83-09-06C!T¥~ OF ~OUND
Hound,.Hinnesota
A G E N D A
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, September 6, 1983
7:30 P.M. - Council Chambers
1. Special Award to Officer Buzz 'Kraft~
Pg. 2331-2333
Pg. 2334-2336
'3. Request to Use Unimproved Forest Lane as a Driveway Access. pg. 2337-2338
e £i ~ - H. . Pg. 2339
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
CASE # 83-246 - Don J. English, 53xx Bartlett Boulevard
Ely 1OO' of the WIy 160'
Lot 28, Auditors Subdivision'170.
Request: Lot-Split Final Subdivision MAP
Pg. 2340-2346
CASE # 83-247 - Jack Tamillo, 4820 Donald Drive
Lots 9 & I0, Block I, Arden
Request: Sign to advertise.
MAP
Pg. 2347-2350
CASE # 83-248 - Marie E. Benson, 5190 Lynwood Boulevard
Metes & Bounds Desc.,
Request: Lot-Split Final Subdrvis!on MAP
Pg. 2351-2356
CASE # 83-249 - Kenneth R. Smlth, 2927 Cambridge Lane
Lot 10, Block 35, Wychwood
Request: Variance of non-conforming lot, 4'foot side
yard setback and garage setback. MAP
Pg. 2357-2365
Set Date for Public Hearing - Those parts of lots 17-22,
inclusive, Auditors Subdivision Number 168.
Final Subdivision Plat.
Suggested Date, September 27, 1983.
Pg. 2366-2368
10.
CASE # 82-I14 - Becky Yantes Cymek, 4936 Edgewater Drive
Lots 16 & 17, Skarp & Lindqulst, Ravenwood.
~gquest: Final SubDivision - Lot-Split. MAP
Pg. 2369-2378
!1.
Report from City Engineer, - Mill Pond Storm Drainage
- Bluffs Tennis Court Project
Pg. 2379-2391
12.
Final Payment Request - Hardrives
For 1981 Tuxedo & Three Points Boulevard Project.
Total: $8,593.15
Pg. 2392-2393
Page 2329
13. Reconveyance of tax forfeited lands..
Lot 5, Block 12, Seton.
14. Application for a Charitable Organization.
3.2 Beer Permit. VFW. 5113.
15. Application for a Bingo Permit. VFW. 5113.
16. Set Date for Proposed Use of Revenue Sharing Funds.
Suggested Date - October 4, 1983.
17. Continue Agreement for City Employee Counseling Services.
Cromer Management, Inc.
18. Set Date for Central Business District Assessment Hearing.
Suggested Date - September 27, 1983.
19. Payment of Bills.
20. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS '
B.
C.
D.
E.
Metro Council Review
Letter from City Attorney
Surfside Dock License
Meeting Notice, Watershed District
Westonka Chamber Waves.
Pg. 2394-2399
Pg. 2400
Pg. 2401
Pg. 2402
Pg. 2403
Pg. 2404
Pg. 24O5-2406
Pg. 2407-240'8
Pg. 2409-2411
Pg. 2412
Pg. 2413-2414
P. age 2330
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBD~!S!ON OF ELY. !00 FT.
OF TNE WLY. !60 FEET OF LOT 28, AUDITOR'S SUBDIViSiON
170 ,P!D # 24-117-24-24-0024
WHEREAS, the finaT subdivision of the Ely. !00 ft. of the Wly. 160 ft. of
Lot 28, Auditor'S Subdivision 170 has been submitted in the manner
required for subdivision of land under the City of ~ound Ordinance
Code, Section 22.00 and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes
and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a waiver to the subdivision requirements
.contained in Section 22.00 of the City Code, and
WHEREAS, the applicant is also requesting a variance of lot width from the
required 60 ft. in the R-1 zoning district to allow a deeded driveway
access Of 25.0! ft., and
WHEREAS, the ?lanning'Commission'has reviewed the request and has no recommendation
to the City Council approving the subdivision, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
. said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of'his land; that the
waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjo~cnent of a substantial
property right; and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the request of Donald. J. English for the waiver from the provisions
of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request for lot width variance
to subdivide property of less than five acres','described as the Ely. 100 ft.
of the Wly. 160 ft. of Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision 170, PID ~24-117-24-24-0024
is hereby granted to permit division of the'property in the following
manner:
Parcel A: The easterly 75.0 ft. of the westerly 135,0 ft, of. the northerly
172.0 ft. of Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision No. 170
Parcel B: The easterly 100.0 feet of'the westerly 160.0 feet of Lot 28, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 170, except, the easterly.75.0 feet of the westerly
135.0 of the northerl.y_.172,0 feet of said Lot 28, subject to
a walkway easement over that part of the easterly 20.0 feet of
the westerly 80.0 feet of said Lot 28 lying southerly of the
northerly 172.0 feet'thereof.
Upon the further conition that,
1. The grading of the property, at the time of development and/or construction,
will not contribute additiohal surface water to .adjoining properties.
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
September 2, 1983
City Councilmembers
City Manager
As a logicai follow-up to Bdzz Krafts award,
I thought it would be a logical time to talk about
the reduction in crime statistics for Mound for
1982, that was released yesterday.
Mound was next to Crystal and Dayton as havihg
the greatest reduction in crime in Hennepin County.
(out of 42 cities).
Considering the staff's reduced size and the
fact that alot of the time we have only one officer
on the streets, is pretty outstanding.
INTEROFFICE MEMO
?0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Jon Elam, City, ,~knager
C~ief Bruce !qold
Western Security Award
DATE September 2 19, 85
On Tuesday, September 6, 1983, Mr. Lynn Zumbrurmen of Iqestec Security,
will award Patrol Officer Herman (Buzz) Kraft an award.
The award originated because lqestinghouse Security perceived a need to
recognize excellence in law enforcement. Westec mai,es a mont~hly mmrd
to one police officer in the metropolitan area who they feel perfomed
a task worthy of acknmvledgement. To be considered for the award, the
police officer must be nominated by his police chief.
Off. Kraft was nominated because of tJ~e contribution i~e made tm~ard
uncovering a major theft ring operating in the Lake Minneto~m area.
~e thefts spanned four police jurisdictions and seven lake area commun-
ities.
CITY of MOUND
5341 IVlAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
July 22, 1985
Mr. Charles J. Schoen
WSSI Security
3501 South Hwy. 100
~nneapolis, MN 55416
Dear Mr. Schoen:
I would like to nominate Patrol Officer Herman Kraft for your monthly award. Off.
Kraft is a t~,enty year veteran of the~und Police Department who used his contacts
and street sense to break a theft ring responsible for the theft of prOPerty
· valued at $3000 fr°m forty-nine boats.-.
Based on infomationfrom informants, Off. Kraft began a surveillance of a car
belonging to a juvenile in Mound. The surveillance ended with off. Kraft recover-
ing stolen property from Carver Park. The subsequent questioning of the juvenile
owner undovered information leading to ~he arrest and/or charging of three juveniles
and three adults. The juveniles and ~wo adults were charged with the thefts from
the boats and the other adult was.charged with possession of stolen proper~y.
off. Kraft's actions lead to the solution of thefts involving, five police juris-.
dictions. By-his actions and his professional approach to law enforcement, a
major theft ring operating in the Lake }iinnetonka area was broken. I believe Off.
Kraft's actions merit consideration for the WSSI Award.
Very~ruly yours,
Chief Bruce H. Wold
Mound Police Department
Ng/sh
etro :
imes
declined!
By Roberl Whereatt · . ' ' l- '
Staff Writer .
It was safer in 'most communities
the metropoli~n area in.1982 than_in
1981, according to figures recently
compiled by the Minnesota Bureau
of Criminal Apprehension (BEA).
In '/5 of 91 cities and townShips in
the area, fewer crimes were report-
ed last year than the 'year.before.
The rate of reported crime per
I00,000 population als9 was !ewer in
those communities. .. ;...
Of the 16 communities reporting
more crimes in 19811, 13 showed in-
creases that would n0t.xaise 'an ny6:
brow. Waconia, for example, report-
ed 76 crimes, compared.with ?1 in
ihd Rbsenii~unt ~was. u.'P bY.-~ ~38, -.t9 1
occurred in th~ ?est of tli~ sate, and
continue~ a do~'uward ~r~jnd.. Sine.e.
1980, such figures indicate, Miuneso-
ta has been bec.om}ns a .sar?. 'pl~6
tO live.
The sate crime rate declige, d du_
the first Slx' months., oL. this. year:
Reports of .violent crini~f.,-w~ra.doWn
15 percent from the iirst'~ix
of last year.. The_
dropped 2.5 percenC',~: ~ = ......
That de'~re~ folio~s i 14.[ perjint
decrease lot the first six months'
1982 over the iL, st six months of
1981. In .t.hat comparison,.~yioleri[
~rtme'was down 5.2 percent. ....
Violgfi['crfr~es are defined as
der, rape, robbery and aggravaied
ass~ulL The overall rate also takes in
burglary, larcenY~ vehicle theft and
Crime cor~tinued on page SA
~1 Statistics for various
communities, Page 4A.
Crime C~ntlnuea trampage
Although Minnesota may be a safer
place to 'live than ii was two years.
a~, .the number-of 'reported crimes"
and the crime rate still are consider-
ably higher.!h~n a decade ago, said
ported crimes --la rate o! 3,440 ler
every 100,000 .p~ople. Last year,
there were 154,11~0 reported crimes'
Natiouali~,
rep,'ts o! violent and
.other crimer~poaked in 1980 and
have begug~o tail off. .
ThaJ~reas~, Said Minneapolis Po-
Jt~ Chief Touy Bouza, cazl. be at?rib;'
~uted to the declining population o!
males in the 16- to 19-year-old brack-
-et, the ~roup ]me says commits a
disproportionate share o[ street
crimes. -
Other. a~alysts stretch that age
bracket, saying 16- to 25-year-olds
commit the most crimes.
The BCA breakdown, o! ~'ime fig-
ures in the metropolitan ar~a shows
a crime decrease in 1982 for six
the seven countieS. Only Ramsey
Couu. ty showed -an in..crease- from
In Minneapolis the crime- rate: per
10O,000 populatiou.was 10,216 last
. year. In-1981,~ lt..was 1_0,375. Violent
crimes, however, were up in three
four :cale~ories (murder, 36 In 1952
compare., with 28 in 1981~' robbery,
2,583 to 2,296;-and agiravaled as-
sauit, 1,314 in 1,192), Reported ~apes
-{
_ dropped to 314 from ~67.
,; In St.-Paut~:.the crime"rat~
pared .with 8;,483 iUtSSt.: .~'.
ports n! violent mime dropped
'mree o! the ~our categories (murder,
robbery and aggravated ama?tit).
.The pereet/t or' crimes t~ .Wblcli
there was an m-rest sayed. ¢oustant
tn 1982 la the metropoman area (19
Naflonaliy, We' 1981 crime rate per
100,000 populaUon was 5,799, accord-
lng to U.Si' Justice Departrnent
urns. That compares with a 1981 rate
of 4,781 for kiiunesota and a rate o!-.!
6,362 for the metropolltau area.
Bouza said he ts not che~ by the
statistical drop. "I think It .is danger-
ous to derive comfort from (them).
The declines are due to demograph-
ics, not to anything we've.done.,;
· -,;- ' : .
The demngraphics wilt chan~e
tually, the chief said. "Th~ Is Just a
peace dividend. ~hatever the sa?is-
tics show, my view of the ~uture is a
gloomF one because we ~re (not con-
fronting the causes of
l"-' ' : ~>" .... : " ..... ""; ~r" "'f'
'?He ltstea' unemployment, poverty,
nutomatinn,, the perpetuation of a
welfare class, racism and-lack of
education as the so~inl and econom-
Ic spawning ~rounds of crime. I"Ie
said the nation ts not addressing
Bouza also sug~estea that bulsiug
prtsoas mi~t,, account for some
the national-decline in crime. He
said prison POpulations have doubled
in the. past decade. More violent of-
feuders and repeat offenders are off
"Any chief of. police who claims
credit !or crime going down Is being
fatuous." Bouza said.
Here-'~ a,,~,,~ of the number of
repor',_~d mimes in the ~eve~
ties in 1951, then 1~ ~nd ~e crime
rates per lO0,O00-popalation
Washl~.mm: 5,133; 4,608; 4,444; 3,952.
August 28, 1983
.Elizabeth A. K~kos
1412 18th Ave. North
Minneapolis, Minn.
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota
c/o Mound City Council
RE:~ Proposed use of public right of way
lee, Stephen and Fllizabeth Kakos, apply for permission
to build a home on Lot l, Block 4 Mound Terrace and fo=
permission t~ use th~ unimproved ~r~s~t Lane as access to
the proposed driveway on Lot l, Block 4. ~e agree not to
hoIdlthe Ci~y.ofMound responsible for maintaining the driveway,
p~ovidin~ city pl0win~ service nor will we~hold the city
responsible, fdr~any damage'incurred by water run off or
storm~~ The city'shall, however, continue to maintain the
d~ainag~'system previously installed under a portion of
Forest~Lane,. ~/
-- ForPsttLane., remaining a city right of way, shall
a~ways be available, as it has in the past, for driveway/access
to the residehts of Lot 2, Block 5, Mound Terrace~and the
the~'reSidents of Lots~l and 2 Block 4, Mound Terrace, each
party respecting the thorofare of the other.
z~z.7
.A
September 1, 1983
TO: CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF~MOUND, MINNESOTA
We~ the undersigned residents of Bartlett Blvd. and Lakewood
Avenue, in the City of Mound~ would like to advise the City
~ounil and Staff o~ our opposition to the proposed subdivision
of lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision #170. Our reasons for opposing
this subdivision are:
1.) The subdivision, as proposed, creates a
non-conforming lot in that it does not meet the City
ordinance which requires a 50 foot frontage on the road
2.> The proposed subdivision will have an adverse effect on
the values of surrounding properties because of its
non-conforming nature.
5.) The topography of the lot is such that placing more
than one principal structure on this site could cause
drainage problems which may adversely effect
surrounding property.
4.) The requirement for a variance created by the
subdivision of the lot is directly related to the
actions of the owner and, as such, is in conflict
with provisions of the City ordinance.
5.) The owner of the lot is able to use the property
for the purpose he intended when the property was
purchased 4 years ago and he would suffer no hardship
if the request for subdivision were denied.
We believe that approval of the request for a subdivision, with
its intent to create a non-conforming lot will set a precedent
which could result.in the degradation and devaluation of the
properties in this area.
NAME
ADDRESS
....
NAME ADDRESS
September 1, 1985
TO: CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
We, the undersigned residents of Bartlett Blvd. and Lmkewo0d
Avenue, in the City of Mound, would like to advise the City
Counil and Staff of our opposition to the proposed subdivision
of lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision #170. Our reasons for opposing
this subdivision are:
1.> The subdivision, as proposed, creates a
non-conforming lot in that it does not meet the City
ordinance which requires a 50 foot frontage on the road
2.> The proposed subdivision will have an adverse effect on
the values of surrounding properties because of its
non-conforming nature.
3.) The topography of the lot is such that placing more
than one principal structure on this site could cause
drainage problems which may adversely effect
surrounding property.
~4.) The requirement for a variance created by the
subdivision of the lot is directly related to the
actions of the owner and, as such, is in conflict
with provisions of the City ordinance.
5.).The owner of the lot is able to use the property
for the purpose he intended when the property was
purchased 4 years ago and he would suffer no hardship
if the request for subdivision were denied.
We believe that approval of the request for a subdivision, with
its intent to create a non-conforming lot will set a precedent
which could result in the degradation and devaluation of the~
properties in this area.
ADDRESS
NAME
ADDRESS
JUDGI~ HEP~ERT Il. WOLNER
BOX 125
MobrtcD, MINr,'I~SOT~, 33364
August 27, 1985
City of Mound
Mound, M[n~.
55564
Att: City Manager
Dear Sir:
Kindly arrange for me to be an early speaker
at the next meeting of the council, and please adv£ae
mm of the date of the next council m~etin~.
Vary truly y.ure,
P.S. If a memorandum is prepared relative to my
appearance, I w~uld appreciate a copy in
advance. !~
Case No. 83-246
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda of August 29, 1983:
Board of Appeals
Case No. 83~'246'''
Location: 53XX Bartlett Boulevard
Legal Desc.: Ely 100 feet of the Wly
160 feet of Lot 28, Audi-
tors Subdivision 170
Request: Lot-split final subdivision
Zoning District: R-1
Applicant:
Donald J. English
401 Ridgeview Drive
Wayzata, MN. 55391
Phone: 472-1819
Proposal:
The applicant is requesting to subdivide his vacant parcel of land
to the south of Bartlett Boulevard. He has submitted soil test report
for the lakeshore portion of the property. He is requesting~a variance
of lot width from 60 feet to 25.O1 feet at the improved public right-
of-way to provide a deeded driveway, utility and public vehicle access
to an area south; the lot width to be approximately 1OO feet. He feels
the site has an excessive depth to the lakeshore from Bartlett Boule-
vard. The proposed access to the south area is alongside of an exist-
ing driveway for A1 Schwingler. Both proposed parcels exceed the
lO,OO0 square foot of lot area excluding the driveway access.
Site:
The site presently has a drive entrance which is shared by the adjoining
neighbor. The front portion of the property is lower than Bartlett
Boulevard and would possibly require filling to divert water from the
southerly higher portion. The lake has a steep bank rising approxi-
mately 15 feet up to the southerly proposed parcel.
Comments:
The applicant is requesting that the City Council waiver the public
hearing for the subdivision of less than 5 acres, the park dedication,
replat of the parcel, and any fees for legal, engineering, etc. Each
lot meets the minimum square footage"criteria for single family use.
Recommen~atlon:
Staff recommends approval of a preliminary (lot-split) subdivision
since it is consistent with other divisions which have been
granted upon the condition that a grading plan should be submitted
before final.approval to review drainage of the area by the City
Engineer. ~
The abutting neighbors have been notified.
Jan Bertrand
Building Official
JB/ms
Planning Commission Minutes
lust 29, 1983
CASE NO, 83-246
Cese No. 83-246 Lot-split flnal.subdivislon for 53XX Bartlett Boulevard
Ely. 100 f~ of ~b¢ Wly. 160 f~e~ of LoT 28, AudiTor's Subdivision 170
Donald English was present, and also neighbors, Patricia Tess~er and Dorothy
Gray.
