2d- ao2eqnDuI ~s~ a~3eM I 3T~'aa2saZ apTzoI& qOeH I 2u~Ia ~qgT~ alq~aoa ~a 00~ · o~uoD ~ 00~ ~o~d0 ~nl~& ~ ~I~ ~ c~n~ ~io~OR ~ 00~ ~am~a~daG ~N~4EIOb.g SO0.~NVTl.g3 SI}{ (INi1014 &O 2L~I3 CITY OF MOUND MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT Police Department 6 Resuscitators for Police Dept. @ $500.00 Each 5 Inhalators for Police Dept. @ $200.00 Each 4 Justom Signals KR 10 Moving Radars @ $2,500 'Each 2 Portable Breath Testers @ $1,200,00 Each Nikon FE ~5mm SLR & Equipment 1 Resusci Annie (1 Owned + non-owned @ $1,200 Each) 2 Resusci Baby (1 owned + 1 non-owned @ $300. Each) 1 Western Field 12 Ga. Shotgun @ $200.00 4 Remington 870 12 Ga. Shotguns @ $240. Each 1980 Yamaha Moped, S#3L5-210561 1980 Yamaha Moped, S#3L5-210568 1 S & W Model 3000 12 Ga. Shotgun Amount of Insurance $ 3,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $10,000.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 6oo.oo $ 200.00 $ 960.00 $ 300.00 $ 300.00 $ 270.00 Deductible $100.00 $1o0.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo 50.00 50.00 $1oo.oo Shop Department 1 Automotive Garage Hoist Coats 10-10 Tire Changer Welder Busy Bee 180 AMP ARC Parts Washer Pressure REgulator for Torches 300 Lb. Compressor 2 Air Wrenchs Portable Grease Gun 4 Ton Floor Jack' 1 Specialty Equipment High Pressure Car Wash S#MPM 48-S34S 1DZDP 4,500.00 300.00 350.00 200.00 150.00 1,500.00 175.oo 15o.oo 300.00 $ 3,658.00 $100.00 $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $1oo.oo $100.00 00'0L~'C 00'005 00'000'6 00'00g 00'00~'L 00'000'6 00'000'~I~ (spenDs u~ pa~o~) qo~5 00'~IL~ ~ s2~uQ alTqoH uosugo£ ~ qo~5 O0'O0~'I~ 0 s~Iqea~o& 9 qo~5 O0'OOZ~ g s,SO ~Iq~a:o& ~ qo~2 00'005'I9 ~ soIqoH a~TIoa &~IQ '2'9 ~ qo~5 00~'I~ ~ s~a~uI~daIa~ aI~qog ~ (spunbs ~¥ pa~IO~) qou5 00~'I~ ~ saI~qoR ~o~IO~ &H~ '5'9 8 ~am~a~da~ eo~Io~ 00'009'6 oo'o oo'c 9 oo'o 00'00~'~ 00'008'I 00'00~'~ 00'008'~ 00'~8I'0I~ O0'~II'8 ~uu~uv pue z~z~Auoo ~o~ zomog I ~Iq~D ,0~I uo~S ~zT~ ~ ~uu~uV I uoT~S ~s~ uosuqo£ I so~p~ ~:~& 9 q~5 00'~9~ ~ szs~z~qD/a sz~a ~iozo~oH 8g ~uuo~u¥ zo~oz a~M I GNnOH ~0 A~ID CITY OF MOUND VEHICLE SCHEDULE Park Department 1978 Chevrolet 1/2 Ton Pickup W/Camper 1970 Chevrolet 3/4 Ton Pickup 1978 Chevrolet Dump Truck 1975 Snowco 2 Wheel Trailer Replacement Cost $ 9,500 $13,500 $ 700 S#6509 S#7412 S#3751 s# $ 5,300. $ 3,200 $ 7,298 $ Inspection Department 1978 Chevrolet Impala 1982 Chevrolet Cavalier (Yellow) Water Department 1978 Chevrolet Van 1982 Chevrolet 3/4 Ton Diesel Pickup S#7304 $d66~0 $ 6,500 $ 8,000 S#2792 $ 5,685 S#3789 $ 14,463 Sewer Depar)tment 1970 ford W/Rodding Machine 1/2 Ton 1970 Ford Truck W/Flusher Unit 1980 Chevrolet 3/4 T. Pickup W/Topper (CCM23AJ138466) $ 9,000 $ 8,000 S#0841 S#3317 S#8466 $ 6,000 $ 4,300 $ 8,000 Manage r 1982 Chevrolet Cavalier (Red Pool Car) S#6539 $ 8,000 Police Department 1978 AMC Concrod 1954 Dodge 3/4'Ton. Van 1980 Chevrolet Malibu 1980 Chevrolet Malibu 1980 Chevrolet'Malibu 1980 Chevrolet Malibu 1980 Chevrolet Cavalier CITY OF MOUND VEHICLE SCHEDULE Replacement Cost S#4079 S#1138 S#8290 S#8181 S#8207 S#8573 S#0358 Value $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 Fire Department 1957 International #4 Pumper Fire Truck ~'"~50~- Ford #6 Pumper Fire Truck 1969 Mack #11 Pumper Fire Truck 1973 Mack #12 Pumper Fire Truck 1966 Chev. Suburban Carry-All Rescue Truck 1974 Chevrolet Rescue Van #14 1976 Ford Tanker 1954 Dodge 3/4 Ton Van 1981 Sutphen Model T5-100 & Fire Truck $95,000 $125,000 $130,000 $ 30,000 $ 40,000 $ 45,000 $ 6,500 $300,000 S#0769 S#0213 S#1139 S#1508 S#5528 S#6332 S#1709 S#1456 S#3010 $ 12,000 $ 7,500 $ 32,000 $ 60,000 $ 6,000 $ 15,000 $'17,000 $ $275,000 CITY OF MOUND VEHICLE SCHEDULE Street Department, 1973 Chevrolet 1 1/2 Ton Dump Truck 1978 Chevrolet Dump Truck 1975 Chevrolet Pickup 1975 Chevrolet Dump Truck 1975 Chevrolet Dump Truck 1976 Ford 3/4 Ton Pickup W/Plow 1981 Ford 2 1/2 Ton Truck W/Plow & Wing Replacement Cost s#0589 s#0638 s#8627 s#8033 s#0160 s# s#1058 Value $13,000 $19,000 $ 4,600 $16,500 ~12,500 S 4,200 $50,000 -for the benefit of Shoreline's Early Intervention, Child Care, & Bridge Pro )s SHORELINE EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT CENTER, ..~C. - a tax exempt corporation April 6th, 1983 Mayor and City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 To the Mayer and City Council: The joint committees of Shoreline's GIANT SALE and the First Ann~al Westonka Multi-Community Parade respectfully request you to proclaim the weekend of June 10, 11 and 12, 1983 as The Westonka Weekend for Kids. We feel that the procla- mation would help unify the weekend's activities and make this celebration more of a community event. We would also request that the city's proclamation be issued and dated on the same date as the Governor's proclamation designating that weekend also as The Westonka Weekend for Kids. The Governor's proclamation will be signed by Governor Perpich at a ceremony at the c~pitol building on April 29, 1983. The following are the statements that will be included in the ~roo-l~mation by the Governor, we request that they also be used in the City's proclamation. Our Kids are the future of our country. Shoreline's Early Intervention, Bridge and Child Care programs aid Kids, some with developmental delays. The parents, staff and friends of Shoreline sponsor a GIANT SALE, June 10, 11 and 12, to financially lad the progz~ams for Shoreltne's Kids. The Westonka Chamber of Commerce and Shoreline are co-sponsoring a Multi-Community Parade for the entertainment of all Kids On June 11th. The City of Mound and all its agencies are encouraging and smpporting the Parade and the events for the benefit of Kids that weekend. Everyone is a Kid when it comes to a parade. Proclamation: The Weekend of June 10, 11 and 12 as The Westonka Weekend for Kids. /~'/I~y~onn~ly,/~ C~e~ Chairma~ GIANT SALE and ParaQ~ 3745 Shoreline Drive · Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 · (612)471-8541 Stationery donated by Ms. Print, Inc. of Mound, Minnesota March 28, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: RE: CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT Enclosed is the proposed development contract that would be used in pinning developers and other down once we approve their plats. This is a fairly common document for the larger cities, but would mean a departure for Mound where all the details and loose ends are often in separate areas and hard to keep track of. Since the change in personnel, alot of things have come up that no one knows about, especially in light of the fact that the developers are taking so long to implement their projects. Please look it over for language and give me your ideas on the appropriateness of using the contract. JE:fc DEVELOPHENT CONTRACT AGREEHENT dated , 19. ., between the City of Hound, a Hinnesota municipal corporation ("the City"), and ("the Developer"). WHEREAS, the Developer has asked the City to approve a plat of land owned by it to be known as (also referred to in this Agreement as the "plat"). The land is legally de- scribed as follows: See attached Exhibit "A". AND WHEREAS, the City has approved the plat on condition that the Developer enter into this Development Contract and comply with its terms. Representation by Develope~. The Developer represents to the City that the proposed plat complies with all City, County, Metropolitan, State and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: Subdivision Ordinances, Zoning Ordinances and Environmental Regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow any construction or de- velopment work in the plat Until there is compliance. The Developer further represents to the City that the plat is not of "metropolitan significance" and that an environmental assessment worksheet, environ- mental impact statement or the like is not required. If the City or another governmental entity or agency determines, however, that such a review is needed, the Developer shall prepare it and reimburse the City for all expenses, including staff time and attorney's fees, that the City incurs in assisting in the preparation of the review. -1- Phased Development. The plat shall be developed in _ _ phase(s) in accordance with the attached Exhibit. Phases not being final platted at this time shall be designated as outlots on the final plat for Phase 1. The City may refuse to approve final plats of sub- sequent phases until development of all prior phases has been satisfactorily completed. Completion of work. The Developer shall complete the work required by Paragraph 4 of this Agreement in accordance with City specifications within months from the date of this Agreement. All work shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer and, when and if necessary, the Minnesota Department of Health, the Ninnehaha Creek tershed District, and any other governmental agency having jurisdiction. Public Improvements. The required improvements and estimated costs are set out in the letter of the City Engineer dated ., l~___, attached hereto as Exhibit "8". Within ninety (90) days after completion of the improvements, the Developer shall supply the City with a complete set of "As Built" plans. The developer shall retain a competent professional engineer to prepare the appropriate plans, specifications, and other instructions to accomplish these activities. The Developer shall specifically instruct his engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. The developer or his engineer shall schedule a pr,construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time and place with all parties concerned including the City Staff to review the program for the construction work. Bond Requirements. The Developer shall deposit with the City a performance, materials and labor bond satisfactory to the City to guarantee completion of the work required by the developer pursuant to Raragrap~ four (4) of this Agreement and also guaranteeing the payment for all materials and labor costs incurred in conjunction with the work. The amount of the bond shall be for 125~ of the estimated cost of the work as set forth in Exhibit "B". Other Costs and Contributions. Before the City signs the final plat the Developer shall pay or make arrangements satisfactory to the City for the payment of the costs and contributions as set forth in the at- tached Exhibit "C". Ownership of Improvements. Upon the completion of the work and con- struction required to be done by this Agreement, the improvements ly- ing within public easements shall become city property without further notice or action. Warranty. The Developer warrants all work required to be performed by it against poor material and faulty workmanship for a period of one (1) year, after its completion and acceptance by the City. The Oevel- oper shall post maintenance bonds or other security acceptable to the City to secure the warranties. lC. Erosion Control. The Developer shall comply with any erosion control method requested by the City for the prevention of damage to adjacent property and the control of surface water runoff. As the development progresses, the City may impose additional erosion control require- ments if in the opinion of the City Engineer they would be useful. The Developer shall comply with the erosion control plans and with any such additional instructions it receives from the City. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Seed shall be rye grass or other fast growing seed to provide a tempo- rary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be mulched as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. Easement. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors an easement and license to enter the plat to perform all work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the development of the plat. ll. Clean-up. The Developer shall promptly clear any soil, earth or deb- ris from streets in the plat resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. 12. Respon$iblity for Costs. Ao The Oeveloper shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat. lhe City shall have no obligation to pay such costs whether or not the City has approved the work. The Developer shall hold the City harmless from claims by third parties, including but not limited to other property owners, contractors, subcontractors and materialmen, for damages sus- tained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City for all costs, damages or expenses, including engineering and attorney's fees, which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims by third parties. T~e Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this contract, including engineering and attorney's fees. T~e Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City within thirty (30) days. If the bills are not paid on time the City may halt all plat development work until the bills are paid in full. The Developer agrees that the City, at its option only, can in- stall and construct any work on improvements required herein to be made by the Developer. [f the City makes any such improve- ments under its power to make local improvements, or if the City makes improvements due to the Developer's default as outlined in Section 13 the City may in addition to its other remedies assess its cost in whole or in part. Unless otherwise specifically provided, the Developer shall pay the entire assessment in a singls installment in the year after adoption of the assessment. -4- The Developer hereby waives any and all substantive and procedural objections to the City doing the work and assessing the cost. Developer's Default. If the Developer does not satisfactorily com- plete the work this Development Contract requires of it, the City may at its option perform the work and the Developer or the bonding com- pany shall reimburse the city for all expenses incurred by the City. The City shall give the Developer and the bonding company at least 48 hours notice of the City's intention to perform any such work. However, in the event of an emergency as determined by the City, 48 hours notice is not required and the Developer or the bonding company shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City in the same manner as if notice had been given. 14. Hiscellaneous. Ae C® This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, as the case may be. Breach of any term of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Development Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the re- maining portion of this Agreement except that the City may elect to rescind its approval of the plat. No one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until: (1) sanitary sewer and water lines have been installed, hooked up, tested and approved by the City, and (2) the streets needed for access to the residence have been paved with a bituminous surface and concrete curb and gutter have been installed. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Development Contract. be binding~amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this development contract shall not be a waiver or release. The security in the form of a performance bond or an approved letter of credit shall not expire or be released until all work and improvements have been satisfactorily completed and approved by the City. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the property on the plat. 15. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents or mailed to the Developer by certified or registered mail at the follow- ing address: Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand de- livered to the City Nanager or mailed to the City by certified or reg- istered mail in care of the City Hanager at the following address: City of Hound, 5341Naywood Road, Hound, HN 55364. Attention: City Hanager. IN WlTNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seal: CITY OF MOUND By: By: (Hayor) (Manager) ®.e~e®eeeeeee®®eeee®ee®ee®eeeeeeee~eeee® By: Its: By: -6- Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNERIN) On this~day of , 19 , before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each did say that they are respectively the mayor and manager of the City of Mound, the municipal corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its City Council and said and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF HENNERI,~) On this~day of , 19 __, before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each did say to me that they are respectively the and of the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its 8oard of Directors, and said and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Rublic -7- STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) On this~day of , 19 and for said County, personally appeared ., before me a notary public within to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that__.he executed t~e same as free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) On this~day of .._, 19.___, before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared to me known to be one of the partners of the partnership that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same. Notary Public -8- Date: March 25, 83 To: Jan Bertrand From: Sharon Legg Re: Subdivision Escrows Please give me copies of Preliminary Plat Subdivision resolutions highlighting the amount to be put into the escrow account (2300) for each developer. We will then set up an account code for all expenditures against that escrow account. These expenditures will not show up as an expenditure to the City, instead they will reduce the escrow funds received, or if not received, reducing future receipts. Therefore, should we never get that money, we would at that time charge these expenditures against the Planning Department making it very important not to set up these escrows if we do not think we will get the money. You can review bills from the attorney, engineer and planner to be sure all amounts are charged to the escrow'account. Also, please give me copies of receipts of escrow funds. The escrow fund will be set up in the General Fund (01) with a project number assigned to it. Thus far we have three developments with account numbers. These are: 01-2300-901-00 01-2300-902-00 O1-2300-903-00 Lost Lake Langdon Landing Newhouse Builders BILLS .... APR Air Comm 2,386.00 Ameri~ Chemical Ind 161.95 Act0 Minnesota 1.6.46 Badger Meter 1,524..80 Blackowiak & Son 54.00 Holly Bostrom 174.OO · Burlington Northern 5}3.33 Butch's Bar Supply 183.75 Brown Photo 249.80 Carol Burlet 15.00 Bradley Exterminating 19.OO Bill Clark Standard 4,331.99 Coast to Coast 63.57 Continental Telephone 86.50 Coca Cola Bottling 240.45 City Club Distributing 2,094.70 Davies Water Equip 615.50 Day Distributing 2,682.68 East Side Beverage 3,592.50 John Ewald 51.20 ion Elam 29.00 First Bank Mpls 16.OO Gerold Welding 35.00 Gold Medal Beverage 128.55 General Tire Service 138.55 Glenwood Inglewood 43.80 Henn Co. Finance 297.30 Henn Co. Treas. 256.00 Eugene Hickok & Assoc 7,272.20 Hoffman Shoe Repair 2.00 Henn Co. Chiefs of Police 55.00 Hudson Map Co. 42.07 Illles & Sons 855.75 Island Park Skelly 28.00 Kool Kube Ice 104.50 L.0.G.I.S. 1,577.66 The Laker 118.14 Lyman Lumber 141.15 Doris Lepsch 15.O0 L.M.C.D. 1,998.50 Bob Lyckholm 500.00 MacQueen Equip 50.52 Marina Auto Supply 52!.52 McCombs Knutson 718.00 Minnegasco 1,970.O1 Wm Mueller & Sons 2,371.O4 Midwest Wine 534.37 Minnesota Wastewater OPerators 5.00 Munitech, Inc. 22.50 Mound Police Reserves 500.70 Mound Explorers 187.50 Minn Comm 28.75 Mpls Oxygen 10.50 Martins Navarre 66 485.00 Navarre Hdwe 197.80 N.$.P. 6,1B3.B4 Natl Fire Protection Assn 50.00 A.J. Ogle Co. 1,662.85 Popham, Haik, Schnobrick 62.10 Pepsi Cola Bottling 195.O0 Pogreba Distributing 3,524.65 Reo Raj Kennels 687.00 Regal Window Cleaning 10.75 Will iam Roth 142.91 Nels Schernau 5.06 Spring Park Car Wash ll6.OO Don Streicher Guns 152.2'5 Sterne Electric 59.00 Sun Newspapers 99.00 State Bank of Mound 14.OO St. Boni Farm Store 30.45 Twin City Home Juice 22.24 Thurk Bros. Chev 346.58 Thorpe Distributing 4,766.35 Tonka Printing 98.00 Unitog Rental ~ 226.07 Village Chevrolet 64.31 Widmer Bros. 280.00 Bruce Wold 6.00 Xerox, Inc. 924.68 A~A~A 170.OO Robert Cheney 334.00 Car-Co Auto Parts 85.15 Duwayne Dorfner 35.00 Stephen Grand 110.89 Greyhound Travel 238.00 Eugene Hoff 30.00 Johnson Paper & Supply 172.20 Metro Waste Control 2,945.25 MACI-Star Cities Conf 40.00 Mound Fire Dept 4,489.95 Municipals 92.75 SexUal Offense Serv.-RamseyCo. 40.00 Griggs, Cooper 2,569.32 Johnson Bros. Liquor 4,074.49 Old Peoria 2,O32.21 Ed Phillips 1,'423.78 State Treasurer 1,381.82 P.E.R.A. 2,540.79 TOTAL BILLS 82,869.25 ~MOUND · SPRING PA RK MINNETRISTA ·NAVARRE APRIL, 1983 westonka orea chamber o$ commerce "CHAMBER WA_~VE__~" APRIL GENERAL ~;ETING - Minnetonka I~J. st -- April 12:00 Lunch..ie are partiq'~la~..lly fortunate to have ':Tin Borden as our ~uest £peaker. Mr. ~or~en, the'President of M.A.$.I. ( Minnesot~ Association of Commerce and Industry ), has an excellent insight on how our business community can~assert itself in our legislative pro- cesses. Non-members are always welcome - so bring a guest! Reservations (472-6780) are not necessary, but certainly a help to avoid confusion. PLEASE NOTE- Due to increased food costs the Luncheon cost is now .35.00. PRESIDENT'S LETTER: I would like to take this opportunity to say a special thank-you to .~.m~.~r~ of our business~ommu.~t~y,' ~. · Ruby. Stecke! and two very supportive "= ~'~ ~ Bill ~{oim, of the ~az_or and Laker newspapers r?~3~pectiv~!y. Not only have both of thsse people made a con~erted ~ffort to support the ~est- onka Chamber throuEh their publications, they have also made strong commit,'~ents to !?