The Building Inspector explained that the applicant is requesting to subdivide his
vacant parcel of land into two parts; Parcel A is 75.03 feet by 172.O7 feet or
13,905 square .feet; Parcel B has 23,958.6 square feet plus a 25.01 foot wide drive-
way access to ~artlett Boulevard. He is requesting a variance of lot width from
60 feet to 25.O1 feet at the improved publ.ic right-of-way for Parcel B. The site
basically does drain to the west. Parcel A has a low area and soil tests have been
taken. The subdivision is recommended with the st!pulation that grade of land not
be changed when structures are built to contribute 'any surface water to neighbors'
property.
The neighbors, Steven and Patricia Tessmer and R. Dorothy Gray are opposed to this
division of land. Mrs. Tessmer presented 2 sheets which outlined some of their con-
cerns regarding this subdivision. The main concerns were the nonconform!ng lot on
Bartlett, the 20 foot walking .easement to the lake, .the.grading that will be done
with construction causing possible erosion and drainage'problems to neighboring lots
~nd the number of docks on the property. Also in Tessmer's contract with English,
y had stipulated that the l'akeshore not be divided further.
The C'i'ty Manager explained that the only thing the Planning Commission could consider
with the division of property was the variance of lot'width of Parcel B as the City
has no control over the docks or private easements. The Building Inspector explained
the waiver provision. The Planning Commission disgussed the request at length. Eng-
li'sh stated there would never be more than 4 boats'on 2 docks on this property. Reese
feels that the number of docks and boats is a real concern for the residents on the
lake and also feels that before land is.divided, the neighbors should have their con-:
cerns resolved.
Reese moved to table action until applicant and neighbors can work out problems.
Motion died for lake of a second.
Jensen moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to deny request. The vote was Byrnes,
Jenson and Reese in favor of the denial; Michael, Vargo and Weiland voted against
the denial; Charon abstained. As the vote istied, the request will 9o to the
Council without a recommendation.
Weiland voted against because he stated a precedent has already been set on sub~.
division of similar lots. Reese voted to deny as he doesn't want another dock on
~ake--feels lake will be destroyed'if we don't control bo~ts'; the LMCD can't control.
'renting docks on the lake.
il lJ~ ~-L'~-'-LL-L~ ! PPLICATION FOR SU~DIVm~ON OF
~~ ~ ,~ ~ VILLAGE OF MOUND
[~ )F MOUND
LAND
FEE $_~._('. ~0
FEE OWNER
/.0/q Vz ~z--~, ,,ul ,d ,¢'.~..~? /
P~L At- PARCEL
~ocS/JT ~
Location and complete leg;I description of property to be divided:
~-I-/ ~ E-P s r ~ ,~ i. Y l ,o o t-- ~. r= T ,oF
ZONING /~ '-""/
. }
To be divided as follows:----- -' '
~ L Y ....... Y r scale drawing showing adjacent Mreets, dimension
~ F~ ~,,o.ng s,~es, sq.~re foot ~.a or each .e~ p~ce~ design~t.d by .umbe~
- I -~ -
' . . ' !~
A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR:
New Lot No.. · From
Reason:
Applicant's iMereM in ih, prope~y~0 d~, ~9 P ~ G%
This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the properly, or an explan-
ation given why this is no~ the case.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
DATE
CERT!FICATE OF SURVEY
FO~? ~'/'~ ~,~/~SA Case No. 83-246
TOTAL PARCEL
The easterly lOO.OO feet of the westerly 160.OO feet of Lot 2~, Auditor's Subdivision ;;o. lTg, Hennepin County,
~,~i nneso t a.
PARCEL A
~he e~sterly 75.00 feet of tqe westerly 135.~ feet of the northerly 172.DO ~eet of Lot 2~. Auditor's ~uh~ivic(on
:;o. '70, ffe,,nepin Corn,ry. f~iqnesot,. A)so, a walkway easm.,e~;t over that r.~rt of the o~stel.1), ~[.~.~
westerly ~t.~ feet of s~i~ Cot 2~ lying southerly of the northerly 1~2.0~ feet thereof.
PARCEL ~
The easterly lO0.D0 feet of the westerly 160. OD feet of Lot 2~. Auditor's Su~ivision ~o. l?O, HenneF, i- County,
Xinnesota. Except the easterly 75.D0 feet of the westerly !3~.00 of the northerly 172.00 feet of said Lot 2~.
Subject to a w~lk~ay e,sement over ~hat part of the easterly 20.00 feet of the westerly ~.0~ feet o~ s~id Lot
2A lying ~out,,erly of th~. qo,'t~.erly 172.09 feet thereof.
it, 32t,15.
/,(_ T/
CASE NO. 83-246
29, 2983
Tot
Do~alt J. ~liz4~ requ~s~ for Divislc~ of Land. The.
easterly 100.00 £t. ,of the westerly 160.00 ft. o£ Lot
A~i~ors $ubd~_vlsion NO. 170, Hezmephn C~-y.
1. ~e ~~t for the 20 ft.
~n tho a~e ~-~ ~m ~old to
J~ o~ ~9, the C~ct for ~ed stated ~ folt~s~
"~e F~tlea ~ the Secc~/ P~t (the
a~e f~ th~=elves, their belts
f~n~ of ~e ~d p~sea will
Sts~n A.. Te;~cr or Patrlc~ L. Tec~r ~ or ~ ~ inte~mt
in ~ ~ion cf thc foll~Ir~ deccri~
Mo. ~70 etc.
~fers ~ ~n ~de ~ ~ivlslcn of the
the prXva~ of the ~e~
a~ ~e ~ ~s ~o~ to him.
~o will ~ ~ for this
~1~ a~ a ~ck? ~ do~
2~ ~l~ston of ~r~s
~ ac~m =o ~le~ BI~. ~:~
~ soil e~ion ~
of ~e eas~ ~ ~1 B.
~ aC~S tO t~ ~, ~ ~ with ~ f~~, ~ a drt~-
~k ~ f~ y= ~ide~tta,
~fo~rs tl~s
Patricia L. Tes~mer
,.9. Do~othy C-ay
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF ELY. 100 FT,
OF THE WLY. !60 FEET OF LOT 28, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
170 ,PID # 24-117-24-24-0024
WHEREAS, the final subdivision of the Ely. 100 ft. of the Wly. 160 ft. of
Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision 170 has been submitted in the manner
required for subdivision of land under the City of Mound Ordinance
Code, Section 22.00 and ~nder Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes
and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a waiver to the subdivision requirements
.contained in Section 22.00 of the City Code, and
WHEREAS, the applicant is also requesting a variance of lot width from the
required 60 ft. in the R-1 zoning district to allow a deeded driveway
access of 25.0! ft., and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission'has reviewed the request and has no recommendation
to the City Council approving the subdivision, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
. said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the 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 granting the waiver will not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the request of DonaldJ. English for the waiver from the provisions
of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request for lot width variance
to subdivide property of less than five acres,'described as the Ely. 100 ft.
of the Wly. !60 ft. of Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision 170, PID ~24-117-24-24-0024
is hereby granted to permit division of the property in the following
manner:
Parcel A: The easterly 75.0 ft, of the westerly 135,0 ft, of. the northerly
172.0 ft. of Lot 28, Au~i'tor's Subdivision No. 170
Parcel B: The easterly 100.0 feet of the westerly 160.0 feet of Lot 28, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 170, except, the easterly 75.0 feet of the westerly
135.0 of the norther!y_.172.0 feet of said Lot 28, subject to
a walkway easement over that part of the easterly 20.0 feet of
the westerly 80.0 feet of said Lot 28 lying southerly of the
northerly 172.0 feet'thereof.
Upon the further conition that,
1. The grading of the property, at the time of development and/or construction,
will not contribute additional surface water to.adjoining properties.
Case No. 83-246
Re': Donald En~_ sh request-for 20 ft.. easenent over
Lot 2B, Auditors Subdivision No. 170 Henr.. Cry, Fro..
Referring to LMCD Seo.. 3.02, Subd~ 1. "Prohlbltic~m.
No ~rson ~11 use ~ ~ of the ~ ouCs~e
au~orlz~ ~ock use.~,, for ~ocks, ~oo~i~, ~t
Su~.. 2. A~orize~ ~ck Use Area, a) ~n~h...b)
For ~ ~ion of ~e
le~=h of the authorized
f~om' .the s~o~ . The. set~ck ~hall
' ~e~:"t6*~ ~:. f~ ~ : 10 fJe~' '
~8 ~u~. ~ ~e te~-water~b aval~bllity
s~ or ~a-c~ty avat~b~ for moorlnE, do~l~
~to~ of wa~~t to.~ us~ on-the ~e.e
.At the p~.~nt, Mr.. E~li~ ~s 2 ~ts on 2 liftm
plus 2 seotio~ of ~o~, us~ ap~~tly 25ft.-of
s~. ~is,. pl~ the 10 f~t' met~ck on either
wo~d me~ a mi~ of 35 ft,, wo~d ~ ~q~ on
~ easeue~ to ho~e the ~te ~ docka he
From-the lakeshore, hack approximate]F; 90 f~, the
easement would fall on'a slcp~ Mtl~lde,- no~. on level
land-. Hew does-he* plan', to-use this? Will he gr~ie the
land? ~at drainage problems, will occur if he does' and*
~£ an~ trees are' removed[?
Thank you for your con~ideration~
'ON
· Case I~o. 83-247
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda of August 29, 1983:
Board of Appeals
Case No. 83-247
Location: 4820 Donald Drive
Legal Desc.: Lots 9 & 10, Block 1, Arden
Request: Advertise occupation with a
2 foot by 3 foot sign
Zoning District: R-1
Applicant:
Jack Tamillo
4820 Donald Drive
Mound, MN.
Phone: 472-5358
Proposal:
Comments:
Recommendation:
The applicant, Mr. Tamillo, is requesting to place a 22 inch by 36
inch .metal sign for "American Family insurance" as an insurance agent
for the Company; placed on his property' approximately 3 feet from the
curb.
The Zoning Code, Section. 23.302 (54) defines the perimeters of the
home occupation stating, "Home Occupations - Home occupations which
shall be defined to mean any occupation or profession 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
thereof. 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 prin-
cipal structure; shall be engaged in only by p~rsons residing in ~he
dwelling; and shall not have special parking, lighting, advertising,
or other facilities which would indicate its use for purposes other
than as a one-family, private dwelling.
Staff recommends denial of ~he request as it is not consistent
with the City home occupation use for the property in a resi-
dential distr|ct. The former Zoning Ordinance 23.011(d)9
dated 10/10/68 also stated that advertising Was not allowed.
Mr. Tamillo has not owned the property long enough to be under
a "grandfather" condition. - ......................... ]]
The abutting neighbors have been notified.
Jan Bertrand
Building Official
JB/ms ·
CITY OF MOUND
CITY OF ~.OJ'" APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMHISSION
_ . '~: ' .-- (Please type the following information)
1. Street Address of Property ~) ~)6~ L D ~
2.' Legal Description of Property: Lot 9 & 10
Fee Paid ,~o". o O
Date Filed
B10ck 1
~dditlon Arden (37730)
Owner's Name ,_) ~ ~ t~ /%q ~/L '2~ 0
Ad dr ess /~/~t~ ~ .0 ~f/~ ,L_~)' Dr i ve
PID No. 24-)17-24 44 017~
o~y P~o~ No.
4. Applicant (if other than owner):
Name '"' Day Phone No.
Address
Se
Type of Request: ( ) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Amendment
" ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ~) Sign Permit
( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. (~
,/ ,~ jz,,.,~~. '
*If other, specify: ~,.g, )( ~ ~, ~'.~,,.~. _
6, Present Zoning District
7. Existing Use(s) of Property
.8. -Has an application ever been made fo~ Zoning' variance, or'conditional use permit or
· other zoning procedure for this prc~perty?, /t/~' If so, list date(s) of
list.date(s) of application, action t~k~n and provide Resolution No..(s)
Copies Of p~evious 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 application by any authorized ~fficial of the City
6f Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such
notices as may be required bY law~
Planning Commission' Recommendation: -
3.Case No. 83-247 Sign advertising occupation - 4820 Donald DriVe :
Lots 9 & 10, Block 1, Arden
Jack Tamillo was present.
The applicant, Mr. Tamillo, has a metal 22 X 36" sign advertising "American Family
Insurance" on his property. Section 23.302(54) Home Occupation definition, of the
Ordinance does not allow advertising in residential areas'
Vargo moved and Reese seconded a motion to deny the request to allow the sign to
remain. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Case 83-247 l';,~--.-,~ ~ _
~.,,~ ,~_ ~'~ Page
SECTION ~3.01! Residential Use District
d. Confo?min~ Uses (continued)
9. Home Occuoations Home occupations which shall be defined to mean
any occupation or profession of a service character which'is clearly
secondary to the ma~_u use of the struct'o-re as a one-family private
· dwe!l~_ug and does not change the character thereof. ~my activity
resulting in noise, fumes, traffic, light or odor to such an extent
that it is noticeable that tb~%t 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 st~cture;
shall be engaged in only by persons residing in the dwelling; ~.nd
s~m!l not involve retail sales of products produced off the site
and shall 'not have special parking, lighting,, advertising, or other
facilities which would indicate its use for purooses'~other than as
a one-family, private dwelling.~.~(~( .Ord. 244 - 10710/1968)~'.·
lC. Off Street Parking As a transitional use to act as a buffer be-
tween Residential property and property in a different use district,
off street .parking may be permitted upon securing a Special Use
Permit from the Council after a public hearing and receipt of the
~ecom~endation of the Plarming Co~.ission. Said public hearing
shall be preceded by lO days' written notice mailed ~o all property
;
owners within 200 .feet of any lot line of the property to be used
for off street parking. ~ne Application for a Special Use Permit
shall contain the following information:
a. A scale drawin~ of the property proposed for said use, showing: 1. the dimensions of the premises,
2. any structures located within or. without 50 feet of the bound-
ary line of land under consideration,
~. a detailed plan with~parkiug space's ~sh0~u~ in accord with all'
of th~.standards established by Section 23.30, subd (i) of
this code.
b. A landscape and site plan, ~;hich 'may be a.part of the scale draw-
ing required in the preceding subsection. Said plan shall show:
1,. adequate means of access to a public alley or street,
'.2. lighting of 'said parking area which shall be accomplished in
. such a way as to have no direct source of light visible from
a public right-of-way or adjacent land in residential use.,
3. a si~¢-foot c2osed-fence of adequate design to be erected along
all residential property lines but not in the front yard set-
back, and subject to all provisions of Sec. 55.17 (c) Mound
Code of Ordinances,
4. setbacks s.hall be as follows:.
, (a) front yard -~ame as required for construction of a
structure in the same use district,
(b) side yard .and rear yard - 5 feet.
c..Any special use permit shall be conditional to require the o~mer
of said premises to maintain said area in a neat and clean
and ~ accordance with the standards established in preceding
Sections a and b.
d~ Off street parking in a Residential District ah!l not be allowed
if said use will be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious
to other property in the neighborhood or if said use will have an
adverse effect upon traffic or t_~affic safety. (Ord. 265 - 3/!9/70)
MANCHESTER
RD~,
~.. I~
This block is oll marsh
CUMBERLAND
:
!
Case No. 83-248
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda of August 29, 1983:
Board of Appeals
Case No. 83-248'
Location: 5190 Lynwood Boulevard
Legal Desc.: Metes & Bounds Desc.,
PID 13-I17-24 43 O001
Request:. Lot-split final subdivision
Zoning District: R-3
Applicant:
Marie E. Benson
3338 - 38th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN. 55406
Phone: 724-7378
Proposal:
The applicant, Marie Benson, is requesting to split the parcel. The
south parcel would have 9,250 square feet, excluding the Lynwood
right-of-way and the north parcel would have 18,5OO square feet as per
the verbal confirmation of the surveyor. The access to the north par-
cel would be from Apple Lane. The south parcel has a structbre on it
with a driveway from Lynwood Boulevard.
Site:
The spot elevations on the survey indicate a gradual slope toward the
lake of 15 feet ~ in 351.O9 feet plus to lakeshore. The utilities
to the existing structure is presumed to be across the front of the
property to Lynwood Boulevard. The drainage from the south parcel is
northerly across the proposed new parcel. The boathouse on the norther-
ly parcel is an accessory building to the south parcel. The present
garage has a non-conforming side yard setback of 1.4 to 1.5 feet; the
principal structure has a non-conforming front yard setback of 15± feet
due to the acquisition of the Lynwood Boulevard right-of-way.
CommeEts:
The applicant is requesting that the City Council waiver the public
hearing for the subdivision of less than 5 acres, park dedication,
the replat of the parcel, and any engineering and legal fees, etc.
Each lot meets the minimum square footage criteria for single family
use. The'proposal of the south parcel would create a larger parcel
than required for single famil~ (6,000 square feet), but smaller than
required for a duplex site conversion (12,OO0 square feet).
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of preliminary (lot-split) subdivision
upon the condition that the grading of the southerly parcel be
corrected to divert surface drainage to the public right-of-ways,
any necessar~ City easements be signed by the applicant, the
boathouse on the newly created parcel be removed; the City
Engineer is to recommend whether the proposed legal description
should be filed with the Registrar of Titles/Register of Deeds
Office (Metes ~ Bounds) and additional unit charges in the amount
of $1,828.15 are _to be paid or assessed against the property with
papers signed by the applicant; and the southerly parcel contain
12,OO0 square feet (excluding public right-of-way).
The abutting neighbors have been notified.
Jan Bertrand
Building Official
.tR/m~
CASE NO. 83-248
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
August 29, 1983
4.Case No. 83-248 Lot-Split Final Subdivision, 5190 Lynwood Boulevard
Metes and Bounds Desc., .Part of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Addition to L~keside Park
Marie E. Benson and her husband, Lowell Benson, were present.
The Building Inspector explained the request to spl~t the lot into 2 parcels; the
south parcel with house would have 9250 square feet excluding Lynwood Boulevard right-
of-way and-the..north parcel would have 18,500 square feet. The drainage goes north to
the lake from the south parcel. Discussed that the boathouse should be removed from
the vacant north parcel and that the structures on the sduth parcel have nonconforming
setbacks.