~ i?3rsonnally involved in Chamber activities. Thank-you Bill and Ruby! Paul Pond, President COMING EVENTS: Volunteer Fai_~r. - April 9 (Sat.) - iOA.M, to 4A.M. If you would like to help man the booth for an hour or so please contact Chic ( 471-7297, 472-6780 ). This is a good way for area merchants and businesspeople to get out and meet the public. Potluck supper at 5:30, just bring a dish, everyone welcome! Theme: Celebrate Volunteerism Nam~The Parade Conte_.____~s! - Judging by April IOth BOARD p~._.~IRE. CTOR'S MEETING - April 12, 7:00 A.M., Twin Birch GOVERNF~___~AL AFFAIRS CO. ~M~_IT_~TE_E__~.~ETING___~ - April 13, see insert GENER~..~MEM_~BERSHIP MEETING - April 20, see above C_L~EA~S3';E~- April 23 ( Sat. ) A~ FREE BREAf{FAST FO~ EVERYONE ( and that means everyon 6'~r28~;6F"~rg~.ud~-~otevens ( Mound Super-Valu will be served in the Community Servzc~s Bldg. down- stairs cafeteria from ~:30 to 9:30. Clean-sweep will start at 9:30. Chairperson Pete Jokuson of Koenig, POST OFFICE BOX 426 · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 CHAMBER POTS - Robin, Johnson,'and Wood will need all the peoplepower he can get. The J~ C. s have already offered their help. Any Chamber members interested in volunteering for the day should call Pete (472-1060) or Chic. The Mound Retail Council is having a promotion to coincide with the event. Hopefully, Spring Park and Navarre will do the same. Will be replanted inearly May. All owners of pots will be contacted 'regarding whether or not they want to contin- ue thc program. Evergreens and flowers will be added this year. If you have a'price on trees, pl~as~ call Chic. MEMBERSHIP NOTES: Bill Koenig and ,Iim Robin are proud to welcome P~te Jo,~,~son and John :lood as partners -new'firm name- "~oenig, R_~bin, Johnson, and Wood. Thr~e cheers also for the firm's decision to start their building renovation:: ~,~' ~m~,,.~.~.~ ~..~.~ to these new area ~Industrial Products- Pau~l and'Pat Meisel, L?L_L~'.s- Lynette Mc- Cullo~]-R~o_~u~-?l~s_hiPn_s- Ju~y'W'i~e, .Sheer El~a_~n~c.e- ~anice Larson CO:_ N~G~RA?U_ ~L~_~TI__p_.N_S_ to Jim and Brenda Dickinson on their recent marriage. WELCOME NE%~ MEMBERS: MAPLE PLAIN FOOD CENTER GIRL SCOUTS OF AMERICA MR. LEIGH KALLESTAD TH]ETA INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS F~{. GREG WARREN SENATOR GEN OLSON. CITY'OF ST. BONIFACIOUS MRS. KATHI MATSON %T~S_COMING!! x~%~ T~HE WESTONKA AREA x WATCH FOR IT ,, We are committed, the First Annual Westonka Multi-Community Parade wil__l be a reality on June llth. I am still looking for help, units and much support from all. Please call if you'can help or wish to participate. CITY 5M1 MAYWOOD RD~ MOUND MN 55364 Thanks, Chairperson Larry Connolly 472-2933 Lt. £ AIE) · WILLIAM E. HUSBANDS 5207 W. 28TH STREET ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554,1 (612) 920-2717 February 22, 1983 Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Rd Mound, Minnesota 5'5364 Re: Policy Statements Dear Jon: Enclosed are the three policy statements (Loss Control, Loss Prevention, and Risk Management) which have been revised in accordance with the recommendations. I would appreciate it if you would review these statements and advise. W.E. Husbands CPCU WEH:avs Enc. RISK MANAGEMENT STATEMENT The City of Mound is to be protected against accidental losses which in the aggregate during any financial period, would sig- nificantly affect the City's personnel, property, its budget, or ability to fulfill its responsibilities. The City of Mound rejects any loss of life or serious personal injury to employees or members of the general public. The City of Mound will apply to their risks a systematic and continuous identification of loss exposure, an analysis of these exposures in terms of frequency and severity, the appli- cation of sound loss prevention and loss procedures, the review of whether risk transfer could have been utilized, and the financing of the risk consistent with the City's financial sources. The administration of the City's risk management program is assigned to W. E. Husbands who will report to the City Manager. LOSS PREVENTION STATEMENT The City of Mound having already gone on record as ~~w~ of life or serious personal injury to employees or ~.'~ any lOSSof the general public resolves that: ~,~, members It shall be each employees responsibility to be aware ~ of his/her surroundings so as to take notice of any unsafe act or condition. These situations shall be brought to the attention of that person's immediate supervisor for corrective action. A safety committee shall be established to review all accidents whether workers compensation, auto, etc. in nature and determine how they can be avoided in the future. Each department will hold safety meetings once a month to review problem areas and corrective measures. If, for any reason, an employee still feels unable to address areas of safety, this should be brought to the attention of the City's outside Risk Manager, Bill Husbands, who is charged with the City's overall safety responsibilities. LOSS CONTROL STATEMENT Once a loss has occurred, a number of actions should be taken in the following order: The injured party should be attended to immediately. In case of a serious injury, the injured person should be transported to the closest hospital (probably Waconia) by ambulance or other emergency vehicle. In case of back injury, sprains, hernias, etc., the injured party can be sent or taken to the Occupational Medicine Clinic at 800 East 28th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota. In all cases, someone other than the injured party should call ahead to the medical facility being used to make them aware of the situation. In those cases where immediate medical attention is' not necessary, the injured party should give a full written report of the loss. In cases where immediate medical attention is necessary; a pre- liminary report should be filed by the direct supervisor. A report must be completed on all losses immediately. or clarifications can be made at a later date. Additions The original loss report should be sent to the insurance company. A copy needs to be sent to Earl Bailey, Bill Husbands and the OSHA report log. Each injured employee shall be contacted periodically by his/her immediate supervisor. Any emoloyee absent more than three days from work should be visited in person at least once a week. Ail efforts shall be made by all parties to return an injured employee to his/her job as soon as possible. RECEIVED FEB 1 81983 Fee LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT · APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE TO THE LMCD CODE Variances: When Granted: Where practical difficulties or particular hardships occur, the Board, upon application of a person affected, may permit a variance from the requirements of this chapter or may require a variance from what is otherwise permitted by this Code, provided that such variance with whatever con- ditions are deemed necessary by the Board, does not adversely affect the purpose of this ordinance, the public health, safety, and welfare, and reasonable access to, or use of, the lake by the public or riparian owners. The following appli- cation, when completed, shall be filed with the Executive Director of the District along with surveys, photos, and such other information ss required: (Name of Owner)A // . ~ ~' (Owner's streefi address) ~ '' ~ (Phone number) (Mailing address if different from street address) (Street address of property to which variance applies) Riparian to LMCD area (s)~~~~~ Number (s) ~ Practical difficulties requiring variance: ~ ~.~_. ~ ~~ , What h~r~ships :~~~~_~ ~~ ~~ Abutting lakeshdre property owners: North or / /~.. O (.-.---,., (Name and mailing add/~..~ (Location) East: (Location) '70 Variance Application - P~ge 2 Other affected 'proper~y owners: (Name and mailing address) (-Loc-~tion) "(Name and mailing address) (Location) '(Name and mailing address) (LOcation) (Name and mailing address) (Location) Req~3~ved documents are attached: Fee is attached M~p Plat Surveys.__ Photos Showing dockage Abutting docka~, Other affected dockage .... P~ oposed changes I certify that the information I~ovided herein and the attachments hereto are true and correct statements, and I understand that any variance issued may be revoked by the District for violation of the LMCD Code. I consent to permitting officers and ~gents of the District to enter the l~emises mt all reasonable times to investigate and to determine whether the Code of the District is being complied with. Date Relationship to Owner SHORELINE LOCATION SURVEY FOR AL ~ ALMAS SUPPER CLUB '"'---PROPOSED DOCKS LAKE MTKA. H,, FLE ('CITY OF MOUND. N / GORDON R. COFFIN CO.,INC. DATE: FEBRUARY 16, 1983 ~rmCi~ve.~, SCALE= I' - 20° FIB ~.SLq~3 ENGINEERS B SuRvEYORS DATUM' MEAN SEA LEVEL ~.~ LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA Fee is attached # /~z~/c~' Village response due received (for LMCD use) License Year /~J~' No. of Boats , Boat Density Index Cau be reached at phone APPLICATION NEW OR REVISED ~b~LTIPLE DOCK~ .RAMP, AND/OR MOORING LICENSE (Print or type own~r~ name) (Owner's address) · the owner of land in the City of ~V/.~U~]/~ rom (Stree~ address) (Phone) (Phone) (Mailing address if different from street address) which is riparian to LMCD area(s) ~ , No(s)._~ Lake Minnetonka, applies pursuant to LMCD Code Chap~III, Sec. 3.08, for a new or revised Multiple Dock License, in accordance with all data and other information submitted herewith and made a part hereof. The following must accompany this application (see samples attached): (a) Locator map (b) County plat of area (c) Certified survey and legal 'description (d) Site plan of dockage to overlay survey (e) Dock construction detail sheet ul ' le 1. Type of application (check): Private Commercial ~. ~e[}~ng Club Other (explain) 2. Intended use of facility. 3.' Abutting lakeshore~rck~_erty o~wners: ~ ~ /) ~ ~ (N~e and ~i~h~ address)./ ~ ~ ~ t ~' ~ t'~ ~ . South or Eas ~..~, ~.. (/~,... ~C~,~ ~ (N~e and mailing addr~) ~ ~ ~ Other affected parties (N~es ~d mailing addresses - attach sheet if necessary) 4. Site Lake frontage: ~ feet. 5. Watercraft Availability Units computation (does not apply to co~ercials): Frontage ft. · 50 = ; total Watercraft Availability Units: Maximum number of boats stored in the water at dock slips: Max.-number boats stored in the water at docks other than at slips: Maximum number of boats stored in the water at slides: Maximum number of boats stored in the water at lifts: Maximum number of boats stored in the water at moorings: Maximum number of other boats stored (explain): Total Watercraft Availability Units: (The number of moorings under separate District Mooring Area Permit is .) 