Reese moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to approve the lot-split with the staff
recommendations with the stipulation that the boathouse be removed and a unit charg:
of .$1,828.15 be assessed or waiver signed by the applicant and the south parcel
contain 12,000 square feet. The.vote was unanimously, in favor. ..
FEE OWNER ;'
PLAT ~, I ~$o PARCEL x/'"el;>' 0 0
.ocation and complete legal descriptiofi of property to be divided:·
R --5'
To be divided as foilows:
(attach survey or scale drewing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed
· building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number}
A WA!VER IN LJOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR:
New Lo~, No. From
Square feet TO Square feet
Reason:'
APPLICANT
ADDRE~
Applicant's interest in the propergy:
Mion given why ~hls is not the case·
PLAK'tV~h,'G COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
DATE
I
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 83-248
RESOLUTION NO~83-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF PT. OF BLOCK 10,
ABRAHAM LINCOLN ADDITION TO LAKESIDE ~ARE, PID ~ 13-117-24-43-00Q1
WHEREAS,
the final subdivision of that part of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Addition
to Lakeside Park, Mound, Minnesota, and of Government Lot 7, Section 13,
Township 117 North Range 24 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described
as follows: All t~at land between east line of said BloCk 10, extended to
Harrison Bay, and a line drawn 85 feet West of, and parallel with said
East line from the rear line of said Block 10 to Harrison Bay, subject
to the easement of the public hiqhwav over the South 40 feet thereof, has
been submitted in the manner required for subdivsion of land under the City
of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 22.00 and under Chapter 462 of the
MinneSota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a waiver to the subdivision~requirements
contained in. Section 22.00 of the City Code, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the r~quest and recommends approval
subject to conditions, and
WHEREAS,
'it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the 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 granting the waiver will not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the request of John H. Swansick Estate 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 PID #13-117-24-43-0001
Pt. of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park , is hereby
granted to permit division of the following property in the following
manner:
North p6rcel: That part of the East 85 ft. of Block 10 lying North of the South 149 feet thereof, Abraham Lincoln Addition to
Lakeside Park, Mound, Minneso%a, and that part of Government
Lot 7, Section 13, Township 117 North, Range 24 West of
the 5th Principal Meridian, lying between Northerly extensions
of the East and West lines of the above described property.
Lot area equals 18,500 sq. ft.+
South parcel: The South 149 feet of the East 85 feet of Block 10,
Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park, Mound, Minnesot&~.
subject to an easement for road purposes over the South
40 feet thereof.
Lot area equals 9,250 sq. ft.
Upon the further condition that,
1) The boathouse will be removed from the north parcel
2) 'An additional unit charge will be paid or assessed against the
newly created north parcel in the amount of $1,828.15.
3) When the north parcel is developed, surface water drainage from
the south parcel will be diverted to the Apple Lane right-of way
(west).
4) The southerly parcel will be used as single ~amily dwelling only.
Harri son
Bay,
Case N°. 83-248
Lake Minnetonka
19
4~
:.' 51
BLVD ~
RD
~3~V~ ...........
t, 18
! I1
C~se No. 83-249
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
Planning Commission Agenda 'of August 29, 1983:
Board of Appeals.
Case No. 83-249
Location: 2927 Cambridge Lane
Legal Desc.: Lot 10, Block 35, Wychwood
Request: Variance of non-conforming lot,
4 foot side yard setback and
garage setback
Applicant:
Kenneth R. Smith
2927 Cambridge Lane
Mound, MN.
Phone: 941-9440
Proposal:
Site:
Code:
comments:
The applicant, Mr. Smith, is requesting to expand a presently roofed
'area, at the front of the house, to become part of the kitchen four
(4) feet to the south property line. The.deck he is proposing would
extend to the property line. He is also proposing:to add a 20 by 24
foot garage structure either attached or detached within the year.
The land slopes quite drastically to the lake at the rear of the home.
The land also falls approximately 8 feet between the parking area in
the front yard to the north lot line. The sewer and water connections
come into the property from the south fire lane.
The Zoning Code for the R-2 District requires 6,000 s~uare feet of
lot area. The lot size is 52 feet by 100 feet = 5,200 square feet.
The structure exceeds the 840 square feet'of floor area minimum. The
structure setback required is 10 feet and 6 feet in the R-2 District
with no garage.
The owner will have the lot surveyed before the structure is altered.
I feel that the 15 foot fire lane does not provide public right-of-
way access as it exists; therefore, it should only require sideyards.
for interior lots, not a corner lbt. The deck along the south would
be four (4) foot in width and would provide a walkway to the rear deck.
The yard grade does slope to the lake and the walkway would stay at
.. the first floor elevation rather than change the yard grade. I have
discussed the placement of a garage with the homeowner. The garage
could be allowed with conforming setbacks, if attached to the house
and the grade raised to 6 inches ~ above the street grade. If detached,
it should be 5 feet. from the house, 8 feet to the front property line
and 4 feet to the side property line.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the 2 foot side yard variance to
allow the enclosure of the roofed area to expand the kitchen;
footings and basement are also presently existing..The deck
design could be modified to allow a sidewalk at grade to a rear
deck with steps 4 feet to the south property llne. The garage
should be constructed with conforming setbacks.
The abutting neighbors have been notified.
Building Official
JB/ms
Case No. 83-249
Planning Commission Minutes
August 29, 1983
5.Case No. 83-249 Variance of non-conforming lot, ~'foot side y~rd setback and garage
setback - 2S27 Cambridge Lane
Lot 10, Block 35, Wychwood
Kenneth Smith was present.
The Building Inspector explained 'that on the first portion of the house as it exists,
there is a roofed area with steel support - the foundation and'ro°f is there and
now they want to enclose what'is existing and need a ~ foot sidey~rd variance. It
was discovered that this is just 2 feet.from property line (required sideyard set-
back of fire lane is 6 feet rather than.20 as this is ~asement not a street).
Applicant would like to construct a deck on lakeside and extend wrap around deck
2 feet into fire lane. For walkway. Also wants to build garage on north side of'
house. Applicant stated yard drops off 5 feet; like to build up and put.in garage
level w{th road.
The Building Inspector recommended that. design' be modified--keep walkway at grade
and'stay out of fire lane, have stairs to deck start at extension of wall. She
recommended to have approval include building a d~tached garage on the undersized
lot with garage meeting 'setbacks of 8 feet to front property line and 4 feet to ·
side yard line and drainage to be diverted back to street~
Byrnes moved and jensen seconded a motion to accept the nonconforming iot size'
and approve the g foot sideyard variance allowing the enclosure of the front
roofed area, and construction of a deck on lakeside with walkway at grade wlth
stairs to deck 4 feet to. property line and a detached garage which meets all
setbacks. The vote on the motion was unanimously in favor.
(Please type the following infor~tion)
APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING gOHHISSION
· Legal Description of Property:
Addition ~ !/~_~ ~jOOO/
~, Applicant (if Other than owner):
Lot
(38010/6650)
PID No.
:Block
24-117-24 '42 0015
,, Day .Phone No. C~m~/--C~
Name
Address -'
Type of Request:
Variance ( } Conditibn
Zoning Interpretation & Revi
Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D.
*If other, specify:
'esent Zoning District
7. Existing Ute(s) of Property mm ~ ~ d ~ n ~ ~
8. Has an applicatlon ever been made for zoning,' vari~
"' .other zoning procedure for this property2 ~1~$. '
list date(s) of application, acti6n taken a~d pro¥
Copies of'pre~ious resolutions shall accompany pre: ...
i certify that all o~ the above statements .and the sta ..... ~ ....................
papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. ! consent to the'~"in
or upon the premises described in this appJ.~cation.by any a/u'd~orized~,ficial of the City
oF Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or..c~?f po~tin~ma~t~lnlng ~ re~ving such
notices as may be required by law~ //.~ J /~..~/.-. // .
.$l~n~ture of ~pplicant
Planning Co~ission R ~n: -
Date
Council Action:
Resolution No.
Date
83-249'
Loca't.ion of: Signs, easements~ underground utilities, etc.
Indicate No'~..~ compass direction
A~y addit'ional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff
and applicable Sections of the Zoning. O.rdinance.
De
III. Request for a Zonln~ Variance
A. All..i~formation 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 property'conform to all use regulations for
the zone district in which it is located? Yes (~)' No ( )'
if "no", specify each n~n-conforming use:
Do .the existing-structures comply, with all area height ~nd bulk.~egulations
for the zone district'in'which i't'is-.located?' Yes (v~ No ' ( )
If ~'no", specify each non-conforming use:
De
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent .its
· .reasonable use for any of the .uses permitted in that zoning.district?
( ) .Too n. arrow (.) Topography (') Soil '
(L/~ Too. small :. -( )' Drainage.. (.) Sub-surface
( ) Too shallow ( ) Sba. pa '( ) Other: Specify:
E..Was-the hardship described ab'~e'create~ by the a~tion Of anyone havi.ng
p~operty interests in the land afte¢ the Zohing Ordinance was adopted?
Yes ( ) No (~,-'~ If yes, explain:
Was the hardship created by"any'.'ol!he~ man-made change, such as the reloca-
tion..of a road? Yes ( ) No (,-')~ If yes, explain:
Are the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar
only to the property desCribed'in this petition?'.Yes (.x~)' 'No ( )
If no, how many other properties ~re similarly affected?
H. .What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations
that will per'it you to make _reasonable use of your land? (Specify~ using
maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional
sheets, if necessary.)
I. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to p t
same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance?
23(,,O
This form need not be used ~hen plot plans dr~wn to scale of not less than
l"-2D' are filed with permit ~pp)tcatton. (£ech but]din9 site must h~ve a
separate plot plan.)
For new buildings provide the fo]lowing tnfornatton: £1evttfon of ezisttng
& adjoining y~r~ grades, 3oc~tton of propuse~ consturction tn~ existing improve-
men:s; shc~; bu~ldtngo site, mhd setback dine. nstons. Show e~se~n~, ~tn~mh
contours or drainage, first ~oor e]evtt~on, stree: e]ev~tion ~n~ m~er .....
service e]ev~:~on. Show location Of ~eter, sever, g~s ~nd e3ec:ric~] service
]inem. Show location of survey pins ~tth elevations. Specify the use of · '
each bul]dng ~n~ ~or port,on thereof. To ~ c~p]eted by.a re~{~te~
land surveyor.
INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE
. .. :- ~'
GRAPH SQUARES ARE 5' X'5' OR 1"=20'
I I I
I {.I
I I
I/'1
{ I
I I
{ t t I
-.Li
t I t I I I I I ~
I I I
%,1. l',/f' {/i :l"q t 1,- I
! I
1,"1~ I I i { I I I
I/ ,t/'I' I IX I \ I' i {/I \l I t I
'%?
I00.0o
0 Denotes Iron Monument Set
· Denotes Iron Monument Found
Iii
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of:
Lot 10, Block 35, WYCHWOOD, Hennepin County, Minnesota
And of the location of all buildings, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said
land. As surveyed by me this 30th day of August 19RR -
Paul A. Johns~/'
Land Surveyor. Minn. Reg. No. 10938
'c~,,=o, CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
· oo. I,^~E for
TSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 194~ 9'2
HIN~N ~ MAR$~LL. MINNESOTA ~ '
1cCOMBS'KNUTE
MINN[APOLIS, HU
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 83-249
RESOLUTION NO. 83-
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE NON-CONFORMING LOT SIZE
AND 4 FOOT SIDE YARD VARIANCE AS REQUESTED FOR
LOT lO, BLOCK 35, WYCHWOOD (2927 Cambridge Lane)
WHEREAS, the owner, Mr. Kenneth Smith, of the property described'as Lot IO, Block
35, Wychwood, PID 24-117-24 42 0015, has applied for a lot size variance
and a 4,~foot side yard variance to allow the enclosure of a presently
roofed area (southeast corner) of the house, to construct a deck at the
lakeside (west), and to construct a garage, and
WHEREAS, the'City Code requires 6,000 square feet of lot area, 10 foot and 6 foot
setback to the side property lines, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has agreed to submit a Certified Survey, place the deck-
6 foot to the side lot line, and construct a garage with conforming
setbacks, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the variance as afore-
mentioned.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the City Council concur with the Planning Commission recommendation
agreed upon with the owner to place the garage~ with conforming
setbacks and enclose the present roofed area (southeas~ corner) within z~'/.~
foot of the property l ine,¢~~ ~ ~L~.~ ~-~/, ~ ~--~
Lake Minnetonka
Cook's Bay
_ ~AFTON RD~ 'in~o
This b!ock is oli marsh
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
CASE NO. 83-250
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on September 27, 1983 at 7:30
P.M. at the Mound City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound;' Minnesota,
the City Council will hear a request for-subdivision of the prop-
erty described as follows:
Those parts of Lots 17 through 22, inclusive, Auditor's
Subdivision Number 168, lying southerly of the southerly
right-of-way line of Beachwood Road; also those parts of
Lots 23 and 24, said Auditor's.Subdivision Number 168
lying northerly of the westerly extension of the south
line of the north 15 feet of Lot 28, and lying southerly
of the southerly right-of-way line of Beachwood Road;
also that part of Lot 25, Auditor's Subdivision Number
168 lying southerly of the southly right-ofTway line of
Beachwood Road; also all of Lots 26 and 27, and the north
15 feet of Lot 28,. said Auditor's Subdivision Number 168,
situated in the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota
(Also to be known as 58 Beachwood Road) PID # 23,117-24
13 OOO3/O004/OOO5/O006/'0-~O8
Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the
above will be given an opportunity to be heard at this meeting.
'Francene C. Clark, City Clerk
Case No. 83-250
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda of August 29, 1983:
Board of Appeals Applicant:
Case No. 83-250 Richard Heggemeyer
Location: Beachwood Road & Bartlett Blvd. 220 W. 98th Street
Legal Desc.: Lots 17-22, Part of Lots Bloomington, MN. 55420
23, 24 & 28, Lots 25-27, Phone: 884-0044
Auditor's Subdivision 168 454-7999
Request: Preliminary Subdivision
Zoning' District: R-1
Proposal: 'The applicant, Mr. Heggemeyer, is requesting plat approval for 7 lots
on the south side of Beachwood Road. In December, 1978, he received
preliminary plat approval just after the Beachwood.Road improvement.
The preliminary approval expired before he submitted a final plat. He
is again requesting a plat approval.
Site:
Comments:
The site has been recently graded with most of the vegetation removed.
It slopes approximately 15 feet from the rear lot lines to Beachwood
street grade. Areas of the property are below street grade.
The City Council on December 19, 1978 recommended a p~rk dedication
based on a value of land of $16,100 or $230.00 per lot. The lot areas
are not shown on the new plat and differ (rom the December 19, 1978
preliminary plat. A grading plan with soil tests have not been sub-
mitted for approval. Street, curb, gutter and utilities were installed
at Beachwood Road under City contract and five (5) sewer and water stub-
ins were assessed against the seven (7) proposed lots. The locations
of the utility stub-ins do not align with the. proposed lot lines for
some lots.
Recommendation:
The Staff recommends that. a preliminary subdivision be approved
conditioned upon:
1. Escrow fund be established to defray engineer, legal and
staff time.
2. Park dedication fee of $230.00 per lot be assessed at the
time of issuing building permits for each of the 7 lots
or re-establish a new value of land.
3. City Engineer approve the grading, utilities, lot areas,
and erosion control plan for the 7 lots and obtain necessary
easements.
4. A public hearing be set by the City Council.
5. City Attorney_review and approve the Title of the property.
6. Soil reports be submitted for Lots 23, 24, 25 and 27 (Pro-
posed lots 5, 6 and 7) minimum.
7. File for final'subdivision approval within one year or the
preliminary'approval will be null and void.
Jan Bertrand
Building Official
JB/m~
0~-~ 'ON
S
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jon Elam, City Manager
Jan Bertrand, Building Official
August 31, 1983
Final Subdivision Approval for Case No. 82-114,
Flora Bauer and Rebecca Yantes,. 4936 Edgewater Drive
The attached preliminary subdivision, Resolution # 82-156, was
.granted plus a June 7, 1983 extension to allow for compliance
of the conditions for subdivision. Attached please find ~
letter from Holly Lovseth, realtor, stating they have complied
with the conditions and would now like to receive final sub-
division (lot-split) approval.
Burnet
WEST SHORE OFF)CE
5560 THREE POINTS BOULEVARD
MOUND MN 55364
~652~472-131J
August 31, 1983
CASE NO. 82-'114 .
Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector
City of Mound
5341Haywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Subiect: Final lot split approval of Resolution #82-114
Dear Jan:
We would like to be placed on the ajenda for the September 6, 1983
Mound City Council Meeting for the purpose of obtaining a final lot
split approval on the property presently known as:
4936 Edgewater Drive, Mound
lots 16 & 17, Skarp and Lindquists Ravenwood
Becky Yantes Cymek, the owner, will be represented at the meeting
by her brother, David Peterso~ or her father, Hewitt Peterson.
Agai6, thank you for all your. help and patience in this matter.
Since[ely,
Holly Lb6qseth
agent for the owner
Merrill Lynch Realty/Burner'
CITY OF MOUI~'D
Mound, Minnesota
Case. No. 82-114
WAIVER OF NOTICE OF HEARING, HEARING, AND
APPEAL ON ASSESSMENT, AND CONSENTING TO BE SPECIALLY ASSESSED.
.WHEREAS, the City Co'until of the City of Mound did on
adopt a resolution ordering preparation of a proposed assess-
.meat of all properties within that part of .the City of Mound
legally described as Lots ~6"~. l~ Sk~.rp-&;Lindquist~Ravenswood
by construction of blacktopped streets,-concrete curb and
gutter and. storm drainage, and
WHEREAS; l~he said assessment roll was prepar~d'.and.
-. Lot 16 and 17 Skar. p' & Lindq. Uist R~venswood
· ' were assessed for . one ~nit , and the owner has re-
quested subdividing this 1.and into two building
" sites, making a deficiency of · on~ unit -"
NOW', TH~'REFORE', the undersigned., ownerL6~'"t6' & 17 Skaro' Lindquist RaVenswood
4936 Edgewater Drive
'. (common street address)
· if permission to'subdivi.~e, is.granted,'doe~ hereby waive right
· ~o published and mailed notice of assessment, does waive hearing
and appeal for'and f~ro~ said assessment of
one unit @lg2g.15
and '8.2 % interest from date of resolution to levy deferred and.
· ' supplemental ~ssessments upon waiver, September 1, , as
his share and benefit from sa d street improvement.~
#8297
S1828.15 .'
Date
1N PRESENCE OF
'i ~ ,.-i %~--~S~':'the Village Council"of the Village of Mound did on Autos{ 15, : ..
, · ..... .. . .~o5 aeop, a resolution ordo,~ng orepara~.on, of a proposee ,...
",..'..'...-". '.. asses~en~'bf all properties in the Village of >~o~nd for the .'.'
":". J~XD ~.S, said assessment roll was prepared aud ~,'~ssessmeng was ;'"-'
r. ...... , '. placed
.:, :.. .~ .
'. - ' , -:' .... · ,...:' ~.': does hereb~ waive right to published and ~5!ed notice of
.. · . nearing and appeal for and from said
,, ~.)~ ~.?.'~.:.. · assossnent,~and does fioncent go an'additional assessmen: of.'
' . ...-'..'-....:.....~ '25'
...... 2~~ · . r~ ~ . . ...''
'~'
' ....~
VILLAGE OF MOUND
Eound: .winne sofa
Case No. 82-114
WA!~R OF NOTICE OF HEARING, HEARING:
A..k~ APPEAL ON ASSESS}~NT
(Mound Sanitary Sewer !~_'.soosal Plant
and Trunk Sewers)
the Vi!!a~e Council of the Village of Mound did on Msv'~6,~,~,':t,...,
- ad. oo'b a resolution ordering preparation of a proposed a~$(~s~i:,,,%l::
of all oroper'bies in the Village of Mound for the improv~menL
consi=*~ % of
o,,_n~, sanitary sewer disposal o!ant and .sanitary
trunk mains~ and
k~EREA$~ the assessment roll so prepared sn~ amended was sdo-pted by the
Council on July 20~ !96)~, and
hots 16 and 17 Skarp & Lindquist Ravenswood
was assessed for
Lots 16 and 17
1 '.- unit(s) and
Skarp & Lindquist Ravenswood
and should have been assessed for 2 unit(s), making a
deficiency of one' unit
Ah~ k~ER~_AS~, said ommission may be corrected by supplemental assessment
but und%rsigned desires to avoid the procedural costs thereof:
NOW, THEREFORE~ THE ~DERSIGNED~ Ok~ER OF
~ 'Lots 16 and 17 . Skarp S tindquist Revenswood 13-117-24 41 00i4
does hereby waive right to pub!ishe~ and m~i!ed notice of
assessment~ does waive hearing and appeal for and from said
assessment:, and does consent to an additional assessment of
1
unit(s) in the amount of $~9~.00 Der unit plus
~ interest from date of Resolution in Sept. as his
share and benefit fro~ said sewer improvement.
'#318O
$292.00
~' OF
.N PRESENCE
Dated
CITY OF
'APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION
Sec. 22.03-a
VILLAGE OF MOUND
OF
LAND
FEE $ ~?_~". m 0
PARCEL
/.7 -// 7-.z~,/
Location and complete legal description of property to be divided:
ZONING
To be divided as follows: ~ /~_~¢.~ ~~ ~d
(attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed
building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number)
A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR:
New Lot No. From
Square feet TO Square feet
Reason;
~ (s i g,r~dre)
Applicant's interest in the property: ~_~~
This application mu~t be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan-
ation given why this is not the case.
237 /
PLANNING COMMI~ION RECOMMENDATION: To approve the subdivision with the stipulation
that house be brought to compliance with the ordinance, the shed be removed and
meet the pther recommendations of the Building 0fficia]. DATE Hay 24, 1982
"174
June 8, 1982
Ca~se No. 82-114
Councilmember.U)rick moved the following resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-156
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSIO~
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY LOT-
SPLIT WITH THE 7 STIPULATIONS - CASE #82-114
WHEREAS,
a subdlvlslon (lot-spilt) request has been submitted by Rebecca
Yantes on property.describe~ as Lots 16 & 17, Ska6p & Lindquist's
Ravenswood, and
WHEREAS,
the request was submitted in the manner required for subdividing
land under the Mound Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the
Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had there-
under, and
WHEREAS, .said proposed subdiv.ision (lot-split) is in all respects consistent
'!'i~with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws
of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Mound,
Chapter 22, and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission has approved the preliminary lot-split
· with the stipulation that the house be brought to compliance with
the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 23 of the City Code;'the shed be
removed and meet the other recommendations of the Building Official,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND:
Preliminary Lot-Split Approval Request #82-114, is approved upon
compliance wi th the following requirements'.
The house be brought to comp)lance with the Zoning Ordinance,
Chapter 23 of the City Code, as far as side yard requirements
are concerned.
Locating utilities servicing the existing structure and topography'
of the site placed on the survey.
Ali water and sewer'unit charges are paid, and street assessment
unit charges, if applicable.
4. Removal of the existing shed building and basement entrance from
the site including the 6" encroachment of the house on Parcel "B".
5. Provide off-street parking for Parcel "B".
6. All persons with financial interest in the property submit
approval of the lot~split request.
That failure on the part of the petitioner to submit a final
plat of the lot-split per Section 22.13 within one year from
the date of this approval shall deem the preliminary approval
to be null and void, unless an extension of time is applied
for and approved,
A motion for the adoption of the foregoi.ng resolution was duly ~econded by
Councilmember Charon and upon vote being taken thereon;'the following voted
in favor thereof: Charon, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick'and Lindlan; the following.
voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was declared passed
and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk,
Mayor
Attest; City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 83-96
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION
82-156 (SUBDIVISION REQUEST) FOR 1 YEAR, TO JUNE
7, 1984
WHEREAS, Resolution #82-156 was approved on June 8, 1982; and
WHEREAS, this resolution approved the preliminary lot split:
of Lots 16 and 17, Skarp & Lindquist's Ravenswood; and
WHEREAS, Rebecca Yantes has requested an extension of this
resolution for 1 year because of a financial condition that kept her
from moving ahead with completing the stipulations outlined in Resolution
#82-156.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Mound that an extension of one year is hereby granted for Resolution
#82-156 - until June 7, 1984.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Paulsen
and'seconded by Councilmember Charon.
The followin§ Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Charon, Paulsen and Polston.
The following Councilmembers voted in-the negative:
None.
Councilmembers Peterson.and Swenson.were absent and excused.
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
27
.O~ 5,.,q'.. kSV,":C K AL, ff. ?,.
GOLDEN VA ,c
L..Y, ~'~ *' N.
?AFC ".iL "A":
:237g
LAND SLTRVEYOP. g e~oc,<LY:; PA~,K, :,',::-:N.
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF ML\'NESOTA ~ g,2 -/J y
:.~vo~c~. ~o.~
'7601. ?3rd/~venue North 560-3093 F.B. NO. ..' L:,-.: .'
Minneapolis, .Minnesol~ 55428 SCALE I" "''~"
0- 9£NOTt:~ IRON
., .~'r'o po.s ed' 9£ v i .-:i on
:~ 72 fo r':
'LO .~'"' ' - --. '' -' "., C }ih'.f T'?'?
l'~- - .. _ _ --/?_..; ....... t.
,;" u -- - - 4;,.,, --
~4'
1
; : ~ Note: Si.ed building
0 .r. q5 n,t
;:,,, ;i
":' .
[$ ' ' ::'--=:~: :,- 5-
~'~.C'. '.-' -- bS.O - - ':,: ~;' .... ..~ .
mgr' Vv'AT;- ~ /k, VL,q' ''-
The ','es*. ;.O.:J.~ fee'. o£ Lot !7, Skar.p and Lindquist's '::.ave:~.%',^'ood
:':.,-'h'- a:,d/e:; to .'.ne ,ftys:. line
AzZ c.f LsL :'~ and ::.at part of Lo: 17 l'.,'i::~: East of :!.~. ',¢e~t .:..7.'.: ~':..-' . -
.:c..;:~.urr,,y .'-1; ":.:.:.t ::;,,.'.'.e£ to %!;e ',','aK; [~r:,., ;:.eTef).~, ~;::;r". :12:~ :.f.. :. .
: .',::.?...co
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES,
CONSULTING ENGINEERS II LAND SURVEYORS [] PLANNERS
INC.
September 1, 1983
Reply To:
121~00 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
Hr. Oon Elam
City Hanager
City of Hound
5341Haywood Road
Hound, HN 55364
Subject:
City of Hound
Hill Pond
Drainage Problems
File #6929
Dear Jon:
As requested, we have investigated a number of alternatives for solving the
drainage problem in Hill Pond. The following is a summary of each alternate.
Alternate A
This would involve reshaping, cleaning, and straightening the existing
ditch which flows to the south. The existing ditch grade is very uneven and
curves around at the end to avoid some brush and small trees. For a cost of
$1,200 to $1,500 the existing ditch could be rebuilt and solve most of the
drainage problems in the area.
Alternate B
The outfall from the existing pond on Outlot A could be run underground in
storm sewer pipe and discharged in the low area to the south. The existing
ditch would have to be retained as a swale to carry the runoff from the rear
yards of Lots 5, 6, and 7. In order to maintain cover over this pipe, it would
have to be installed in the rear yards of the existing homes on Lots 5, 6, and
7. The outlet for this pipe would be well past the end of the existing ditch
onto private property, which would necessitate permanent and temporary con-
struction easements. This Alternate would cost approximately $10,000 to
construct. We caution you that Alternate A would not eliminate the existing
pond on Outlot A since the connection would be made to the existing 12" R.C.R.
that now acts as a regulated outlet.
Alternate C
The suggestion was made to investigate the possibility of installing ade-
quate storm sewer to eliminate the pond on Outlot A, This pond was constructed
as a requirement of the Hinnehaha Creek Watershed District at the time Hill
Pond was platted and constructed, I have discussed with the Watershed District
the possibility of eliminating this pond and installing storm sewer, Their
initial reaction was a definite no, although they did indicate that the size
and/or capacity of the pond is somewhat flexible.
Mr, Oon Elam
September 1, 1983
Page Two
Conclusions
Because of the great difference in cost and since the pond cannot be
eliminated, we would recommend the City undertake Alternate A. -One additional
item we would suggest is that the City acquire the 100 foot square parcel
(R.I.D. 14-117-24 34 0044) from the state when and if it goes tax forfeit.
This parcel is the discharge area for the ditch. We have talked to Hennepin
County and if the back taxes are not paid within the next 60 to 90 days, this
parcel will belong to the state, at which time the City could acquire it for
wetlands.
If you need any additional information, please contact us.. I will be in
attendance at the Council Meeting on the 6th of September to answer any ques-
tions you or the City Council may have.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
INV.=
MANHOLE
~/--PROPOSED PO=N,D
NORMAL WATER 959.2,
BOTTOM = 955.0 '
SIDE SLO~S ~ 3~1
~ oU'rLOT. A
DRAINAGE SWALE
PROPOSED DITCH
SEE DETAIL LEFT )
0.52%
ELE~I~,TION · 959
6
,/7
_COMBS-KNUTS.ON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I~ LAND SURVEYORS mi PLANNERS
Reply To:
12800 Indunrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
July 7, 1983
Honorable Ma~or and
Members of the City Council
City of Mound
5341 ~ywoo0 Road
Mound, MN 55364
Subject:
City of Mound
Preliminary Engineering Report
Tennis Court, Outlot A, "THE BLUFFS"
File #6865
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
As requested, we are submitting herewith a Preliminary EngineeringReport
for a proposed tennis court located on Outlot A, "THE BLUFFS".
If you have any questions or require further information on anything in
this report, we will be pleased to discuss this w£th you at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
O~C: sj
Enclosure
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
TENNIS COURTS
OUTLOT A, "THE BLUFFS"
Mouno, M&nnesota
July, 1985
I hereby certify that this report was prepareO Dy me or unOer my
direct supervision anO that I am a duly. Registere0 Rrofessional
Engineer unOer the laws of the State of~nne$ota.
7/7/85 ............................................ Re~. ~. 7all
William H. McComDs
GENERAL
A number of residents of The Bluffs have requested by petition that the
City investigate the possibility of constructing a tennis court on putlot A,
"THE BLUFFS". This property is more commonly known as "T~e Tot Lot" and is
owned by the City of Hound. At th~'present time it is undeveloped but is main-
rained as a play area by mowing. Tne lot measures ?0 feet wide by 125 feet
deep and is fairly level in the front, but rises sharply at the rear, which re-
sults in a difference of approximately 14 feet in elevation. For'this area of
the country a north-south orientation for tennis courts is recommended, but
cause of the lot configuration, we will be restricted to an east-west
direction.
DESIGN
The recommended fenceO in size of a standard court is 60 feet Dy 120 feet,
with the actual playing court being36 feet by 78 feet. Because of the limited
space available with this lot, we would recommenO reducing the length between
six and ten feet. For purposes of this report we will De using 60 feet by il4
feet.
Because of the extreme grade difference from front to back on this lot,
retaining walls will be a necessitity. We have inyestigated the use of two
cltfferent retnining walls, poured reinforced'concrete and 'timber. Either of
these walls will work satisfactorily, but there is a substantial cost differ-
ence between the two which will be shown later in-this report. At the north-
west corner, the wall will extend approximately seven feet above the playing
surface and at the southeast corner, the playing surface will be approximately
four feet above the adjacent ground. Tne drawings included with this report
show a plan view of the court and also three elevations. The court surface
would be asphalt, much the same as the two courts in Island Rark Rark. An as-
phalt curb will De required along the south side to direct the runoff to the
street.
Because the construction of this.court woulO not meet any of the required
setbacks for this residential district, we feel the Rlanning Commission should
be involved. It would also be a gooO idea to pass the proposal through.the
Rark CommiSsion. The Mound coOes limit a residential fence to six feet in
height, whereas the recommended height for the tennis court enclosure is ten
feet. Since the homes are very close on Doth sides, we would recommenO at
least a ten foot high fence. .,
114 feet, the setbacks from each side would, or;ly be 5 feet. We would recmmmena
tne retaining wall and fence be built on the rear lot line which would leave
approximately 9 feet to the front lot line and 1~ feet to the CurD. If a tim-
ber wall is constructed on the rear lot line, a larger t~mporary construction
easement would be needed from the property owner to the west.
COST
The estimated cost for the tennis court, as proposed in t~is report, is
$52,700. This estimate includes contingencies and engineering, legs!, fiscal,
and administrative costs. A detailed breakdown is included in this report.
If poured reinforced concrete were to be used in lieu of wood timber:for
the retaining walls, approxzmately $9,500 would be added to the project. Be-
cause of the added expense, we would recommend using the timber walls.
kSSESSHENIS
Since this proposed tennis court would be more a neighborhood facility and
is being requested by the residents of 7he Bluffs, we are proposing to sp~d
the cost as a per lot assessment. Using the estimated cost of $32,700 divided
by the ~5. lots in The Bluffs, the estimated assessment per lot would be approx-
Imately $935. Ti'Lis could'be spread over a period of ten years.
'CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
From an engineering standpoint, the project is economically and technically
feasiole. However, we hesitate in giving a positive recommendation for this
project because of the problems-created by the small size of the lot
ava/lable. Our big concern is with the court extending into the normal setback
area beyond the front lines of the adjacent homes.
COST ESTIMATE
Item
Rough Grading
Retaining Wall (TimOer)
Standard Court (~0' x 114' ) with 10' Fence
Bituminous Curd
Conti ngenci es
Total Estzmated Construction Cost
Engineering, Legal, Fiscal and
Administrative Costs
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
Quantit~
900 S.F.
113 L.F.
Uni t Price
Lump Sum
$ 8.00/SF
Lump Sum
$ 5.00/LF
Amount
$ 2,000
7,200
15,000
2,47~
$27,250
5,450
$32,700
....... WF_-~T . F_lql~ '_
0~~ q-~=.N~4~ cc, U~T t.,:x:~4r= W~-.~T)..
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS [] LAND SURVEYORS I PLANNERS
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
August 31, 1983
Hr. Oon Elam
City of Hound
5341Haywood Road
Hound, Hinnesota 55364
Subject:
Hound, Hinnesota
Proposed Tennis Court
Outlot A, "The Bluffs"
$6865
Dear Son:
As requested we have investigated a number of ideas and concerns brought up
by citizens present at the neighborhood meeting held on August 18, 1983. As
you are aware an on site inspection of the drainage problems in the Bluffs was
made on August 25, 1983. Since that time drainage calculations have also been
done in our office. It appears that the erosion and flooding problems at the
curve on Bluffs Lane and Bay Ridge Road have been solved with the addition of
an earthen berm behind the curb.
The resident who's driveway is adjacent to the catch basins in the curve at
the intersection of Highview Lane and Bay Ridge Road informed us there is a
problem with water overflowing the curb in this area. Our calculations also
show that the capacity of the two catch basin inlet grates are below that of a
5 year storm. The solution here would be to add another catch basin, the cost
of which would be in the range of $1,200.00 to $1,500.00. We do not feel that
the added runoff from the proposed tennis court would be significant enough to
create any additional problems. Ne do propose to restrict the flow from the
court by use of a smaller opening in the curb.
We have also discussed with a local tennis court contractor the possibility
of flooding the court in the winter for use as a skating rink. The people who
manufacture the final color coats, which is an acrylic material, do not recom-
mend the use of tennis courts as ice rinks. The contractor we talked to said
he has seen a number of installations used for ice rinks with no adverse
affects. He did indicate that some small hair line cracks could appear but
they would not affect the life of the playing surface. The City of Duluth
floods one of their multiple courts each year and have had very little problems
as a result.
Son Elam
August 31, 1983
Page Two
We have also reviewed our cost estimate keeping in mind the lowering of the
court and the use of a removable fabric for the upper portion of the east
half. The quantity of retaining wall required would be increased a small
amount by lowering the court, but the area of permanent fence would be
decreased. After talking with the contractor about costs, we feel the overall
estimate should be left about the same at this time.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
US,
Sincerely,
McCOMBS-KNU~SON ASSOCIATES, Inc.