10/82 Application for New or Revised Multiple Dock and/or Mooring License - Page 2 Name 7. Number of (a) rental slips (b) service slips (c) transient slips /~ (d) other slips Total slips /~- Explain: If different from total in #6, explain: Ail required permits, licenses and approvals have been obta om the C in which the multiple dock is located, and the M.D.N.R.: Yes No All commercial (and other, where applicable) must provide the following additional information: 10. Check the nature of services and parking provided: a) Boat storage No. of parking spaces b) Launching ramps " Times ramp is open for public use: Ramp overflow parking 11. .12. 13. 14. c) Sales d) Service e) Boat rentals f) Restaurant g) Other (explain) No. of parking spaces !! $1 h) Parking not required Reason: Sanitary facilities'are provided: Yes ~/ No Boat toilet pumping service is provided: Yes Total ; number of units No Locate and describe gas service and storage facilities on your site plan. ALL APPLICATIONS~ Base. fee ................... $ /~ Watercraft Availability Units @ $5.00 . . + Total fee enclosed $ 10.00 I certify that the information provided herein and the attachments hereto are true and correct statements, and I understand that any license issued may be revoked by the District for violation of the LMCD Code, including Sec. 3.02, Subd. 10: "No per- son shall sell, rent, or lease for the storage of boats or watercraft any space within dock use areas other than at commercial docks; provided, however, that such space may be rented or leased at docks of apartments solely for the storage of boats or water- craft owned by residents of the apartments." I consent to permitting officers and agents of the District to enter the premises at all reasonable times to investigate and to determine whether the Code of the District is being complied with. Relationship to Owner lO/82 . t ' PSOT[CT GITF "' [MI N N ETIRISTA ~IOUND SPRIN~, PHELPS ISL 3 (Mound PAR HENNEPIN CO ZUMI~RA 0 MINNEWASI American Legion Post 398 DATE ~ARCH 31~ 1983 GAMBLING H=PORT CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE ~ROm: ~2185.O,0 ~15.O0 EXPENSES: SALES TAX ~123.67 BOND lO0. O0 SUPPLIES 127.20 EoUI-PMENT (&MPIJFIFR) 51.35 PAYOUT AS PRIZES: ~Z~02.22 1200. O0 ~'59o .~8 _ 2~' 50. O0 PROFIT: ~582.78 ~1377.52 DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS: MINN. SHER~IFF'S ASE'N. HOCKEY BOOSTERS CUB SCOUTS ALANO !{8o.oo 85.oo 80.oo 25.oo f270.o0 ¢' ~'13.23' _ CHECKING ACCOUNT .~ .~2537,68 April 15, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER With the start of baseball season, I though you all would enjoy the enclosed article. JE:fc 877 THE CIVIL-SERVICE GIANTS A story of baseball and bureaucracy by Allan B. Jacobs Allan B. Jacobs was the dirccwr o! the San Francisco Department o[ City Planning [rom 1967 to 1974 and is currently a pro[essor in the dcpartment o! city and regional plan. ning at the University o! Cali/ornia at Bet. keley.  lt}': SAN FIIANCISCO GIANTS went civil service in 1980. The team~the play-  thc the coaches, the ers, lllanagers. ..///i_ batboys, and the gr'ounds keepersMall of them became civil-service employees of tile City and County of San Francisco that year. It wasn't planned. It just happened. After an unexpectedly good year in 1978, when the Giauts actually finished third after leading for most of the season, the team fell to fifth place in '79. Ancndance, which had exploded to well over 1.5 million in '78, sank to 1,500 to 3,000 on weekdays and 10,000 to 12,000 on weekends when the Dodgers were in town. So Bob Lurie sold the Giants near the end of the '79 season to a Brazilian who had made it big selling Amazonian hardwoods in Georgia aml was looking for his own tax shelter. The new owner soon found out about ma- jor-league salaries, all those empty seats, and the other competition that was bidding for the fans' dollars in the Bay Area. He concluded that maybe hc hadn't bought tile best baseball franchise in the world, tax write-off or not, and began thinking and talking of ~noving the franchise, just as earlier owners had when fans stayed away from games, tie felt sure he could break the Giants' lease arrangement for the use of Candlestick Park. By now, few people paid much attention to that sort of posturing and threats to leave. Those antics made good press for a day or two, but it was well known that the Giants were locked into San Francisco for twenty years by virtue of an ironclad agreement they had signed with the city's Department of Parks and Recreation. Some long-forgotten lawyer in the city attorney's office bad written a lease that bound the two parties together like Siamese twins. Nevertheless, the city attorney always got a bit anxious when the Giants threatened to leave. He asked a new, young assistant, Ha- drian Ness, fresh from the University of San Francisco Law School, to check up on it: Could the Giants get out of the lease? The as- signment had been given before and was con- sidered good training by the old pros in the office. But Ness was eager to make his mark and took the job more seriously than his pre- decessors had. He also had no other assign- ments just then and wanted to be busy, lest some city councilman demand that his position be lopped off the payroll. City attorneys were about the only category of employees in San Franci,co that didn't have civil-service pro- tectim~, and that rankled Ness. After all, the re:t of his USFL$ classmates who went to work fo,' the city (some 68 percent was the )'early ax'era,ge) were secure for life. Ness was pretty angry about that. In his research, Ness made some interest- ing observations. He noticed that the lease was with the Department of Parks and Rec- reation, not with the city council or the mayor or the city. He recalled that the city charter said somethi,~g about all Park-Bec employees having to be hired through the civil service. ..Ness also ob,erred that the Giants' front of- flee worked in space in Candlestick Park pro- vided by Park-Ilec. Some of the Giants' per- sonnel were pretty chummy with the Park-lice people. After all, they shared the same johns. On a few occasions (once when there had been a printers' strike in town, and once when someone had forgotten to reorder envelopes) the Giant~ had sent out letters on Park-Bee stationery. What are friends for? It was also a fact that Willie Mays's contract had once been sent with a letter that bore Park-Bee's The head of Park-Bec had framed a pho- pied facsimile, just for laughs, of course, and hung it on the wall behind his desk. From these seemingly innocent observations and frmn one day seeing the Giants' grounds keepers digging up the pitcher's mound, rak- ing the base paths, and cutting the infield grass --the kind of thing that the city's own gar- deners did--Ness came {o a startling conclu- sion: All of the team, including the players, were employees of the city and county of San Francisco, and should be treated as such! Assuming Ness was right, that meant that, like all Park-llec stall, the players would have to be hired by civil-service procedures. Among other things, they would have to pass exams, and any new players would have to live in the city. Fantastic! Ness's father, a union orga- nizer/street cleaner working for the city at 818,000 a year, would be proud of him. Ness went immediately to his boss to tell him the exciting news, but that august person- age was out defending the city on a zoning · case. So, while waiting, Ness had lunch with his newfound city-hall friend, reporter Russ Cone. He confided to Cone the significance of what he had found, knowing without hav- ing to ask that his friend would treat the mat- ter confidentially. The story that hit the afternoon papers was headlined CITY ATTORNEY SAYS GIANTS CIVIL "All of the team, including the players, were employees of the city and county of San Francisco, and should be treat- ed as such!" 71 Allan B. Jacobs THE CIVIL- SERVICE GIANTS SERVICE. The mayor was quoted on the eve- ning news as responding, "Did the city attor- ney say that?" San Francisco, as any politi. cai-science student will tell you, has a weak- mayor, form of government. Governor Brown the Younger, reached at a San Francisco ashram, thought it was a good idea, but if this was just another ploy of San Francisco politicians to get state money in the po~t-Prol)osition 13 era, they had another guess coming. He said he hadn't been born yesterday, you know. The commissioner of baseball said some- tiring to the effec~ that this was probably just another bit of nonsense coming out of San Francisco and needn't be taken seriondy. He thought that San Francisco ought to start try- ing to solve its baseball problems instead of coming up with such tomfoolery. Most observers thought that it was simply West Coast high jinks, that the idea was im- pos~ibh, and lib'gal on its face, and they had a good laugh. Hadrian Nes~ didn't think it was funny, tie took hi~ severilncc pay and, with a small grant from thc CMl Scrvice Fom~,latiou, ~et up au utiicc and In'ought t[~c matter lo court. Ness a]~o lnitnagcd to get ;m injum't~on against thc (;iant,---or any,,n,, ,,is,. for thal matter--using Candle,lick Park until the ca,e was settled. So a lot of pcoph, want,.d the question re- solved quickly. Anticilmling appeals, the city and Il,. {;im~ls agr,.,.d to h.t thc matter go di- rectly to th,. California Sulm.lnc Court, where it wa, l,'ard in late January of 1980. Thc young grandson of onc of thc justices had ju,t been traded by. the Giants to a Cin- cinnati /arm team in Tennessee. The justice didn't know where Tennessee wa,, was sure thc boy had re.vet been given a chance, lek thc wh,,h. },usincss of buying and Starling play- ers was like slavery, and thought he'd never see his favorite grandson again. By a one-vote margin, the California Su- preme Court agreed with lawyer Ness; the Giants had to be civil scrvicc. SAN FRANClSCO'S ball team became the laughingstock of baseball in almost no time, well before tit(. first pitch of the 1980 ~eason. Baseball, like most other professional sports, was big business. Most fans knew that where tile team played had al- most nothing to do with the team itself. Place was incidental to the business/sport, a vestige of an ohler, more romantic time, when the owners also owned local breweries and the players might even live on the next street. In the modern era thc players had ahnost never grown up in the cities where fl~ey played. They came from places like Cuba and Mexico. Only the bat boys lived in the home city. It was an cra of trades, options, release clauscs, multiyear contracts, and making it while you could. Game times and places were determined more by the imagined needs of a prcprogrammed national television audience than by local preference. Most people sus- pected that national and international TV ran sports anyway. It was clear that a local team, made up of local civil sen'ants who came from and lived in San Francisco, could never com- pete in an international sport. The players were dumbfounded. Civil ser- vice? Civil servants? They had only recently been given some freedom from the odious "re- serve clause" that