OC:j
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS [] LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
August 31, 1983
Mr. 3on Elam
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Subject:
Mound, Minnesota
Proposed Tennis Court
Outlot A, "The Bluffs"
#6865
Dear Oon:
As requested we have investigated a number of ideas and concerns brought up
by citlzens present at the neighborhood meeting held on August 18, 1983. As
you are aware an on site inspection of the drainage problems in the Bluffs was
made on August 25, 1983. Since that time drainage calculations have also been
done in our office. It appears that the eroslon and floodlng problems at the
curve on Bluffs Lane and Bay Rldge Road have been solved with the addltion of
an earthen berm behind the curb.
The resident who's driveway is adjacent to the catch basins in the curve at
the intersection of Highview Lane and Bay Ridge Road informed us there is a
problem with water overflowing the curb in this area. Our calculations also
show that the capacity of the two catch basin inlet grates are below that of a
5 year storm. The solution here would be to add another catch basin, the cost
of which would be in the range of $1,200.00 to $1,500.00. We do not feel that
the added runoff from the proposed tennis court would be significant enough to
create any additional problems. We do propose to restrict the flow from the
court by use of a smaller opening in the curb.
We have also discussed with a local tennis court contractor the possibility
of flooding the court in the winter for use as a skating rink. The people who
manufacture the final color coats, which is an acrylic material, do not recom-
mend the use of tennis courts as ice rinks. The contractor we talked to said
he has seen a number of installations used for ice rinks with no adverse
affects. He did indicate that some small hair line cracks could appear but
they would not affect the life of the playing surface. The City of Duluth
floods one of their multiple courts each year and have had very little problems
as a result.
3on Elam
August ~1, 198~
Page Two
We have also reviewed our cost estimate keeping in mind the lowering of the
court and the use of a removable fabric for the upper portion of the east
half. The quantity of retaining wall required would be increased a small
amount by lowering the court, but the area of permanent fence would be
decreased. After talking with the contractor about costs, we feel the overall
estimate should be left about the same at this time.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
US,
Sincerely,
MoCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc.
~mero~
oc:j
printed on recycled paper
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS . LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS ,
August 31, 1983
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
Mr. Oon Elam
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Subject:
Mound, Minnesota
Final Payment Request
Tuxedo Boulevard, MSAP 145-101-06
Three Points Boulevard, MSAR 145-106-01
#5387 & 5388
Dear Oon:
Enclosed is Hardrive's Final Payment Request in the amount of $8,593o15 for
the above project. This is the retainage which was held back until they com-
pleted all patching and seal coated the section of Tuxedo Boulevard from
Brighton Boulevard to Drummond Road. This work has now been satisfactorily
completed.
we have reviewed the project and find that it is completed in accordance
with the plans and specifications. It is our recommendation that the contrac-
tor be paid in full for this project.
Sincerely,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inco
William H. McCombs, P.E.
President
WHM:j
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jon Elam, City Manager
Jan Bertrand, Building Official
August 25, 1983
Jim Evenson, Final Subdivision Approval
Mr. Evenson received preliminary subdivision approval by
the City Council August 3, 1982, Resolution # 82-214. He
has now met the conditions stated on the Resolution.
I would recommend the City Council adopt the attached
proposed final subdivision resolution.
Jan Bertrand
JB/ms
CITY OF HOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Case No. 82-136
Planning Commission Agenda of July 26, 1982:
Board of Appeals Applicant:
Case No. 82-136 James A. Evenson
Lots 15-22, Block 10, Avalon and all of 2879 Tuxedo Boulevard
'vacated Montgomery Road Phone: 472-2150
PID 19-117-23 31 0032
Request: Lot-Split Subdivision Preliminary
Zoning District: R-1
The applicant is requesting a split of the existi.ng Lots 15-22 to allow for the
creation of two parcels of land with existing structures on both sites.
Both new parcels exceed the lO,O00 square foot lot area requirement for the R-1
Zoning District.
However, Parcel A's present structure fronting on Tuxedo Boulevard is undersized
(724 sq. ft.; required is 840 sq. ft.). The existing garage is 2.1 feet from the
sout~ (Brunswick Road) property line with the present concrete slab next to the
garage encroaching unto the Brunswick Road and Tuxedo Boulevard]rlght-of-ways.
The present house structure is at the public right-of-way line of Tuxedo Boulevard.
The setback requirement for the garage is 30 feet from Brunswick and Tuxedo Boule-~
yard. The front yard setback for the house is required to be 30 feet from Tuxedo i
Boulevard. ~
Parcel B's lot width required'for the R-1 Zoning District |s 60 feet. The proposed'
Parcel B has double frontage(to the south--Brunswick, to the north--Montgomery Road).
The frontage on Montgomery Road is 65.7 feet and the f~ontage at Brunswick is 50
feet. The setbacks of the structure and the size 6f the structure are conforming
with zoning requirements.
RECOMMEND: A motion to approve the preliminary lot-split subdivision upon the con-
dition that:
I. The encroachment of the concrete slab at the garage not be removed
recognizing the proPosed road to'the south will not be improved.
2. The iron monuments be set in place with 'separate surveys to be
submitted for Parcel A and Parcel B,
3. A new address be assigned to the Parcel B structure off of Mont-
gomery Road for emergency and mailing efficiency.
4. Extend 20 foot'utility easement across Parcel A.and Parcel B (Minimum)
5. Any additional street unit charges be paid or assessed in the
amount of $1,170.90.
6. All property owners with financial interest sign approval of
division of the property.
7. Install a dead end sign at Montgomery Place.
8. That failure on the part of the petitioner to submit a final
plat of the lot split per Section 22.13 within one year from
the date of this approval shall deem the preliminary approval
: to be null and void, unless an extension of time is applied
for and approved.
This will be going to the Council August 3, 1982
2n'~Bertrand
Weiland moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary lot-split subdivision upo~ the following conditions:
1. The. encroachment of the concrete'slab at the garage not be removed
recognizing the proposed road to the south will not be improved.
'2. The iron monuments be set in place with separate surveys to be sub-
mitted for Parcel A and Parcel B.
3. A new address be assigned to the Parcel B structure off of Montgomery
Road for emergency and mailing efficiency.
4. Extend 25 foot utility'easement across both Parcel A and Parcel B as
per City Engineer's description as follows: "An easement for utility
purposes over, under and across the northeasterly 25.00 feet of vacated
Montgomery Place which lies between the extensions across it of the
Southeasterly li'ne of Lot 4, Block 9 and the Northwesterly line of Lot 8,'
said Block 9, all in Avalon according to the recorded'plat'thereof,
Hennepin County, Minnesota."
5. Any additional street unit charges be paid or assessed in the amount of
$1,170.90.
6. All property owners with financial interest sign approval of the divi-
sion of the property.
7. Install a dead end sign at Montgomery Place.
8. That failure on the part of the petitioner to submit a final plat of
the lot split, per Section 22.13 within one year from the date of this
approval shall deem the preliminary approval to be null and void, un!ess
an extension of time is applied for and approved.
The vote on the motion_wps unanimously in favor..--'?
Case No. 82-136 · ~-~F.a~
APPLICATION ,' SUBL
Sec. 22.03-,
:ON OF LAND
VILLAGE OF MOUND
FEE OWNER
PLAT~ PARCEL
Location and complete Iegal description of property to be divided:
To be divided as follows:
ZONING
(attach survey or scate drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed
building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number)
A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR:
New Lot No. From
Square feet TO Square feet
Reason:
ti
/
(signature)
This application must be signed by all the OWNERSof the proper~y, or m~'explan-
ation g ..... hy this is not th ...... ~t.~~ /¢¢,, .~-d~
A0prova] o¢ the preliminary lot-split subdivision
upon certain conditions.
DATE Ju}y 26, 1982
i COUNCIL ACTION Concur with the P]anning Commission & DATE
approve the pre1 iminary subdivision/lol:-split
Resolution No. ,~2-2 I L~
8-3-82
APPROVAL OF THIS DIVISION IS DEPENDENT ON THE LEVYING OF ANY
DEFICIENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS BY WAIVER, THE FILING OF THE DIVISION
AS APPROVED AND THE NECESSARY PAYMENTOFTAXESBY THE FEE OWNER
WITHIN 1 YEAR FRO%.I THE DATE OF THE RESOLUTION OR IT BECOMES
NULL AND VOID.
A list of residents and owners of property within feet must be attached.
,~24
August 3, 1982
Coun(ilmember-Swensom moved the following resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-214
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNI[~G COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION/
LOT-SPLIT - LOTS 15-22, BLOCK 10, AV'ALON, AND ALL OF
VACATED MONTGOMERY ROAD
WHEREAS,
an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in
Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound,
and
WHEREAS, said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning. Commission
and City Coupcil, and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
it is hereby 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 granting the waiver will not
be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other
property' owners, and
the purpose of this subdivision/lot split is to allow for the.
creation of two parcels of land with exi. sting structures on both
sites, and
WHEREAS, both new parcels exceed the 10,OO0 square foot lot area requirement
for the R-1 Zoning Dis,trict.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MN..'
A.; The request of James A. Evenson for the waiver from the provisions
of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request to subdivide
property of ]ess than five acres, described as PID #19-117-23 31 0032
is hereby granted preliminary approval to permit division of the
property in the following manner:
· PARCEL "A"- Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block IO; and all of
vacated Montgomery Place lying between the extensions
across it of the Southeasterly'line of Lot 4, Block 9,
and the Northwesterly line of Lot 8, said Block 9, all
in "Avalon", lying Easterly of a line described as
follows; Commencing at the Southwest corner of said
Lot 15; thence East along the South line of said Lots
15 and 16-a distance of 50 feet to the point of
beginning of the line being described; thence deflecting
left 67o18! to the Northeasterly line of said vacated
Montgomery Place, and there ending.
PARCEL "B" - Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of
vaca~ted Montgomery Place lying between the extensions
across it of the Southeasterly line of Lot 4, Block 9,
and the Nothwesterly line of Lot 8, said Block 9, all
in "Avalon", EXCEPT that part thereof lying Easterly
225,
Au'gust 3, 1982
-of a llne described as follows: Commencing at the
Southwest corner of said Lot 15; thence East along
the South llne of said Lots 15 and 16 a distance of
50 feet to the point of beginning of the line being
described; thence deflecting left 67o18' to the
Northeasterly line of said vacated Montgomery Place,
and there ending.
B. Preliminary subdivision is.approved upon compliance with the
'following requirements:
1.~ The encrOachment of the concrete slab at the garage not be
removed recognizing the proposed road to the South will not
be improved.
2.~ The iron monuments be set. in place with separate surveys to
be submitted~for Parcel·A and Parcel B.
3. A new address Se assigned to the Parcel B structure off of
Montgomery Place for'emergency and mailing efficiency.
4. Extend 25 foot utility easement across both Parcel A and
Parcel B as per City Engineer's description as follows:
"An easement for utility purposes over, under and·.across
the northeasterly 25.00 feet of vacated Montgomery Place
which lies between the extensions across it of t~e South- -
easterly line of Lot 4, Block 9 and the Northwesterly line
of Lot 8, said Block 9, all in Avalon'according to the.
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota."
Any additional street unit charges be paid or assessed in
the amount of $1,]70.90 (Levy 7514).
6. All property owners with financial interest sign a~proval of
the division of the property.
'7. Install a dead end sign at Montgomery Place.
8. That failure on the part of the petitioner to submit a final
plat of the lot split per Section 22.13 ·within one year from
the date of this approval shall deem the preliminary approval
to be null and void, unless an extension of time is applied
for and approved.
A motion fo~ the adoption of ~he foregoing reso'l'ution was duly seconded by
Councilmember Charon and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted
in favor thereof: Charon, Polston, Swenson'and Lindlan; the following voted
against the same: none; with Councilmember Ulrick being absent; whereupon
said resolution was declared passed and. adopted, signed by the Mayor and
his signature attested by the Ci'cy Clerk.
Mayor
AttestS: ~ C,~-y ~le~-k ~
./ ./
/
.,--.
~as~uu!H 'X~u'no3 ~Td~uu~H /
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
I #83-
~ RESOLUTION NO. 83-
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION
OF LAND FOR LOTS 15t22, BLOCK 10, AVALON
(PID 19-117-23-31-OO32)
WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in
Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound,
and
WHEREAS, said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Commission
and City Council, and
WHEREAS, the conditions for preliminary subdivision under Resolution #82-214 have
been met, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; and that
the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right; and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the request of James A. Evenson 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 PID #19-117-23 31 0032 is hereby
granted to permit division in the following described manner:
Parcel "A"-Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of vacated Mont-
gomery Place lying between the extensions across it of the
Southeasterly line of Lot 4, Block 9, and the Northwesterly line
of Lot 8, said Block 9, all in "Avalon", lying Easterly of a
line described as follows:-Commencing at the Southwest corner
of said Lot 15; thence East along the South line of said Lots 15
and 16 a distance of 50 feet to the point of beginning of the
line being described; thence deflecting left 67o18' to the-North-
easterly line of said vacated Montgomery Place, and there ending.
Parcel "B"-Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of vacated Mont-
gomery Place lying between the extensions across it of the South-
easterly line of Lot 4, Block 9, and the Northwesterly line of
Lot 8, said Block 9, all in "Avalon", EXCEPT that part thereof
lying Easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at
the Southwest corner of said Lot 15; thence East along the South
line of said Lots 15 and 16 a distance of 50 feet to the point of
beginning of the line being described; thence deflecting left
67o18' to the Northeasterly line of said vacated Montgomery Place,
and there ending.
It is determined that the foregoing division will constitute a desirable and
stable community development and is in harmony with adjacent properties.
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.
This final subdivision shall be filed and recorded within 180 days
of the date of adoption of this resolution in the Office of
Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County
to show compliance with the subdivision regulation of this City.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
#83-
RESOLUTION NO. 83-
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION
OF LAND FOR LOTS 15-22, BLOCK 10, AVALON
(PID 19-117-23-31-0032)
WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in
Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound,
and
WHEREAS, said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Commission
and City Council, and
WHEREAS, the conditions for preliminary subdivision under Resolution #82-214 have
been met, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; and that
the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right; and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the request of James A. Evenson 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 PID #19-117-23 31 0032 is hereby
granted to permit division in the following described manner:
Parcel "A"-Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of vacated Mont-
gomery Place lying between the extensions across it of the
Southeasterly line of Lot 4, Block 9, and the Northwesterly line
of Lot 8, said Block 9, all in "Avalon", lying Easterly of a
line described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner
of said Lot 15; thence East along the South line of said Lots 15
and 16 a distance of 50 feet to the point of beginning of the
line being described; thence deflecting left 67°18' to the North-
easterly line of said vacated Montgomery Place, and there ending.
Parcel "B"-Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of vacated Mont-
gomery Place lying between the extensions across it of the South-
easterly line of Lot 4, Block 9, and the Northwesterly line of
Lot 8, said Block 9, all in "Avalon", EXCEPT that part thereof
lying Easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at
the Southwest corner of said Lot 15; thence East along the South
line of said Lots 15 and 16 a distance of 50 feet to the point of
beginning of the line being described; thence deflecting left
67o18' to the Northeasterly line of said vacated Montgomery Place,
and there ending.
It is determined that the foregoing division wilt constitute a desirable and
stable community development and is in harmony with adjacent properties.
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.
Form No. 28-M
QUIT CLAIM DEED
No delinquent taxes
and transfer entered;
Certificate of Real
Estate Value
( ) filed
( ) not required
Certificate of Real
Estate Value No.
,19
County Auditor
by
Deputy
STATE DEED TAX DUE
HEREON: $
Dated:
(reserved for recording data)
, 1983
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Virgil D. Lindholm and Donna E.
Lindholm, husband and wife, Ronald W. Smallwood, single,
James A. Evenson and Becky Evenson, his wife, Grantor(s),
hereby convey(s) and quitclaim(s) to City of Mound, Grantee.,
a Municipal Corporation under the laws of the State of
Minnesota, real property in Hennepin County, Minnesota,
described as follows:
"An easement for utility purposes over, under and across
the northeasterly 25.00 feet of vacated Montgomery Place
which lies between the extensions across it of the
Southeasterly line of Lot 4, Block 9 and the
Northwesterly line of Lot 8, said Block 9, all in Avalon
according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.'
together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging
thereto.
-1-
D~.~na D. Lindholm
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
~ day of ~ , 1983, by James A. Evenson and
Becky Evenson,his ~i£e, Grantor(s).
notarial stamp or seal
(or other title or rank)
signature of ~person
taking acknOwledgement
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The for, egoing instrumen~t ~,acknowledged before me this
~day of _ _~_ j 1983, by Ronald W.
Smallwood, sinEle, Gra~tor~).
notarial stamp or seal ~~
( o
~ <~-~. JL'RRY FIETROWSKI ~
~ ~'~ HENNEPIN COUNTY ~
~ ~ - taking acknowledgment
~ ' My Commission Expires Oct. 13, 1987 ~
-2-
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
~t day ofD~ L~ndh-~m{~~o ~ 1983, by Virgil D.
Lindholm and Donna lm, husband and wife,
Grantor(s).
no~,~rial stamp or"~J~'t~ ~
(~r~'ot. her.. title,~o.~~ t
~&s &~s~ru~en~ ~as CraCked by ~eed & Pon~~ ~~~
Blvd., P.O. Box 157, Mound, MN 55364~~'~u~nE~.N. IM
T'ax statement for the real property described in this
instrument should be sent to (Include name and address of
Grantee): City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
-3-
,224
August 3, 1982
Councilmember Swenson moved the following resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-214
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNI[~G COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION/
LOT-SPLIT - LOTS 15-22, BLOCK 10, A~ALON, AND ALL OF
VACATED MONTGOMER¥ ROAD
WHEREAS,
an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in
Section 22.00 'of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound,
and
WHEREAS,. said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning. Commission
and City Coupcil, and
WHEREAS,
it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
said property such that the strict application of the ordinance
would deprive the 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 granting the waiver will not
be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other
property' owners, and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this subdivision/lot split is to allow for the.
creation of two parcels of land with exi-sting structures on both
x~ sites, and
WHEREAS, both new parcels exceed the 10,OOO square foot lot area requi.rement
for the R-1 Zoning Dis. trict.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MN.:
A.i The request of James A. Evenson 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 PID #19-117-23 31 0032
is hereby granted preliminary approval to permit division of the
property in the following manner:
· PARCEL "A"- Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of
vacated Montgomery Place lying between the extensions
across it of the Southeasterly~li~ne of Lot 4, Block 9,
and the Northwesterly line of Lot 8, said Block 9, all
in "Avalon", lying Easterly of a line described as
follows; Commencing at the Southwest corner of said
Lot 15; thence East along the South line of said Lots
15 and 16 a distance of $O feet to the point of
beginning of the line being described; thence deflecting
left 67o18! to the Northeasterly line of said vacated
Montgomery Place, and there ending.
PARCEL "B" - Lots 15 through 22 inclusive, Block 10; and all of
vacated Montgomery Place lying between the extensions
across it of the Southeasterly line of Lot 4, Block 9,
and the Nothwesterly line of Lot 8, said Block 9, all
in "Avalon", EXCEPT that part thereof lying Easterly
Sketch ·
~ ~ James A. Evenso~
of Lots i5-22~ ~lock 10~ Avalon
Hennepin Co'~ty, Minnesota
/
.," 5::'
500'
· ~r,-, :.m s ed descri:iic, ns
.............. , ,~...-.,.. ~C~i~o~ ~
That ::,art of the :'c~,-~,.~-~,~, - ' .....o~,ty:
.... - ~-~ 72'inclusi';e, ~!~c~: lO and all of vecated ~t "'d~ :, Place tvir. g
bet'.;aey, the ext~:r-sior, s across it of the Southeasterly line o¢ ~t A, -~o .~ ~', and
~-,'~- Easterly or a Line des, rribed as ~'ollows: Cormenr!ng at the Southwest oo~er of
s'~~'~ ~t. 15; tkence E~st. azong the ~o~:, sago Lo-- 15 aha a di~t~nce of
~ -~' ~-'~: of t~e !in= being ':~''~k~' thor. ce de~leciin~
~et. t.o the count of .,~,L ....... ~ -.- - ....... ( ....... o; .... .
(-.7°!~' to th~ "ot"~'~s~"I'~ line of said vacatec ~,'ont~'c~e~~ Place ,~nf, there ending.
~ts i5 *~ .... ~ 22 inclusive, ?lock iC; and all of vacated Hcnt::c~ry Place
.... o~g,. ~ -~ ~, and the
eXv~,,S~C~o ~CTOGS 0
bet~:eer. ~e *~ ~ '~ it f tko Southeasterly line of Lot A~ :~=o.-. 9,
"~*~ ......+.~lv line of ~o~ f, sazc ~Iock 9, all in "Avalon" EXCE~ that ~.rt t~erecf
~ ,?~=.c~,~ "* the Southwest corner of
iy~nL ~3aster~' of a line d,:-scribe~ as .'~
sara Lc 15; *~" ..... ¢, :~n+ ~:~'~'- the S{:~itkl linc o~ s:,.id Lots 15 and 16 a distance cf 50
:e~::~ t.o tka ~Int cf lcginr~ing cf thc' line beiug descril, ei' t,~::c:e
GORDON R. COFFIN CO., INC.
SURVEYING' ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING
3025 WATERTOWN ROAO
LONG LAKE, MINN. 5S3S6
473-4141
~. James A. Evenson
2879 Tuxedo Blvd.
Mound, Minn.
Stake new dividing line in Lots 16,
17 and 20, Block 10, Avalon, on
8-29-83
Less adjustment'
9-3-83
$155.00
$120.00
CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIMATE NO. 09 PAGE
S38-?~k88
MOUNO, MN - T~EOO ROAD & THREE POINTS BLVO ~SA 1981
FINAL PAY ESTIMATE
INEER: McCOMBS---KNUTSON CONTRACTOR: HARDRIVES, INC.
IPSO0 HWT 55 ~00 HEMLOCK LANE
PLYMOUTH, MN MAPLE 0~, MN
-- CONTRACTOE PAY ESTIMA~ S~HARY --
01
THIS PEEIO0
WOEK COHPLETEO
TUXEDO BOULEVARO MSAP 145-101-06 0.00
THEEE POINTS BOULEVAEO MSAP 145-106-01 0.00
liAIEP, IALS ON SITE
TUXEDO BOULEVAPJ} MSAP 145-~01-0G 0.00
THREE POINTS BOULEVARD M~P 145-10G-01 0.00
. TO DATE
S~4,558. OB
504,757. ~
0.00
0.00
ADJUSTED TOIAL O. O0
LESS P, ETAINA~E - 1% PREVIOUS, 0% CURRENT -B,593.15
859,3LS. 43
0.00
TOTAL A,~O'JNT DUE FO;~ WOF(K COMPLETED TO DATE
LESS PEEVIOUS 'PAYMENIS
B, 593.15
-0. O0
859,315.43
850, 7B8.88
TOTAL AMOUNT DLE - 8,593.15
ESTIMATE NO.
8
4
5
7
8
DATE
OGF30181
07/3I/B1
OB/31/B1
0~/30/B1
_. 10/~1/B1
12./31/81
11/~0/8~
APPROVED:
ENGINEER: McCOMBS-WNUTSON
StNtMARY OF PREVIOUS ~AYMENT$
"AMOUNT
104,149.81
137,10~. 8~
804,175.~
113,809.3~
10~, 764.98
· ..' 180,155.21
45', 145. ?S .
16,411.98
8,593.15
TOTAL
104,149.81
841,859. ?0
445,435.09
559,844.48
669,009.4 0
789,164.61
834,310.3G
850, '788. ~8
APPROVED:
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472ol 155
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
September 2, 1983
City Councilmembers
City Manager
Enclosed is a request to reconvey to Hennepin
County, Lot 5, Block 12, Seton. This is a tax-forfeit
property that can now be considered for private sale
to the abutting property owners.
The easement questions raised by John Cameron appear
to be taken care of and thus, it is appropriate to
reconvey.
OF FORFEITED LANDS TO STATE OF
BY GOYER.N,M~ENTAL SUBDI¥ISIONS
~LIh~NES 0TA
WHEREAS, Pursuant to lfinnesota Statutes, Section 2B2.0!, Subdivision 1, the STATE
OF ~II.NNESOTA, as trustee under ~Iinnesota Statu~es, Section 281.28 conveyed to
~!~ OF MOL~D ,, a ~ove~mental subdivision, the lands herelnaft~
described, to be used !or an ~uthorhed public use,
WEER~RS, Saia ~overnment~I subdivlsion 'has failed to put such land ~o the ~ubli~ use
Ci tv of Mound now desires to reconvey smd l~nds t0 the ~tate of
' ~Iinnesota, as such trustee,
NOW, THEREFORE, This indenture, made ~h~s day of 19
between C ~ r~ o~ ~ou~d ~ governmental subdivision of the
State of Minnesota, as party of the first pafl,~and th~ 5~ate o~ ~innesota, a~ trustee as hm-einafter set fort~
a~ party of the second part,
WITNESS~H, That the ~aid ~a~y of the first part, in consideration of the premls~ and
other valuable considerations, the receip~ ~hereo/is hereby ac~owledged, does hereby Grant,
Quitclaim and ~econvey unio the said p~ty of the aecond part all the tract or ~arcel of. 1~ lying
heine in the County of . ~ennepl n .... ~n the State of ~innesota, described as follows,
PlO 'g1~-117-23 2~ 0039.- Lot'5, Block 12~' 5etom '.
EASEMENT T0 BE PLACED ON ABOVE:
A perpetual easement for utility purposes, over,-'under and across ~he following
described ~roperty: .Lot 5, Block I~, Seton- Said perpetual easement be.Jag the
east 15.00 feet and the fouth 10.00 feet of said Lot 5.
be e~ec~te~ ~ it~ co~p~te ~me ~y it~ Maymr
end,ts Cl tv Cl~rk . . ~'~' ~nd its corporate seal to be
hereunto a~xed tke day and 7ear first above ~tten.
In Presence of: ' CfTY OF'M'-N'uu u
Its Mayor
ItS City Clerk
County of Hennepin J '
On this ' day of ,19 , before me,
, Notary Rubl i.c within and for said county, personally appeared.
_~nb Pnl~tnn ' and ~r~n ~'~ar~'
to me personally known, who, beinll each by me du~y zxvom say that they are respectively
the . Mayor and the . C~tv CIerk ofthe
governmental subdivision named in the ~oregoing instrument, ~nd that the s~I a~xed ~o
smd instrument is the corporate seal of smd ~overnmentM subdivision, and that smd
instrument was sicned nnd sealed in bchM( of smd governmental subdivision by a,3~hori~ '
o~ {ts .., City Counci') ~d said .Msyor . . .
~nd City Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the Iree
act nnd deed of smd gove~mental subdivision.
THOMAS ~. UNDERWOOD, P. A.
JA~ES D. LARSON, ~ A.
LAW OFFICE:S
WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON ~ UNDERWOOD
I100 FIRST BANK PLACE WE:BT
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
July 15, 1983
TELEPHONE
Mr. Jon Elam
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Land Acquisition 1979 Streets
Dear Jon:
I am enclosing herewith copy of a letter from Walter J. Carlson
under date of July 11, 1983 which is all marked up with my notes.
I have gone to the tax forfeited land department and have conferred
with Sam and find the following. Lot 5, Block 12, Seton was held
by a letter from the City of Mound dated March 24, 1975. The lot
was later released for public sale by letter dated March 15, 1978.
For some reason the County never put it up for sale, but if it is
as I.suspect, a non-buildable lot or non-conforming lot, we should
immediately retract the action of a public sale and if we want it
sold, Mr. Carlson would like to purchase it and I wou--fd recommend
that it be done at a private sale.
Lot 17, Block 24 Seton has two separate conveyances to the City of
Mound, one dated January 23, 1976 which transfers part of the lot
to the City of Mound for street purposes and a second deed dated
April 4, 1980 which transfers the residue of the lot to the City of
Mound for wetlands. I am copying John Cameron on this letter so
that he can review theseparcels and I am presuming that Lot 17
probably has to be held by Mound, but if part of it can be released
Mr. Carlson would be interested in purchasing it. If the City wishes
to release it, it should do so under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 282.01
Subdivision 7A.
Jon, I am enclosing a copy of that law which was enacted by the
Legislature through efforts of the County and myself to protect
Mound. The 1982 Legislature adopted Chapter 523, Article 39,
Section 6, which incorporates these features and restricts the land
to abutting owners if they would create a nuisance or a zoning
problem for the City.
WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD
Mr. Jon Elam
Page 2
July 15, 1983
I am also enclosing a copy of my letter to Walter Carlson and of
the four items that we are trying to work out with him, I received
notice from John Cameron that I am to forget easements IP-855 and
IP-856. IP-871 and 872 should be ready for recording. IP-236
and 237 have been redrafted and I am sending those to Carlson today
for signature. Slowly we are making some progress. Will you please
advise me of your findings on Lot 5, Block 12 and Lot 17, Block 24,
Seton so that I can convey further information to Mr. Carlson.
Ver~ truly y~o~r
O~rtis A. Pearson
City Attorney
CAP:ms
Enclosure
cc: Mr. John Cameron
¥~. Walter Carlson
July 22, 1983
INC.
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 554~1
(612) 559-3700
~. Curtis A. Pearson
Wurst, Pearson, Hamilton
Larson &Underwood
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Subject: City of Mound
Land Acquisition
Dear Curt:
:
In. response to your letter of July 15th to Jon Elam, I'm enclosing a copy
from the Mound S~ver and Water Plans ~vhich show Lot 5, Block 12, Seton. As you
will note, this lot has a 6" ~termain running along the southerly lot line and
then within the lot itself, 8' feet east of the west lot line. I can only as-
sume this is why the City originally kept this lot. I have no idea if there
are recorded easenents for this watermain. I would recerrmend they irrmediately
retract this lot frcrnpublic sale. Once the easenent question is answered the
lot could be sold to an adjacent owner, but not at public sale because of its
size.
I will also try to fill you in on the other lot in question, Lot 17, Block
24, Seton. The City owns the following portion of this Lot: CcnTnencing at the
Northwest Corner of LOt 17 thence South 20 feet,. (hence Northeasterly to the
Northeast Corner thereof, thence West to t'he beginning. As far as street or
utiIities are concerned this portion is all the City requires.
According to the wetlands map, this lot is not included, but if you look at
it in the aerial photo it appears that the southerly portion is Iow. This
should be field verified if the City wishes to release the renainder of this
lot for sale to the adjacent property owner. The City also owns LOt 14, which
is just d~m the street to the east and is probably about the same situation.
If either you or Jon Elam have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATES, Inc.
JO: j
Jon Elam
John Caneron
DIST.
[£D[RAL FISC),L SH[[T TOTAL
8.~ ++
m 0 0
o :59 o+~
o 0~,'~-0
K-I.I
0
§ :57
:56
)RANT
~6'x6'T£E :5,5 =
~" O.V. -
~'~ PUUb ~
ON LO'F
0¢' lO
+
6" PLU~
6'~, 6'{ 6"
6" PL.. U'G
* '6" G .V.
L6 .:
95O
APPLICATION FOR
CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 3.2 BEER PERMIT
acditional day.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Name of Organization_ df4~I.~.~/,~,~ ..
Cbm~n C ,.
Address of Organization ;~V
Name of Person Applying for Permit ~A~, ~S~.A
Organization Title of Person Applying~fbr Permit
Dates Permit Will Be Used: From e/'l 19~] To ~/I.?.
Address at Which Permit will be used '~S~'~
Does the Organization Carry Liquor Liability insurance
If.answer to No. 7 is YES, please list:
Name of Insurance Company
Amount of Coverage
9. If this application to sell 3.2 Beer is on property owned by a public
agency other than the City of Mound, written notice from the pub!lc
agency giving permission for such sales must accompany this application.
(a) Is such written permission at~ached?
10. If this application is a request to sell 3.~ Beer on City property, the
City requires Liquor Liability I'nsurance with limits of $300,000,
~App ] i ~;~a n t
"Date
X oo ,
CITY OF MOUND
APPLICATION FOR BINGO PERMIT
Date ~-~ /7
Name of Applicant ~,%~6~'~t,~ -- .~r~d~ ' ~'/~I/ .~--//'~
· (If an organization, give organization name)
2. Address ~.~-~¥ ~ ~.~,*~
3. Bingo Manager (Name)
Address
Phone No..~7~-~.~ ~
Address of where Bingo will be played ~$-q~f '~;~~ I~/~1
o
Dates and Hours Bingo will be played
(Attach separate sheet if more room necessary)
Is License Fee attached?
Fidelity Bond: r
Yes__ N6X Amount
(a) Amount
'(b) Name of Bon~ing Company
* (Minimum $10,O00.) .
(c) Expirati'on Date of Bond
*Note:
Fraternal', religious, veteran and other non-profit
organizat'ion's may_request the Bond t~ be waive'd.
Please. indicate' below if you are making such a request.
Sign person m)aking applicat
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
Date: September 6, 1983
TO:
FROM:
RE:
City Council
City Manager
Revenue Sharing Proposed Use Hearing
NOTICE OF PROPOSED USE OF REVENUE SHARING FUNDS
This is to announce that the City Council of the
City of Mound will conduct a public hearing on October
4, 1983, at 7:30 PM at the Mound City Offices, 5341
Maywood Road to solicit proposed uses for the 1983-84
Federal Revenue Sharing Funds. Revenues of $45,000
are expected. Citizens interested in commenting on
this are urged to attend this meeting.
After the proposed use hear.ing ha.s been held, a budget
hearing then has to be held at a later date before
enactment of the 1984 budget.
BETWEEN
CROMER MANAGEMENT; INC~
AND
CITY OF MOUND
e
e
This agreement is for the period July 1, 1983 to June 30, 1984. In this agreement
the term EMPLOYER refers to City of Mound and CMI refers to Cromer
Management, Inc.
SERVICES. Metropolitan Clinic of Counseling (MCC), an affiliated company of
Cromer Management, Inc., has agreed to provide diagnostic services (problem
assessment and initial counseling) and referral services (motivational counseling,
referral to competent care and follow-up) to all employees of the EMPLOYER, to
the employee's dependents and household members.
SERVICE AVAILABILITY. Diagnostic and referral services will be available from
any of Metropolitan Clinic of Counseling's four office locations in the
Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. Emergency and after-hours calls will be
responded to by a professional staff member on a 24-hour daily basis.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES. CMI agrees to provide for all eligible employees an
individual orientation brochure explaining the services. CMI agrees to
periodically provide to the EMPLOYER brochures aimed at maintaining employee
awareness. CMI agrees to periodically provide to the EMPLOYER a statistical
report regarding utilization of the services.
EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES. To assure adequate acceptability and utilization
of these diagnostic and referral services, the EMPLOYER agrees to participate in
program exposure and employee education of the services available. Mailings to
employees shall be the expense of the EMPLOYER. The EMPLOYER agrees to
provide a list of names of employees covered under this program, said list shall be
updated quarterly. The EMPLOYER agrees to provide CMI with a copy of its
current hospitalization and health insurance policies which are relevant.
FEE. The base retainer fee for the agreement period is $490. The base retainer
fee is based upon the per employee rate of $14.00 for 35 employees.
Pro-rata adjustments in the retainer fee will be computed quarterly when
deviations greater than five percent (5%) occur in the employee count upon which
the base retainer fee was established.
The retainer fee will be payable within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice
from CMI.
~ROMER MANAGEMENT, INC.
DATE
CITY OF MOUND
-- Cromer Management, Inc.
DATE
BILLS ...... SEPTEMBER 6, 1983
Air Comm
All Star Electric
Auto Con Industr. ies
Acro-MN
Holly Bostrom
Burlington Northern
Bury & Carlson
Bradley Exterminating
Jan Bertrand
Crown Rubber Stamp
Craftsman Industries
Dependable Services
Dixco Engraving
Dytec, Inc.
Flexible Pipe Tool Co.
Gerrys Plumbing
Henn Co. Treas.