hound them for life to whichever team owned th:.ir contracts. They were making lots of money now that tb,:y were ahnost free to play for the highest bidder. Players knew that civil scrvanta didn't make much money, no one called a civil servant couhl. So they quickly turned to their lawyers. agents, anti contracts. There was undcrstandal~h' confusion ami,1 the fact antl rumor that went tl,e rounds. Old contracts would have to be honored, wot,ldn't they? Players could play o,t their options and then try to land with another team~but who would want them? Wouhl there be pay cuts? Thc law?rs and the agent~ had a wimlfall of nnexpcctcd fees and commissions while look- ing after their player,' interest. They felt se- curt' in advising thc latter to take it easy anti ~e how things sorted themsclves out. The sea- son was about to start, and in all likelihood they would be secure for tile year. Player security was actually enhanced when Giants' manager Grubb tried' to fire Isis third- base coach just before the season started. The coach had a drinking problem and was wob- bly on the field three out of five days. He kept sending base runners home from second hase on groundballs hit to the infield~the runners were always out by forty feet. And Grubb had found out that the coach was having an affair with his wife. So Grubb fired the bounder, who promptly appealed to the Civil Service Commission. Bernice D'Orsi, head of the civil service, advk-ed her com~nissioners that drunkenness on the job, during games, bad not been proved I Grubb wondered bow you could prove that), that thc coach sent the framers home on his best professional judgment and it was his judgment against tile manager's (who, by sit- ting in the dugout, was farther from the ac- tual scene of action), anti that the wife-steal- ing business was personal, not professional and work-related. Grubb should certainly be able to make that simple distinction and not carry over a private relationship into the work en- qronment. D'Orsi therefore recommended gainst the firing and was upheld unanimous- ly by the commission. Grubb was dazed by the experience. He had always been able to fire coaches at will. It was one of his few plea- sures. Worse yet, now that the business about his wife and the coach was out in the open. he would have to move out of his apartment. He had never had to do that before. He locked him:~4f in the manager's office for three da)'.~ and then looked for a new place to live. Hearing the news, some old-time players barely banging on, as well as some rookies not quite out of tile minor leagues but praying never to go back to the Fresnos of the world, were seen walking into the office of tile civil- service union. TIlE SEASON opened without incident. Tile mayor threw out the first pitch (to D'Orsi, for a little humorl and was booed by 4,000 paying faus. In Iris abbreviat,-d speech he wondered if this might not be the dawn of a new baseball cra, and was booed again. The ga,nc, against the l~ath'es, started well. The Giants wer.' hining, aostlv doubh-s. By the fourth inning, the coach bad sent three base runners to thcir doom at home plate: and then the roof caved in. The Giants lost, 12 to 1. ]',':m~ morale was none too good to begin with, anti soon got a lot worse. Not many peo- ple came to the home games; most of them were silent when they did. Without kids clam- oring for their autographs, players' fragile egos were hurt. No one asked for a city traffic en- gineer's autograpb~why would they want a city baseball player's? San Franciscans backed winners, and it was clear that a civil-service team could not be a winner, so the fans staved home and the players felt bad, and their play- ing suffered. Road trips were worse. The team was laughed at in other cities. Players were asked over and over bo;~ it felt to be a civil servant. What would they do during the off-season, when all the other players got to stay home and fish and drink beer? Would they be street cleaners or, since they were part of the De- partment of Parks and Recreation, would they be playground leaders, or gardeners? The ball- players didn't think that kind of question was too funny. They stayed in their hotel rooms, their usual lobby seats, where, in ,etter times, they had been oohed and aabed over. Now, people stared and were more prone to point their fingers and snicker than to li. onize. To top it all 0fl, groupies who I0110wed big sports teams stopped following tile Giants. Civil servants, even if they were baseball play- ers, didn't have much sex appeal. In late May, in the eighth inning of a score- less game in Philadelphia, Grubb went to the mound to replace Denny Sullivan, bis rookie starting pitcher, who had just walked three Phillies on twelve straight had pitches to load the bases. Sullivan refused to leave the game. lie said he was doing fine and bad a right to remain that was protected by civil service. It was a matter of professional opinion. Besides, this could be his first major-league victory. Grubb had told tile kid to quit screwing around and to go take a shower. Sullivan refused. He was the pitcher, he had been designated tile pitcher, and he had a right to pitch. They weren't even behind. Walks were as much a part of tile game as strikeouts. They went into the records. It was like being fired without cause. He wanted a civil-service hearing. (;rubb went for Sullivan's throat. It took three Phillies to separate the two Giants, and tl,e umpire threw them both out of tile game. The story lnat{e national headlines. Here was thc inevitable consequence of bureaucrats and lawyers meddling in placcs where they had no businc,s. It made no ditlcrence to the base- ball worhl that the Civil Servicc Commission later upheld Grubb's action on the grounds that a departnaent head had the right to assign staff as he thought best to carry out the de- partment's responsibilities. The commission did, however, censure Grubb for lack of phys- ical rcslraint. The baseball establishment came to the real- ization that tile Giants were no laughing mat- ter. By the All-Star break in early July, when the subject of the big-league lneetings was what to do about the Giants, the team was al- ready twenty-five games behind the leading Dodgers. Meetings of baseball moguls are sel- do~n productive and this was no exception. There were indications that the Giants would be bankrupt by September, so haseball de- cided to wait until the season was over. In the meantime, tile problem took care of itself. Well, ahno:t. As STRANCE AS it may seem, it was the totally bizarre circumstances of the Giants that began to have a positive effect on the team's fortunes. The first sign was when it became apparent that there was a hard knot of fans that showed up at most home games and sat together, isolated, out in the right-field stands. The 1,000 or so "Here was the inevitable eon' sequence of bureaucrats and lawyers med- dling in places where they had no business." 73 Allan B. Jacobs THE CIVIL- SERVICE GIANTS people were readily defined by all the vacant seats around them. They were, of course, civil servants. They took advantage of cheap tick- ets available to them as part of a promotion to stave off financial disaster' and came every night. They soon found out that the afternoon rest-break that tile union had won for them could be stretched into four or five innings on day games. They were a happy, fun-loving bunch who soon got to know and like each other and found Candlestick Park a good place to hold informal meetings to discuss working conditions and wages. They cheered on their union brothers in uniform, regardless of bow the game was going or of how badly their heroes played. They were a positive crowd. San Francisco's civil-service fans helped, but not enough to make any difference. The nature of San Franciscans made a difference. llemembcr, San Franciscans are tile kind of people that voted .for McGovern, legalizing pot, legalizing abortions, and the rights of homosexuals, and against Jarvis-Gann, the death penalty, and a lot of othcr tilings that later became important. To some of them, in Jl~l.v. th~. notion of their local team competing against tile national and international imper- sonal i.nstitution that baseball had become gave the whole matter a David-and-Goliath character. There was no question but that the Giants were the Davids, and there was no question of which was the right side to be on, especially since the home-towners were getting l~cat up so l~adly. Fans could come out and joyfully cheer the Giants on and not be dis- appointed when they lost. More people, re- laxed, came to the games to cheer (and laugh at) the underdog. It was nice to be seen there, like conspicuous consuming. Girls went alone or in pairs, and so did boys. Candlestick Park became a good place to meet other people, and 'maybe go home with them. It was an even bet- ter place to go once the management added white wine (served in little plastic goblets) and a remarkable mini-quiche to its choice of food. Still more people came. The players felt they were being laughed at at first, hut they joined in the good humor of it all and actually played better, losing less frequently. Attendance jumped again when civil-service employees from around the Bay Area made the Giants their favorites and came from as far as Milpitas. Civil servants from other major-league cities got the message. When the Giants were on the road they began to find themselves cheered on by whole sections of fans. These were local municipal employees coming to support the visitors. Hell, they were civil-service brothers all. It was possible to identify with the Giants, and they needed a hand. So the city employees of St. Louis came to cheer the Giants and boo the Cards. The Cards muttered about the fickle nature of their fans and went into a slump, losing four straight to tile Giants. Team morale went up. It skyrocketed when, in New York, some civil-service groupies showed up to give the boys support. Jocks were jocks after all, regardless of their civil status. The Giants took two of three from tile Mets, and then murdered the Expos in three straight after someone translated the French banners, "L'union Jait la force--l/ire les Giants." Some young kids out in Walnut Creek were bugging their parents to move to San Fran- cisco so that the kids could have a chance to make the Giants' civil-sen, ice-regulated team. This was not lost on city politicians and city planners who for years had been looking for ways to stop the flight of middle-class families to the suburbs. Local baseball might just suc- ceed where lousy schools had failed. By the time the Giants returned from their road trip toward the end of July, they were a relaxed, winning bunch of guys. Morale was up, and they were playing over their heads. A ten- or twenty-game fluke streak perhaps, but fun nonetheless. As attendance rose, tile team