Hawkins Chemical
Henn Co. Sheriff
Hayden-Murphy Equip
J.B. Distributing
Johnson Paper
Jones .Chemical
Robert Johnson
Island Park Skelly
Inland Associates
Lowell$ Auto Parts
Lakeland Envelope
MacQueen Equip
Minnesota Playground
City o.f Mound
Metro Fone Communications
Maple Plain Diesel
N.S.P.
No. Central Section-AWWA
Popham Haik
Pitney Bowes Credit
Precision Striping
Reo Raj Kennels
Shepherds Rental Rugs
Sterne Electric
S.O.S. Printing
Stern-Lev ine-Schwartz
Francis Salden
Specialty Screening
Terry' s Plumbing
Thrifty Snyder Drug
Thurk Bros. Chev
Tri State Drilling
Tri Med Surgical Co.
218.20
1,427.16
877.28
271.33
.272.O0
533.33
179.20
38 O0
24 52
38 94
47 O0
/~3 O0
2 25
687 OO
392 43
26 O0
2,144 OO
698.54
33.66
2O. 5O
91.32
219.35
184.80
41.36
479.83
1,925. OO
107.15
34O.24
67.37
1,392.20
29. O0
23.60
47.01
614.54
6O. O0
1,7O5.71
26. O0
416.10
201. O0
53.OO
37.00
309.20
4,363~-I 6
2O.5O
232.00
5.16
3.75
30.56
513.08
224.30'
United Business Machines
Water Products Inc.
Widmer Bros.
Westonka Sanitation
Bruce Wold
R.L. Youngdahl
Ziegler, Inc.
Commissioner of Employee
Commissioner of Revenue
Griggs, Cooper
I.C.B.O.
Johnson Bros. Liq
Mound Postmaster
Mound Postmaster
Metro Waste Control
MN Academy Prosecution
Old Peoria
Ed Phillips & Co
TOTAL BILLS
297.00
344.64
1,001.00
100.O0
17.00
5,723.00
16!.92
Reltn 28 49
7,339 56
3,246 17
195.O0
2,638 08
101 04
7OO Oo
26,126 47
160 OO
714 15
3,694.74
74,325.89
CiTY OF HOUND
SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE
LOAN PROGRAM
MAY 1983
BACKGROUND
In the Spring of 1981, the Mound City Council appointed a Downtown
Advisory Committee to begin the process of studying the revitalization
of the downtown commercial areas of the City.
Initially this started with a study of shopping habits and an
inventory, of the existing commercial services. The second step included
a detailed design guide for Downtown. The City Council adopted this plan
in early 1982, although final funding and implementation has yet to be
decided.
An additional focus that came from the two efforts was the need to develop
some creative financing to encourage existing businesses to begin the process
of reinvesting in their commercial properties. Using Housing an~ Community
Development Funds (HUD), two separate programs were initiated.
The first was a Design Grant Program, whose purpose was to take the
Downtown Design Study to its next step and apply it to specific buildings.
By using a 50% Grant up to a maximum of $750.00, the Committee felt that
people would work with professional designers, where they otherwise might
not, thus giving Mound a more professional and coordinated appearance.
The second program was an Interest Assistance Program for the store
front rehabilitation efforts. This focuses on reducing the interest rate
charged by local banks from the going rates (14 - 16%) to a more manageable
level of 8 - 9%.
A's of May 1, 1983, these two efforts have achieved some success. Four
businesses have participated in the Design Grant Program and two have received
Store Front Rehabilitation Gran~s. Public costs for these efforts have amounted
to approximately $13,000 and private investment has exceeded $180,000, a leverage
ratio of better than 15:1.
Although these efforts are up and operating, gaps still remain in the effort
of the City to develop a comprehensive plan of capital financing assistance in
commercial areas. To further add to the available resources the following small
business loan program is proposed.
CONCEPT
As a second phase of our Downtown Commercial Rehabilitation efforts,
we now are proposing to establish a revolving loan fund from which high risk,
front-end financing and technical assistance could be available. The goal of
the program would be the improvement of the commercial areas of Mound, improved
job opportunities for city residents and leverage of private investment that
otherwise would not occur. This will address the lack of small, lo~er~interest,
longer term loans available to the small business owner (particularly the
tenant business or Contract for Deed purchaser) for real estate improvements
and fixed equ.ipment.
Reductions in the availability of public funds for these purposes (SBA, etc.)
are likely to widen the gaps in the future. Extension of the public/private
partnership created in the City in early 1982 in its downtown interest reduction
program, will offer the opportunity to.continue and improYe the capability to
meet such needs.
This new concept suggests a partnership be established by the City of
Mound to fund a $200,000 Small Loan Program to assist downtwon business so they
can improve their markets and service and retain or expand job opportunities.
The Program as proposed will provide $100,000 from City CDBG Funds and
$100,000 from area banks. The City's fund will .be the source of longer term
loans of up to $25,000 for a minimum of 15 years at 2% interest. This will be
matched by equal loan amounts from area banks at going interest rates to provide
a total loan up to $50,000 at a melded interest rate of about 8 - 9%, currently.
This pilot program is projected to operate for a two year period at which
time it will be evaluated.
The Program objectives will include the following:
1. Be limited to or give high priority to the provision of loans and
technical assistance to small business for real estate purposes:
2. Be responsive to identified small business needs.
3. Be targeted to the central business district as determined by the
Downtown Advisory Committee.
4. Service existing small retail, service or commercial businesses,
or start up businesses that would use undeveloped land and vacant
or underutilitzed buildings and retain or create new job opportunities.
-2-
5. Be Coordinated with existing and proposed small business assistance
programs available.
6. Serve as a catalyst to leverage additional public and private resources
and actions.
7. Be operated on a revolving fund concept.
8. Be established on a two year pilot program basis.
These objectives will address a number of gaps in service to the smaller
retailer and services business. These include:
- Current financial assistance tends to favor the larger business
with a good track record and the new business that have high
poten.tial for growth and job creation.
- Shortage of revenue bond financing which is too costly for the small
business that requires under $50,000.
- Contract for Deed and tenant businesses are often unable to finance
improvements.
- A small flexible longer and lower cost loan is needed to compliment
the present City Commercial Storefront Rehabilitation Loan Program.
- The smaller retailer does not have time to devote to planning physical
improvements fo~ his place of business...or joint efforts with others.
- Technical assistance in management and marketing is often needed but
operator is not aware of the need, the resources available or the
potential benefits.
Eligible improvements may include, facade or other exterior improvements
including parking, interior improvemtns and fixed equipment and production
equipment that results in new business or new jobs.
Administration of the Program will be conducted by the City of Mound under
the guidance of policies set by the Downtown Advisory Committee and the City
Council.
The City of Mound will be responsible for:
- ]~dentifying the~area 'to be served.
- Improvements to be funded.
- City requirement or ordinances requiring compliance.
- Determining individual applications eligibility based on above factors.
The City of Mound will be responsible for information and advice as to:
- Any special design criteria established by the Downtown Advisory
Committee.
-3-
- Proposed public improvements to be made by the City(street paving,
parking, lighting, street furniture, etc.)
- Distribution of Program information to area businesses.
- Referral of applicants to local banks.
- Participation Agreements with local banks.
Local Banks will be responsible for:
- Receipt and processing of applications.
- Provision of matching loan funds at least equial to funds to
be provided from the City's Revolving Loan fund.
D~termining applicants credit risk and required collateral.
Determining loan amortization period.
Approval or disapproval of loan, subject to City Certification
as to Program eligibility.
- Collection of lien waivers, and other documents deemed necessary
for loan disbursements.
- Distribution of loan funds subject to final approval of the City
of Mound.
- Distribution of principal and interest payments to the City of
Mound Small Business Revolving Loan Fund. On default, the claims
of the City of Mound are subordinate to the bank's.
ADMINISTRATION FEES
A processing fee of $250.00 will be charged each loan
applicant. This fee will cover the time of City Employees in reviewing
and determining the eligibility of the application to be in conformance
with Program and City rules and regulations.
-5-
GOALS
- The committment of from five to seven new commercial loans
between July 1, 1983 to December 31, 1984.
- Leverage the $100,000 initial loan fund into $400,000 of
private investment. A ratio of at least 4:1.
- The creation of at least ten new permanent jobs with goals of
twenty new jobs by December 31, 1985.
-6-
PROGRAM EVALUATION
Evaluation will be made in terms of original Program Goals
outlined earlier in the proposal. These will include:
- The improvement in appearnce, structural condition and
operational efficiency of commercial buildings in the City.
- Improvement of business market and service to the Community.
- Retention and creation of jobs.
- Leveraging action program in dollars of additional improvements
and impact on adjoining commercial or residential areas.
- Effectiveness of Revolving Fund to fund as a vehicle to
prov~ide continuing support to small business.
-7-
APPENDIX
CITY OF MOUND
REVOLVING LOAN FUND GUIDELINES
PURPOSE OF FUND
To extend the capability to provide financial and technical assistance
to community retail, service and commercial businesses through joint
private section/public action.
To establish a City Iow interest, longer term loan program to provide:
- capability and incentive for owners and tenants to upgrade the
appearance, structural condition and operating efficiency of
their place of business.
- improvement of their market and service of their business to the
community.
- retention and expansion of job opportunities.
II.
PARTICIPATION AND FINANCING
The City of Mound Small Business Revolving Loan Fund is established and
will operate as a public/private sector partnership.
The fund will provide $200,000 Community Small Business Loan Funds avail-.
able to City businesses over a one and one half year period.
The fund will provide one-half of each small business, loan up to a
maximum of $25,000 at an interest rate of 2%.
Matching funds of at least $100,000 will be provided at current interest
rates by local banks.
Administration will be shared by the City and participating local banks.
~ The City has established these guidelines and will monitor
operations of the Program.
~ The City of Mound is the general administrator of the Program.
- Local banks will execute participation agreements with the City
to carry out their participation in accord with these guidelines.
-8-
Ill.
LOAN TERMS AND CONDITIONS
NSBRLF/BANK Participation
The City of Mound and a participating bank will share in a loan on
a matching basis. For example, the City Loan Fund and a bank will
each provide $25,000 for a $50,000 loan.
Maximum Loan
The City Loan Fund will participate in a loan up to a maximum of
$25,000. A bank may increase its portion over $25,000.
Interest Rates
Cit~y Loan Funds are amde at a fixed rate of 2%. The funds loaned
from the City Loan Fund are subordinant to funds provided by the
bank.
The effective annual rate to the borrower will be approximately one-
half the customary rates offered for direct loans from private financial
institutions. An example is shown below:
CITY LOAN FUND EXAMPLE
City Loan Fund Loan
Bank Loan
Total
Cost:
$25,000 at 2%
$25,000 at 14%
$50,000 at 8%
5 years = $1,O13.82/mont'h
10 years = $606.64/month
15 years = $477.83/month
Term
The term of the loan shall be a minimum of 15 years, maximum of
20 years. The bank shall make the determination for an appropriate
term relating to the applicantls ability to pay.
-9-
IV.
Coll~ateral Required
The bank shall have the sole responsibility of determining the applicant's
credit risk.
The bank shall have senior lien on any collateral required.
The City Loan Fund shall have identical collateral but subordinated to the
bank.
The bank shall file for the City Loan Fund any liens required on collateral.
Loan Disbursements
Payments 'to consultants and/or contractors shall be made by the bank, but
not before written approval from the City is provided. Loan disbursements
will be limited to three (3) in total; two partial payments plus one final
payment (minimum of 10% of total lban) when all work is completed and
inspected.
Lien Waivers
The bank will collect lien waivers and/or other documentation as deemed
necessary by the bank.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Areas
All loans will be within the Central Business District boundaries or other
development areas as established by the City. (See Attachment 1.)
Applicants
An applicant's place of business must be located in one of the areas defined
above.
The applicant may be: individual owners, partnerships, corporations,.tenant
operators or Contract for Deed purchasers~
An applicant must have the ability to repay the loan and be an acceptable
credit risk as determined by a bank.
-I1-
An applicant's property must be a conforming use under the City's
Zoning Ordinance.'
Upon completion of improvements, the applicant's property must comply
with all applicable code, permit and license requirements and must have
a current certificate of occupancy.
Improvements
1. Exterior Improvement Loan
Under this type of loan an applicant may improve the exterior appearance
of the building and property and will not be required to do any interior
improvements if the applicant provides a valid Certificate of Occupancy.
Where design standards have been established for the area in which the
loan is to be made, review and approval of the business o~ community
organization responsible will be obtained by the City of Mound.
The following are eligible expenditures:
- All work on the front and sides of business buildings facing public
streets.
- Cleaning, painting and staining of exterior surfaces.
- Masonry repairs.
~ Repairing or replacing of cornices, entrances, doors, windows,
decorative details and awnings.
- Sign removal, repairing or replacement.
- Architectural design services for plans and specifications.
- Parking lots, including lighting, surfacing and ~andscaping.
- Building identification.
- .Other items that are viewed necessary to compliment exterior.
- Building permits.
- Energy Audits.
- Roofing.
- Energy conservation.
- Handicap access.
-12-
2. .Exterior-Interior Improvement Loan
Upon upgrading the exterior appearance and the correction of all health
and safety code deficiencies (as recorded by City inspection) an
applicant may include other fixed interior improvements among his work.
In addition to the eligible expenditures listed previously under the
exterior improvement loan, the following additional expenditures are
eligible:
- Almost all fixed improvements including the repair and/or decoration
of walls, ceilings, floors, lighting, windows, doors, entrances,
electrical, plumbing, mechanical, air conditioning, architectural
change, energy improvements, etc.
- Professional fees in conjunction with the completion of a project may
be paid for reasonable engineering, architectural and other related
service fees necessary to plan, estimate costs, etc.
3. Production Equipment Loan
If the applicant has a valid Certificate of Occupancy, loan funds may be
borrowed for the purchase of production equipment. The purchase of
equipment should contribute to new job opportunities or business
investment. Replacement of equipment will not be considered an eligible
purchase unless the applicant can demonstrate increased job opportunities
resulting from the purchase of the equipment.
Ineligible Costs
The following costs are ineligible:
- Refinancing of existing debts.
- Non-fixed improvements.
- Working capital.
- Inventory.
- Sweat Equity (PaYment for the applicant's own labor and performance
for construction or improvements.
-13-
Improvements 'Completed Prior tO Loan ~losin~
Such improvements are not eligible unless the applicant's structure requires
immediate attention'(hazardous code deficiencies, etc.), and the following
steps are taken:
- Applicant must fill out a loan application with the bank.
- App!icant must submit a written request to the bank describing the need.
- Applicant must receive written permission from both the City and the bank.
- Work is performed under provisions of the Federal Davis-Bacon Act.
- If the above conditions have been met, the applicant may proceed using
his own fuhds or interim financing from a bank. However, this. is done
at the applicant's and/or bank"s own risk until the total scope of work
..
has been approved by the City and the loan has been closed.
CONTRACTING AND CONSTRUCTION
All applicants shall provide the bank and the City with information on Form 1
"Loan Application"detailing applicant's interest rega'rding rehabilitation
building, giving permission for code inspec'tion and any other requested
supplements necessary to achieve the approval of the project..
A document (Scope of Work) must be submi'tted to the City and the ba~k
detailing the work to be performed, estimated cost, specifically detailing
how the code work (when interior work is p~rt of the proposal) is to be
satisfied and any other documentation necessary to achieve City approval
of the project. The Scope of Work will be reviewed by the City, for
inclusion of the Davis-Bacon.requirements prior to the owner taking bids
on the woFk. It is required that the owner obtain two written bids 'for
the work.
Contractors and all sub-contractors must comply with all regulations of the
Davis-Bacon Act. A 10% retainage will be held in escrow until the
-13-
contractor demonstrates compliance with the Davis-Bacon requirements.
The quality and progress of the work is to be monitored throughout the term
of the.contract by.the loan recipient, general contractor and the City.
Payment requests'.(e[ther partial or final) cannot be made to the'
contractor until' a written.request for payment is made and th~ loan
recipient and th~ Ci.ty have accepted the eligible improvemen.~s~in writing.
If the contractor requests periodic draws on completed work,-the draws
shall be limited in amounts equal to the value of materials furnished
and/or services performed at.the time of request. Number. of payments
will b~ limit'ed-to three (3) including final payment. All payments are
subject to a final 10~ holdback. The holdb~ck may be used to correct
unsatisfactory work, or'to.defray~costs to obtain a replacement contractor
'and/or to.complete ~he p.roject.
All.work is to be covered by the normal required~permits'and approvals
~f affect~d agencies.
All work must be inspected by the City Inspector to insure conformance
· with code and must be'verified for proper completion by City staff t6
insu're.c~mpliance wi'th Speci. fication~ prior to final.payment. The final
inspection cannot be scheduled'until all permits taken out hav~ been
signed of~ by field inspectors.
All eligib~le'improvement work performed pursuant to approved City Loan
Fund loan must provid~ a 12-month warranty from the date of accepted
completion by the loan recipient and.the City. This warranty must cover
the quality of materials used and workmanship in performing, the work.
This warrant~ is the responsibility of the recipient.
-14-
FORM 1 "LOAN APPLICATION FORM"
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Applicant's Name
Home Address
Name of Business
Business Address
Type of Business (describe)
Home Phone
Business Phone
II.
Number of Years Operating at Present Business Address
Years
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Owner of Property (name) Phone
(Address)
Does the Business Occupy the Total Building? ( ) YES ( ) NO
If you Answered No to the Above, What Percentage Does it Occupy and What
Occupies the Balance of Space? %
Ill.
IV.
REHABILITATION PROPOSED OVER AND ABOVE ALL CODE WORK
Briefly describe the following work proposed.
Exteri or
Interior
Production Equipment
Site
Residential (Including No. of Units)
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON IMPROVEMENTS
-16-
VI.
BUILDING INSPECTION (If Applicable)
Building/business owner grants permission for the City Inspector
Signature of Owner
REMARKS:
Type of Loan (Circle #)
(1) EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENT
(2)
(3)
(4)
Date
EXTERIOR - INTERIOR IMPROVEMENT
EXTERIOR - INTERIOR, COMMERCIAL - RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENT
EXTERIOR - INTERIOR - PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT
Use reverse side for additional information.