continued to play well. They were still fourteen games out of first place by the end of July, a distinct im- provement, but it was clear that they were too far behind to ever catch up. In early August, two stars from the hated, league-leading Dodgers announced that they were playing out their options and would toil for whichever teams would pay them tile most millions the next year. The two were al- ready pocketing something in the vicinity of $700,000 a year--each. That made the Giants, with their civil-service aura, even more popu- lar. (Management wasn't talking about how much three or four of its stars were making, or that fifteen of the Giants were planning to do the same tiling as the two ungrateful Dodg- ers.) The Dodgers went into a slump with the announcement of the impending defections, and they dropped nine straight, four to the Giants on a memorable weekend when 250,000 people squeezed through Candlestick's turn- stiles to see the civil-service Giants. By the end of August, they were only four games out of first place and were driving hard. Just then, Fidel Castro announced that he would love to come to the World Series if the Giants won. The idea of a public, socialist team was inspiring and could only help Cuban- U.S. relations. Even people from the Haight- Ashbury started coming to games after Fidel's announcement. The Giants took over first place September '15, then won another three ght from Atlanta and led the pack by three games on the twentieth. SAN FRANCISCO was a madhouse. There were only two weeks left in the season. Orders for World Series tickets lvere pouring in. Every hotel room was booked in anticipation. The papers and tele- vi,ion were full of the Giants. No team bad ever conic from twenty-five games bebin,1 to win the pennant. Anti this was a civil-service team~ ltoward Coscll man'eled over "the in- credible vitality of this team and tlds town, the City by the Golden Gate." In city ball, more than one observer com- mented that the workcr~ there ~eemcd to stand straight,..r and taller than usual. They were th',.>,ing better (fewer combinations of jack- ,.t~ ami pant, from different suits of dightly difft.rcnt c,,lor, ~ and seemed to have a shine al,out them. Thc ]cx'd of public service chang,',l, but it ;va. a n~orc lmrt~o~cful cb.h,';, q'hc m3x,,r rccalh.d l]lat hc l~ad prc- d]~'h.d a nt*w cra. and Goxcrnvr Brown rc- iml,.,l cvcrv,.n{. Il,at llic id,.a wa, hi~ },lace. ]'iadri;u; Ne>s was b,'ing xvo,~,.d by tx attorney to takc an hnportant, hi~h- I,:i} lng j,A,. },ut xx'i~ h,,hling out .for -l;~lll~. }mt ihat ,]idn't l,~th,'r him since he }lad con,' a c,.h.bl'itv, lh' also had a wonderful, I,uih-in ,Cal,,.?mt for the few times thc Giants h,~t. Ih' ¢ould lml,lk'ly berate Ibc performance ~,f his third-l~a>c coach~"How can I manage when civil service makes me keep people like that?" No one could blame him if they failed on occa4on. He had no control of thc dolts. 'j'jl(' [f;l)ll S $tlCC¢SS under such circmnstances was duc to ltl, ,upcrior managing, the won- d,.rful San I:rancisco fans, and a solid core of th.dicatt.d players. On St'l,tembt.r 21. late in a gmne with Chi- cago that thc Giants were leading by eight run~, the third-lmse coach had Billy Murphy, one of the dedicated ones, try lo steal home f,,r what would bare been a superfluous score. Kretcb. tl~e Chicago pitcher, furious that the Giants would add insult to injury, threw his b~.,t pitch of the game, directly at Murphy. It broke Murphy's leg. Mm'phy, the second baseman, was a steady not outstanding member of tim team. He did his job, and a lot of people didn't even know his name. So it didn't seem to be a crucial loss~at least not until the new sec- ond baseman showed up the next day. Gussie Johnson, sent by civil service to re- place Murphy, was a big, strapping, fast, San Francisco-bred Chinese who had been batting .420 in the minors (albeit with the Golden Gate Park Dunes). The only trouble with Gussie ;vas that lie was left-handed. Manager Grubb was livid. He screamed to D'Orsi that it was impossible to have a left- handed second baseman. A southpaw couldn't possibly make the pivot necessary on double plays. There had never been a left-banded second baseman in the history of baseball. Ask Cosell. D'Orsi, as ever, was calm to the onslaught. She pointed out that Grubb was just using au old, old ploy of all thc other department heads to undermine tile civil-service merit system: Tile)' wcr,' always trying to create so-called specialist positions, geared to particular peo- ph,, rather than gen,:ral positions where many apldicants couhl cmnpct, and get jol,s by it. Only recently, the city-planning director had been' caught trying to create something called an urban-designer position, when it was eh.ar that a city planner was a city planner. Ju,t because th(' 1)lanner ~:ho passed first Il:Id a background in political economics (Marx- i,m~ was no reason that h,' couhln't design a park as well as thc next ldanner. An inth'ldcr ~;'as an intiehlcr, bv God. None of this special- ist sccond-]mscman subcatcgory nonsense. B,Mdcs. I;ussic had competed in a well-ad- vcrtis,',l exam and had cmn,. in first. It lnitdc ilo di~l'~.rcnce to D'Orsi that Gussie bad got sucl, a hi~4h score by virtu,, of thc extra points that came bis way automatically as an armed- forces veteran, l)'Orsi also let Grubb know that she had observed that there were no Chi- nest on thc ball team. W'as Grubb living tes- timony that thc bureaucracy ;vas bigoted, and was hc looking for a civil-rights suit? D'Orsi told (;rubb that the civil-service union watched her every .-top. She ;vas pow- erlcss, she couldn't set a precedent for the rest of the civil service. The union's attorneys would have the matter in the courts for mont}~s, and in thc meantime Grubb would have no second bascm,.n, not even a left-banded one. Anyway, if Gussic didn't work out, then Grubb had the right to terminate him during the first six months, il there was a good reason. Grubb perked up at this, but only until he realized that two of tile next three people on the "in- fielder" list were over forty-fiw~ (but under sixty~, part of a new, "Not So Senior" mi- nority group that was just emerging in San Francisco. Thc third was known to be active in the women's movement. The fourth person "There had nev- er been a left. handed second baseman in the · history of baseball. Ask Cosell." 75 Allan B. Jacobs THE CIVIL- SERVICE GIANTS HARPER'S OCTOBER 1979 on the list might be a winner--he was young and didn't know anything except how to play baseball--but he was much too far down on the list to offer Grubb any hope. Grubh wandered unevenly back to Candle- stick Park. 'fhat afternoon Gussie had four hits and scored the Giants' two runs. In the ninth inning, score tied 2 to 2, bases loaded, one out, the Cubs' batter hit solidly to the Giants' shortstop, who threw to second base for one out. Johnson's relay to first was not in time to catch the batter for a double play, and a run, thc winning run, scored from third. l)'Orsi heard the game in her o~ce at city hall and was ecstatic about Gussie's hitting. The Giants were still two games ahead, and the next day Grubb moved his right-handed third bast.man to p/ay second and tried Gus- sic at third. Grul,b did fire Two-Fingered Brown, the ].~ck-.p ca~chcr that civil service sent. Brown had a rifle arm but no control of where the ball wc.t wi.,. he threw it. That character- istic hadn't been screened out in the eivil- s,,rvivc exam. which was three-quarters written ~and tcsl,'d thc play.r's knowledge of base- ball'~ and one-q.arter ~ctuaIly playing in the livid, Brown. a reader, had done magnificent- ]y on thc written exam (100 percent), so it didn't matter that he only got a score of 40 on the playing part of the exam. His combined :core of 85 was more IMm enough to pass~ and ~ ith the 15 ,,xtra points he g-t for being han- dicalq,'d, h, came out on top. Brown had a mania for trying to pick run- hers off at first base, having done that once s,ccessfully in l]~e Little Lcaguc ten years earlier. In a game against Houston, not two days after thc (;ussic Johnson incident, Brown tried to pick a runncr off at first. The throw, lik' a shot. hit pitcher Montefusco on the kneecap and that was all for Montefusco for the season and for the Giants that day. h wasn't all for Two-Fingered Brown, though. Gr,bb fired him, and his firing was upheld {this being Brown's probationary pe- riod, wh,m department heads had absolute dis- cretionary rights ~. But, as a gesture of kind- ness and humanity (Brown had two wives and three kids to S, pl,ort), the Civil Se~ice Com- mission directed that his name be returned to the bottom of the civil service "catchers" list, so that he might have a chance with some other "department." D'Orsi didn't point out to them that no other city department used catchers, two-fingered ones least of all. As luck would have it, no one else was on the list at that time (thc others who had passed the exam had since moved out of town), so the bottom of the list was the same as the top of the list and Brown was back with the Giants, duly certified, the next day. The Giants' lead was down to one game. The season was drawing to a close. TItEBE ARE PEOPLE in San Francisco who will tell you that the season ended tile next day, when a new outfielder · -.i~' showed utw-in a wheelchair. Most people close to the situation ;viii tell you that never really happened~it was at best a prank pulled bv the visiting Dodgers. It is certain, however, that Manager Grubb had a nervous breakdown the next day. Whether it was the Two-Fingered Brown in- cident, or the Gussie Johnson affair, or the third-base coach's affair with his wife, or just his hatred of D'Orsi, or one of a thousand oth- er reasons is hard to say. Trained people~ civil-service psychologists at' San Francisco General Hospital~are searching for an an- swer now. Somc observers will tell you that San Fran- ciscans live in their own w~rld. They will tell you that there was a World Seri,s in 1980, just as in other )'ears, and that to ]lear people talk around city hall, the civil-service Giants were in it--or could have been. For some people in San Francisco, it is still September. October and the World Series are just around the corner, and the Giants may damned well make it. All they need is a good, left-handed first baseman and there's a terrific, can't-miss prospect just waiting to win it all for the Giants. He ;vas second on the civil- service list. The new manager, an expert from Berkeley's School of Public Policy, is in the process of firing the right.handed first base- man the civil service sent, but that could take a while because the case is being appealed. Some city-hall watchers w~ill tell you that time does not stand still, that' it is Monday of the last week of the season and they, the Civil Sen'ice Commission, will be meeting this very afternoon to decide the issue. It's on their agenda. They will tell you that there is great expectation in the Giants' offices and dressing rooms in Candlestick Park. The Giants are only one game behind and a pennant is still in sight. A civil.service clerk, on the staff of the Civ- il Service Commission, will tell you, just as he told his wife five minutes ago during his break, that a lawyer for the civil-service union, representing the right.handed first baseman, has requested a postponement, and that such requests are almost always honored. Maybe they will decide the matter next week. Maybe the season won't end. [] aeeociation of metropolitan munici'palitiee April 7, 1983 TO: Mayors, Managers & Administrators As you will note from the enclosed brochure, the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and the Coalition for Sensible Land Use (a private sector group) are co-sponsoring a seminar on "Public & Private Perspectives on Land Development Issues in the '80's" We believe it is the interest of both the public and private sectors to work more closely together to improve the climate for economic development in the seven county metropolitan area. We hope this seminar will be an important step in developing a more positive relationship between the public and private sectors in the development process. We believe this seminar will be useful for both policy makers and administrative officials at the city level. We look forward to seeing you on April 28th. at the Sheraton Midway (I-94 and Hamline Ave.). SSncerely, Mary Anderson, AMM President and Golden Valley Councilmember Managers and Administrators: We would appreciate if if you would bring this matter to the attention of the. appropriate persons in your cities. Thank you. MA/cw encl. 183 university ~vcnu¢ east, st. paul, minncsot~ 55101 (~12)22?~5600 aeeociation of Coalition for metr. opo!i.f..an Sensible Land Use mun~apam~ee jointly present: An informative program to explore: Featuring these prominent experts: Donald Brauer Lyn Burton June Demos Robert Hoffman Wolfgang Penzel Bill Schreiber 5:30 6:00 6:30 '8:00 8:30 Sheraton Midway Thursday association of Coalition for metr. opo[[t, gn Sensible Land Use mun~apa,nee RSVP: Sensible Land Use Suite 1500 7900 Xerxes Av. S. Bloomington. MN. 55431 Attn: Stephanie 835-3800 Public & Private Perspectives on Land Development Issues in the '80's Encouraging partnerships in facilitating development Communicating with public officials Attracting development in the '80's Maintaining the level of city services without Increasing costs Obtaining financing under changing market conditions President, The Brauer Group Vice President, Northland Mortgage Company Mayor, City of Roseville President, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly, & Lindgren, Ltd. Mayor, City of Eden Prairie Minnesota State Representative, District 48B Program Cocktails (Cash Bar) Dinner Panel of Speakers Questions / Comments Adjourn 400 Hamline Avenue April 28, 1983 St. Paul $ lO/Person Registration for Public & Private Perspectives: Name Address Organization/City Enclosed ($10 / Person) Phone .. RSVP by April 25 CITY of MOUND April 15, 1983 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Enclosed is the original Memo from the Citizens League that contained the property tax data published today in the tribune. When I read this, I was very distressed by the fact that Mound is the 20th ranked property tax out of the 95 communities ranked having populations over 2500. This problem with this whole analysis is that it does not look at the wealth of the tax base. That is illustrated by the fact that Mound has an average house value of $80,786. While Minnetrista has an average value of $130,139. While this means Minnetrista ranks 42 (twice as high as Mound), it's average tax bill is more than twice as high - $1870.O0 vs. $840.00. I wish they would add a column for assessed value and population so one could compare value per person. That would help put it into, I think, sort of perspective. JE:fc VOLUME XXXII, NO. 7 PUBLISHED 8Y THE CITIZENS LEAGUE (USPS 114-180) MARCH 29, 1 CL Tax Survey Property Taxes Increase, Erratic Pattern An erratic patlern of increases-and sorhe decreases-mark this year's Citizens League. survey of property taxes on an $80,000 house. · Of the 95 municipalities in the metro- politan area with populations greater than 2,500, 13 had increases of more than 35 percent in 1983, 39 had increases be- tween 20 and 35 percent, 24 had in- creases between ten and 20 percent, '13 had increases between zero and ten percent, and six had decreases. A tax of $715, or roughly .9 percent of market value, is the median property tax on a homestead selling for $80,000. The corresponding figure in last 'year's survey was .75 percent of market value. Of the thirteen municipalities with increases topping 35 percent-Arden Hills, Columbus Township, Deephaven, Eden Prairie, Fridley, Linwood Town- ship, Mounds View, New Brighton, North Oaks, Saint Anthony, Shoreview, White Bear Township and Woodbury-some are inner ring and others, outer ring suburbs. · There is no clear pattern of wealth or 'grOwth among the communities with rapidly rising property taxes. The six municipalities which showed decreases-Belle Plaine, Chaska, Farming- ton, lnver Grove Heights, Rosemount, and Jordan-are all outer ring suburbs in the sourthem portion of the metropolitan area. Except for Jordan and Belle Plaine, the rest of the municipalities are at the low end of the property tax rankings. The purpose of the survey, which has been conducted by the. CL NEWS since th~ mid-1960s, is to illustrate how home- stead property taxes generally compare from community to community. The chart on pages two and three shows how property taxes compare. It .is not de- signed to show how much you will pay in taxes on your home. However, ff the. assessor pegs the value of your house at the same level as is shown in column fOur of the table, your tax this year should be _. fairly dose to the estimate for yOur com- munity. , A new feature in this year's survey is the column at the right hand side of the chart which shows the average house 'value in each municipality and the esti- mated tax on it. This column shows what the tax would be on a home which is typical of the municipality, not of the whole metropolitan region. Average house values and estimated taxes range from a high of $211,870 and $3,841 in North Oaks to a')ow of $~4~7 and $387 in Belle Plaine. In some cases, the estimated house value figure in column ten is fairly close Median Net Property Tax as a Percentage of Selling Price on a "Typical Homestead" In the Metropolitan Area, Annual Citizens League Survey 1074 1975 1076 1077 1~78 1079 lqg0 1981 1082 Iq83 to the adjusted estimated market value figure shown in column four, but the .' estimated tax figures are quite different. The difference is accounted for by the sales ratio adjustment. The average house value figure in column ten is adjusted by state Department of Revenue sales ratio figures to account for different a~ss- ment practices among communities. A figure of $80,000 in column ten would result in an estimated tax figure similar to the one in column one. ' ~ .... · Thc average value figure for each' ' community was developed using state Department of Revenue records. The total assessed 'value for homesteads in each municipality is recorded, as is the number of homesteads; Dividing the total assessed value by the number of home- steads gives the average, figure. The median value figure was unavailable.. Another new feature of this year's ~ survey is the. inclusion of more detail on mill rates. In past years, only the total mill rate for each municipality has been was included. This year, we list the total rate and the components which make it up, showing mill rates for school districts, cities or townships, counties and special taxing districts in columns five through nine. ' In all cases, the school mill rate is the largest element of the total mill rate. The school mill rate shown includes any levy for vocational-technical institutions a~ well as the levy for primary-secondary- education. In looking at the figure for the school district levy, keep in mind that school districts frequently cover parts of several municipalities, :and municipalitie's may contain parts of several school dis- tricts. The school district number is listed next to th~ name of the. municipality in the left hand column of the table. Differences in county mill rates among municipalities in the same county can typically be accounted for by services provided only in certain parts of the county. Ramsey and Hennepin counties, for example, levy for library service in most of the county, but not in Saint Paul or Minneapolis, cities which have their own library systems.. The miscellaneous levy is made up (TAX continued on Page 4) m PAGE. 4 (TAX continued from Page I ) mainly of thre~c elements: the Metro- politan Trmsit levy, the Metropolitan Council levy, and the Mosquito Control lledistrict levy. Cities and townships out- e the MTC service area pay a transit vy which is less than the levy in cities receiving MTC service. Additional levies shown in the miscellaneous column ate watershed districts, hospital districts, and 'other special taxing districts, such as the Hermepin County Regional Rail Author- ity. Special assessments are not included in the calculations. The survey deals only with homestead taxes. Taxes on non- homestead property are much different.. Among the 95 communities, taxes on an $80,000 house range from a ~gh of $974 to a Iowof $~70. qn last yea~'~ ~ survey, the high '~v~a~$817'ahd 'the 16~' $346, but for a $75,000 house. The cities with the highest estimated taxes: Maplewood (622)- Shakopee (720) Robbinsdale (281) Jordan (717) Saint Paul (625) Savage (191) Falcon Heights (623) io Lakes (12) te Bear Lake (624) - Circle Pines (12) $974 974 958 939 932 925 923 912 896 881 The cities with the lowest estimated taxes: Grant Township (832) $370 Inver Grove Heights (199) 406 Mendota Heights (197) 426 Eagan (197) 433 Farmington (192) 434 Lake Elmo (834) 440 Alton (834) _444 West Saint Paul (197) , ~,. ., 445 Hugo (624) 458 Rosemount (196) 460 This year's survey is based on a house with a market value of $80,000. This represents ~n increase in value of 6.6 percent above' last year's house value of $75,000. An estimated 'real estate tax on the house, including the impact of the home- stead credit, is calculated for every city. To arrive at the estimated tax figure, the $80,000 typical house selling price is multiplied by the state Department of Revenue's sales ratio for each munici- pality in order to account for different Saint Paul, Landmark Center, 75 West Fifth Street, Third Floor, Noon-I p.m. Thursday, April 7: assessment practices around the metro- politan area. The figure in column four, "1983 Adjusted Estimated Market Value;' is the $80,000 typical house value multiplied by the sales ratio figure. Property tax classification categories 8re.thenapplied, with 16 percent for the firsf $27,000 of value, 22 percent of the next $27,000 of value, and 28 percent of the balance available for taxation. The sum of these figures is the taxable value, which is multiplied by the total mill rate to determine the gross tax. The gross tax is reduced by the home- stead credit, under which the state pays 58 percent of the gross tax, up to a maxi- mum of $650 dollars. Another refund, not incorporated in these estimates, is provided to home- owners whose household income is less than $33,000. This is the circuit breaker. The estimated tax figure in column one as well as the estimated tax on an average valued homestead in the municipality shown in column ten does not include possible circuit breaker refunds a home° owner may be entitled to. The CL NEWS would like to thank Leonard Peterson, Jerry Silkey and Deb Volkert from the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the county auditors from the seven Metropolitan area counties for their assistance in this year's survey. ROBERT ORTH Chairman, Ramsey-Washington Waste- to-Energy Board "Planning and Financing Resource Recovery" MARCH 29, 1983 VOLUME XXXII, NO. 7 Minneapolis, The Lutheran Brotherhood, 625 - 4th Avenue South, 7:30-8:30 a.m. Tuesday, April 12: CHARLIE WARNER · Exective Director, Common Space, Inc. :..-."The Potential & the Obstaelea for .:. ' Cooperative Housing" .... Tuesday, April 19: - ALL,~ B0¥C£ VP, Public Affairs, ' Burlington Northern Inc. "Heritage Landing: Devdoping Minneapolis' Riveffront' Bloomington, Lincoln Del, 4401 W. 80th St., between France Ave. and Hw~ 100, Exit 1-494 at France Ave., 7:30-8:30 a.m. Thursday, April 28: TOM TRIPLE'Ir Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, Gov. Rudy Perpich's Office "The Governor's legislative Program: A Status Report" CL NEWS (114-180) is published bi- weekly for $25 per year by the Citizens League, 84 S. 6th St., Minneapolis, MN 55402. Second Class postage paid at Minneapolis. MN. POSTMASTER: Send address chan~e to same address. SECOND CLASS POSTAGE PAID AT MINNEAPOLIS, MN AGENDA Minnehaha Creek Watershed District April 21, 1983 Wayzata City Hall 7:30 p.m. Call to order; present, absent, staff. Reading and approval of minutes of the special meeting of March 10, 1983, and minutes of the. regular meeting of March 17, 1983. Approval or amendment of April 21, 1983, agenda. Hearing of permit applications. ae 83-08 Robert Schmitt - dredging for navigational access, Excelsior Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Excelsior. 83-09 David J. Logelin - dredging, steel sheet pile retaining wall, Harrison Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Mound. Ce 83-10 Design Management Construction Co., Inc. - grading and drainage for 816 Wayzata Associates office Building, Wayzata Boulevard at Broadway, Wayzata. De 83-11 Irwin Mandel Development Corp. - grading and drainage plan for a high density residential apartment building, County Rd. 18 and Glen Rd., Shorewood. 83-12 John_~~ - 124 lineal feet of rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Lost Lake Channel, Lake Minnetonka. Mound. 83-13 Thomas DiRocco, DiRocco Development - grading and drainage plan for the "Harborage," a nine town home, planned unit development, Smithtown Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Victoria. Correspondence. Hearing of requests for petitions by public for action by the Watershed District. A. Mrs. Margaret Francis and Mrs. Ansinson 7. Reports of Treasurer, Engineer and Attorney. A. Treasurer's Report - Mr. Carroll (1) Administrative Fund Report B. Engineer's Report - Hr. Panzer C. Attorney's Report - Ms~ Peterson (1) Fee Schedule 8. Unfinished Business. A. Rule and Regulation Reuision/Chapter 509 B. District Initiated Maintenance Projects C. Bridge Obstruction D. Draft Permit Application Guidelines 9. New Business. 10. Adjournment. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 BOARD OF MANAGERS: David H. Co*:hran. Pres. · Albert L. Lehm-n · James S. Russell · John E. Thomas · B~,rbarl Gudmundson LAKE MINNETONKA / MEETING NOTICE A special meeting of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will be held on Thursday, April 28, 1983, at 7:30 p.m. in the Wayzata City Hall, 610 Rice Street, Wayzata, Minnesota, for the purpose of establishing a work plan for watershed management planning under 1982 Laws, Chapter 509. 0108i MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT March 10, 1983 A special meeting of the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was called to order by Chairman Cochran on March 10, 1983, at 7:40 p.m. at the St. Louis Park City Hall. Managers Present: Cochran, Lehman, Thomas, Carroll and Gudmundson Also present were Board advisors Panzer and Peterson, and numerous interested citizens, a typed roster of which is attached° Chairman Cochran explained that the purpose of the meeting was to initially organize the District's efforts to undertake water management planning pursuant to Chapter 509, of the 1982 Legislature. The attorney distributed copies of the .relevant portion of the Act, and the engineer distributed a memorandum dated March 10, 1983, outlining a proposed work plan. The managers discussed the need to involve the local municipalities and other units of government immediately in the planning process. The managers concurred with the staff recommendation to form an advisory committee composed of individuals designated by each of the local units of government. The managers also discussed the time commitment necessary for both the Watershed Management Planning and the Upper Watershed Project. They discussed whether the managers should divide the responsibilities for these projects with some managers assigned to one, and others assigned to the other. It was agreed that the managers would continue to be involved in both major planning efforts, and as time progressed, there might be a natural migration of the managers to one or the other of the projects. M~rch 10, 1983 Page 2 The managers discussed the five proposals listed in the engineer's memorandum: Authorize staff to prepare a draft work plan including more detailed scheduling, cost estimates and billing procedures for 1983. Authorize staff to commence data collection and other work tasks previously identified in the September 14, 1982, memorandum under Milestones I and II and in the 1983 work plan submitted by legal staff. Authorize staff to prepare a draft letter to all municipalities within the District. The purpose of the letter would be to advise the City Councils of the planning effort underway, to request appointment of individuals to serve on an advisory committee to assist and advise the Managers and to request contact person identification for the purpose of collection of data. Authorize staff to report to the Board on problems and inconsistencies associated with existing Rules as a first step in Rule revision. Direct staff to report to the Board of Managers on Items 1., 3. and 4. above prior to the next special meeting. The managers agreed that this was a logical first step to proceed. Comments were received from'the interested citizens. Milton Christensen, representing the City of Minneapolis, requested that the managers ~irst consider existing boundaries of the district. He submitted.a map with a proposed relocation of the District's boundary in the City of Minneapolis. James Von Lorenz, a resident of St. Louis Park, asked if the managers had considered and taken a position regarding the portion of Chapter 509 which allowed the Board of Managers to be increased from five managers to nine managers. He expressed the need to have a representative on the Board from St. Louis Park and neighboring communities. Chairman Cochran responded that each of the present managers represents the entire district and that it would be impossible to have a representative from each of the numerous local units of government within the district. He indicated that the managers had not considered the question of enlarging the Board, but would do so. March 10, 1983 Page 3 Following discussion of the staff's proposal, it was moved Thomas, seconded by Lehman, to authorize the staff to complete tasks 1-4 as outlined in that memorandum and report back to the Board prior to the next special meeting. Upon vote the motion carried. It was stressed that the advisory committee should consist of representatives from all local units of government, including the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board, and the Hennepin County Park Reserve District. Chairman Cochran also encouraged representation from the Isaac Walton League. The managers then determined that the next special meeting to discuss this matter further would be April 28, 1983. Notices of the location will be sent. Two members from the audience representing Laketown Township asked the Board if they were familiar with the fact that two solid waste sites were being proposed in Laketown Township. The Board requested that the staff look into this matter and report back to the Board. There being no further matters to come before the Board of Managers, it was moved by Thomas, seconded by Gudmundson, that the meeting be adjourned. Upon vote the motion carried and Chairman Cochran declared the meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Gudmundson Secretary MINNEHAHA WATERSHED CREEK DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 BOARD OF MANAGERS: David N. Cochran, Pres. * Alber~ g Lehman · James S. Russell · John E. Thomes · Berbara Gudmundeofl MEMORANDUM LAKE MINNETONKA WATERSHED BOUNDARY / TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council of All Municipalities Within the District and Park Board Commissioners David H. Cochran, President Minnehaha Creek Watershed District April 15, 1983 High Water Conditions on Minnehaha Creek Dear Public Officials: This is to update each of you with respect to current high water conditions on Minnehaha Creek. The rain and snow storms on Wednesday and Thursday have raised the level of the lake to slightly above the top of the dam. Water levels on the lake and creek will therefore remain high, and may increase over their present levels as this snow melts, depending on weather conditions. We are attempting to reduce the lake level as rapidly as possible without excessive flood damage to buildings downstream. Our engineering sta/f has been in contact with the staffs of each of the cities and we wish to be kept informed of current and changing downstream high water conditions. We will continue to examine alternatives to the present rate of discharge as conditions change in order to minimize high water conditions as rapidly as possible. Please feel free to contact either the engineer at 473-4224 or me at 474-4743 if you wish further information.