BANK INFORMATION
Name
Loan Officer
Applicant's Signature
Date
RETURN TO:
CITY OF MOUND
c/o CITY MANAGER
5341MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
-17-
" ~ORM 2 "PROGRAM.GUIDELINES SIGN-OFF"
I, the.undersigned, have r'ead and. understood the documents dated,
19 , entitled "City of Mound Revolving Loan Fund Guidelines"., and accept the
terms and cohditions therein.
I further understand that' any inspection made by the City of Mound under this
program.is for purposes of determinin, g the ~app~icant'.s eliglbillty Under this
program.and it is not intended to represent or warrant the condition of the
premises.
I further u'nderstand that ~aking application in no.way insures approval of my
loan or guarantees 'funding.
I understand that "approval'.' means specific, written approval from both the City
and my bank.
! understand any work performed'prior to specific written approval from both the
· bank. and·the City will be consldered.inel~gible'unless~otherwise waived in
writing by the City.a~d the bank'ac6ording to.the ~ui~elines~
Payments on the entire City Small. Business Revolving Loan Fund portion start
30 days from issuance of. City check to Bank.
Signature Date
-17-
Date
FORM 3 "CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION"
Amount of Participation
In Indebtedness of
(Name of Debtor)
, Debtor
(Name of Issuing Bank)
(herein called "BankTM) hereby
certifies that the City of Mound (herein called "Participants") has a partici-
pation through said participants City Small Business Revolving Loan Fund from
the date hereof in the amount of
Dollars in an indebtedness of
bearing interest at the rate of
Dollars
percent per annum, owning to Bank by
Debtor above named, evidenced by Note, dated due
(starting)
and all mortgage or other security therefore
and all guaranty or other instruments, if any, given in connection therewith.
For participating in this indebtedness for the amount above stated,
the Bank shall pay interest to Participants' (City of Mound) at the rate of
two percent (2%) per annum.
The granting of this participation shall not limit or affect the Bank's
descretion in exercising or refraining from exercising, without notice to Parti-
cipants, any and all rights afforded to Bank by any promissory note evidencing
the indebtedness or any security instruments and other documents relating thereto
or which Bank may have as a matter of law. Bank may, at its sole discretion, with-
out notice of responsibility to Participant, exercise or refrain from exercising
any such right, give or withhold consents or approvals,, or take or omit to take
any action pursuant to said documents. It may permit substitutions of security
with or without reductions in the loan. In doing any or all othe foregoing, Bank
-19-
will exercise the same care that it exercises in the making and handling of loans
for its own account but it has not further liability or responsibility.
Prior to an event of default and after an event of default has been
cured by Debtor, interest payments received by the Bank shall be paid to Partici-
pant City Loan Fund as set forth above and principal payments received by the
Bank will be distributed.between the Bank and the City Loan Fund pro rata.
Following an event of default by Debtor, all net amounts received b'y the Bank
in payment either of principal or interest on said indebtedness or any part
thereof, and all amounts received from or on account or said security or guaranty
or other ag[eements or by right of offset or counter-claim after deducting all
expenses and costs incurred in connection with such collection, 'including
reasonable attorney's fees, will bedistributed first to the Bank ~nd then to the
City of Mound Small Business Revolving Loan Fund. Bank reserves the right, how-
ever at its election to apply, in full or partial payment of this or any other
participation, any monies received by which it might otherwise be allocated to
the payment of its own portion of the indebtedness.
In doing any or all of the foregoing, the Bank will exercise the same
care that it exercised in the making and handling of loans for its own account,
but it has no further liability or responsibility. In the absence of fraud or
other wrongful act on the part of Bank or its officers, employees or other agents,
Bank shall not be liable for the genuineness, validity, sufficiency, or
enforceability of any instrument evidencing the indebtedness or the security
therefore.
_By
Issuing Bank
An Authorized Official
-20-
300 Met. Fo Square Bldg., St. Paul, MN $$101 -
l~. /~,~..
General Office Telephone (612) 291~359 ~ .,,..,..~. -
A Metropolitan Council Bulletin for Communi~ Leade CITY OF MOUND
For more information on items in this-PZ~bticcrtion, call
August 12, 1983
RECENT COUNCIL ACTIONS (August 1-12)
Transportation-The Metropolitan Council approved the
· Metropolitan Transit Commission's (MTC) 1982 Transit
Development Program but asked that changes be made in the
next development program scheduled to be submitted in 1984.
The Council asked the MTC to include in its 1g~4 develop-
ment program: the MTC's general goals and policies (in addi-
tion to federal, state and Council goals and policies); a more
detailed service plan; and a more regular schedule for replacing
and rehabilitating buses, The law requires the MTC to submit
a transit development program to the Council every two years.
Health-A plan to curb escalating health care costs by
stimulating price competition for patients in the Twin Cities
Area was adopted by the Council.
The plan contains 39 recommendations for increasing
competition, While keeping enough regulations to ensure that
everyone can still get basic.medical care. It says infor-
mation on the prices and the quality of care should be
publicized, For a copy of the plan, Prescription
for Change: Ba/ancing Comped~ive, Community and Regula-
tory Forces in Twin Cities Health Care, pub. no. 1843-074,
call 291-6464.
Sewers-The Council approved a budget amendment
requested by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission to
increase funds authorized to extend regional sewer service to
Mendota from $194,000 to $400,000.
Housing--The Council recommended the following housing
project applications for federal Department of Housing and
Urban Development loans to build new or rehabilitated
housing fo~' older persons and persons who are blind. The
applications are ranked in priority as follows: Lakeville Project,
Laker(lie; Northwest Area Housing, Maple Plain; Gideoq Pond,
Bloomington; Housing for the Blind, Minneapolis; Moore
View, Fridley; Shepherd Arms Apartments, Anoka; Crest View
Residence, Columbia Heights; and Greenwich Court, Blaine.
5341 MAYWOOD ~LV~
MOUND ~N 55364
The Metropolitan Council appointed Ronald Jerici% Anoka,
to the Task Force on Metropolitan Area Cable Communica-
tions Interconnection. Jerich is self-employed.
COUNCIL SETS PUBLIC MEETINGS
ON ECONOMIC POLICIES
The Metropolitan Council has scheduled two public meet-
ing3 to hear comments on proposed economic development
policie~ aimed at fostering a strong regional economy.
The policies would provide a policy base to finance programs
for economic development, such as selling industrial revenue
bonds on behalf of smaller communities in the Region and
setting up a program throu9h the federal Small Business
Administration for long-term real estate loans to small
businesses. The policies are scheduled to be adppt, e_d by the
Council in early 1984.
The meetings will be:
-- Aug. 29, 7 p.m., Fairview Community Center, 1910 W.
County Rd. B., Roseville.
- Aug. 30,.7 p.m., Normandale Community College
Auditorium (Fine Arts entrance), 9700 France Ay. S., -"
Bloomington.
To obtain a copy of a discussion paper, "Draft DiscussiOn
Statement on Metropolitan Development Framework: Pro-
posed Interim Economic Policies," pub. no. (32-83-094, at no
charge, call the Council's Communications Department at
291-6464.
If you'd like to speak at a public meeting, call Shirlee
Smith, Communications, .at 291-6421. Address questions
about the proposed policies to Council planner William
Byers, at 291-6322.
COUNCIL SETS PUBLIC MEETING ON
CREDIT RIVER TWP. LANDFILL SITE
Funding is available for only a limited number of projects. The Metropolitan Council will hold a public meeting at
The Council said an amendment to Biaine's housing rev. en_ue -. .7 .P'm' Sept. 14 to hear comments on the possible inclusion of
bond plan allowing the city to issue $7.4 million in bonds to a proposed Credit River Twp. solid waste landfill site in Scott
finance four multifamily rental developments is consistent
with regional housing guidelines. The developments are named
CreeksJde, Fair Oaks, Park Villa and Pioneer Village.
Budget-The Council set a public hearing on its proposed
1984 budget of $10.9 million for Sept. 12. See related item
below,
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Metropolitan Health Planning Board-Aug; 24, 5 p.m.,
Council Chambers. Request by Careview Home, Inc., 5517
Lyndale Ay. S., Minneapolis, to build a five-level structure
adiacent to an existing 150-bed nursing home at a capital
cost of S1.9 million.
County's inventory. The meeting will be held at Orchard Lake
Elementary School, 16531 W. Klamath Trail, Lakeville.
Citizens will be allowed to suggest additional landfill sites,
The state Waste Management Act requires Scott County
to have four solid waste landfill sites in its inventory. The
Council has approved three Scott County sites, Because the
county has not submitted additional sites, the law requires the
Council to complete the county's inventory. The proposed
Credit River Twp. site has already been found intrinsically
suitable by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
For more information or a copy of the Council's pre-
liminary evaluation of the proposed site, call Council
planner Carl Michaud at 291-6579.
HEARING SET ON COUNCIL'S PROPOSED 1984 BUDGET
The Metropolitan Council has set a public hearing on its
proposed 1984 budget of $10.9 million for 5 p.m. Sept. 12,
in the Metropolitan Council chambers. The 1984 budget is
scheduled to be adopted Sept. 22.
Priorities in the proposed work program include revising
the Council's Development Framework and key regional plans
dealing with housing, health systems, aviation, solid waste,
and parks and open space.
Federal revenues a~ount for 30 percent of the draf~ 1984
budget. The local revenue share is 66 percent and the state
revenue share is 4 percent. The draft budget also calls for in-
creasing the number of Council employees from 211 to 217.
For more information or a free copy of the document,
Metropolitan Council Proposed 1984 Work Program and
Budget Draft for Public Hearing, pub. no. 23-83-073, call the
Communications Department at 291-6464.
MINNESOTA JAM ARTS MARATHON IS SEPT. 18
Jugglers, singers, dancers,' weavers, actors and others will
perform at the second annual Minnesota Jam to Preserve the
Arts noon-8 p.m. Sept. 18, at the Minneapolis Convention
Center.
About 70 organizations will take part in the jam, designed
to help nonprofit art groups increase their visibility, audiences
and supporters, and raise money from individual contributors.
Participating artists solicit pledges and then earn the money
by performing continuously at the event.
The jam is produced by the St. Paul-Ramsay United Arts
Council and the Metropolitan Council Regional Arts Council.
Admission is S4 for adults, $2 for senior citizens and those
aged 14 and under. Tickets will be sold at the door.
PUBLIC MEETING ON AVAILABILITY OF SAND,
GRAVEL AND CRUSHED ROCK SET
The Metropolitan Council will hold a public meeting at
7:30 p.m. Sept. 20 in the Council chambers, to hear comments
on a study that examines the future availability of aggregate
resources--sand, gravel and crushed rock--in the Twin Cities
Area.
The study, Twin C/tie~ Metropolitan Area Aggregate
Resources, was prepared by the M{nnesota Geological Survey
under direction of the Council's environmental planning ~taff.
The s"~udy says the Area has a lO0-year potential supply of
aggregate, essential in most construction projects. However,
one-third of the reserves has been covered by other land uses
and is not available. It says regional coordination is needed to
protect long-term supplies.
For more information on the meeting, or a copy of the
study (pub. no. 10-83-019; 109 pp.; $7), call the Council's
Communications Department at 291-6464.
SMALL CITIES GRANT PROGRAM WORKSHOP
The Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department
of Energy and Economic Development will cosponsor a small
cities development grant workshop Sept. 8, from 9:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. The workshop will be held at the Ramada Inn
St. Paul, 1870 Old Hudson Rd. From Interstate Hwy. 94 eas~
of St. Paul, take the White Bear Ay. exit. Lunch and beverage
breaks will be provided.
Registration is $5 and is required by Sept. 1. Send to:
Michael Auger, Department of Energy and Economic Devel- '
opment, 100 Hanover Bldg., St. Paul, Minn. 55101. For more
information, call Auger at 296-2394.
PLANNERS' FORUM SET FOR SEPT. 13
New population and household forecasts and their implica-
tions for the Region will be the. topic of a Planners' Forum
from 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. Sept. 13 in the Metropolitan Council
chambers. The forum, designed for local planners, will be
sponsored by the Council's Planning Assistance Department.
For more information, call Jim U~ley at 291-6361.
NEW PUBLICATIONS
Metropolitan Council Publications D/rectory. July 1983.
Lists 275 current plans, reports, maps and audiovisuals avail-
able to the public. No. 08-83-023; 10 pp.; free.
Recycle it/A Directory of Recycling Caterer= in the Twin
Cities Area. No. 08-83-082A; 4 pp.; free.
COMING MEETINGS (Aug. 22-Sept. 2)
(information be/ow i$ tentative. To verify, ca//291~454.J
Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission-Monday,
Aug. 22, 3 p.m., Council Chambers.
Special Committee on Economic Development-Monday,
Aug. 22, 3 p.m., Conference Room E.
Task Force on Metropolitan Area Cable Communications
lnterconnection--Monday, Aug. 22, 4 p.m., Conference
Room A. ·
Program D.e. veloprr{ent and Review Committee--Monday,
Aug. 22, 5 p.m., Conference Room E.
Management Committee-Tuesday, Aug. 23, 1 p.m.,
Conference Room E.
Special Committee on Resource Management--Tuesday,
Aug. 23, 3 p.m., Conference Room E.
Commit"tee on Metropolitan Commissions-Wednesday,
Aug. 24, 3 p~n., Conference Room E.
Metropolitan Health Planning Board--Wednesday, Aug. 24,
4 p.m., Council Chambers.
Metropolitan and Community Development Committee--
Wednesday, Aug. 24, 6:30 p.m., Conference Room E.
Metropolitan Ridesharing board-Thursday, Aug. 25,
9 a.m., Council Chambers.
Metropolitan Council--Thursday, Aug. 25, 4 p.m., Council
Chambers.
Advisory Committee on Aging--Friday, Aug. 26, 9 a~n.,-
Council Chambers.
Special Committee on Economic Development--Monday,
Aug. 29, 3 p~n., Conference Room E.
Program Development and Review Committee-Monday,
Aug. 29, 5:30 p.m., Conference Room E.
Management Committee-Tuesday, Aug. 30, 1 p.m.,
Conference Room E.
Special Committee on Resource Management-Tuesday,
Aug. 30, 3 p.m., Conference Room E.
Committee on Metropolitan Commissions-Wednesday,
Aug. 31,3 p.m., Conference Room E.
Metropolitan and Community Development Committee-
Wednesday, Aug. 31,6:30 p.m., Conference Room E.
TH0~AS WUlqST, F'. ^.
CURTIS A. J~I~AR$ON, P. A.
JOSEPH E~. HAlelILTON, ~ A,
THOh~A$ F. UND£RWOQD, P. A.
JAMES ~). LAR$ON, ~. A,
LAW 0 F F' I C ~" $
WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD
It00 FII~$T BANK PLACE WEST
MINNEAPOLIS, NINNE$OTA 55402
August 22, 1983
TELEPHONE
Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Jori:
I copied you on a letter to Senator Luther and
Representative Schreiber some time back-concerning the
need of the City to record variances, conditional use
permits, etc. with the County Recorder or the Registrar
of Titles. This has proven to be extremely burdensome
to Fran. Please contact Senator Olson and our Representative
to see if they will help Senator Luther and Representative
Schreiber in this matter. /
C~ty Attorney
CAP:Ih
Enclosure
WILLIAM P. LUTHER
Assistant .Majorit.x Leader
Senator 471h District
205 Statc Capitol
St. PauI. Minnesota 55155
Telephone: 296-8969
August 3, 1983
Senate
State of Minnesota
Mr. Curtis A. Pearson
City Attorney
City of Brooklyn Park
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Curtis:
Thanks for your letter regarding the problem Brooklyn Park is
having with conditional use permits, i appreciate your bringing
this problem to my attention.
I am having Senate Counsel look into the matter and have asked
that a bill be draf£ed to deal with this unnecessary requirement
for city government. I plan to discuss this matter with the
appropriate legislators on the Local and Urban Government
Committee. Hopefully, we can deal with it during the next
legislative session.
Again, thanks for bringing this problem to my attention.
Sincerely,
P. Luther
Assistant Majority Leader
WPL:rh
COSIMITTEES · Rules and Administration · Finance · Economic Development and
Commerce · Judiciary · Elections and Ethics · Vice Chairman. Rules and Administration
· Vice Chairman. Elections and Ethics
'l LAKE MINNETONKA
~ 402 EAST LAKE STREET
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 TELEPHONE 6121473-7033
FRANK MIXA. EXECU]'IVE DIREC3'OR
BOARD MEMBERS
Robert T~pton Brown. Chairman
Greenwood
Roberl P. Rascop. Vice Chelrmen
Shorewood
JoEllen Hurt. Secretary
OrOnO
Edward G Beuman. Treasurer
To~ke Bey
Donald E Boynton
M,nnetonka Beach
Jona~men R. Elam
Moun~
Alan Fesching
Minnet rlste
Richard J. Garwood
Deepheven
Robe~ S. MacNemara
Wayzata
Robert K. Pillsbu~
Minnetonka
Robe~ E. Slocum
Woodland
Richer~ J. Soderberg
V~ctorie
Robert E. Wagner
Spring Park
Carl H. Weisser
Excelsior
August 25, 1983
Surfside, Inc.
6/0 Joel Essig, President
2670 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mr. Essig:
Subject: 1983 Multiple Dock and Mooring Area
License
The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of
Directors has approved your multiple dock license
for the 1983 season.
The license, including any LMCD stipulations, is
enclosed.
We appreciate your cooperation in helping to
"Save the Lake."
Sincerely,
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Frank Mixa
Executive Director
jm
Enc: License, site plan/
cc/enc: Municipality ~
cc/site plan: LMCD Inspector
NO,,
(51 units)
MULTIP DOCK AND MOORING
AREA LICENSE
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
County of Hennepin, State of Minnesot~ ss.
WMEREAS, SURFSIDE, ' INC.
2670 Commerce Blvd., City of Mound
has paid the sum of~Tw° Hundred Sixty-five and no/100 ($265.00) DOLLARS
to the Treasurer of said LAKE IvilNNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT as required by the Ordinances
of said District and complied with ailtherequirements of said Ordinances necessary for obtaining this
License:
NOW, THEREFORE, By order of ~eBoard ofDirectors ofsaid District and byvi~ue.hereof, the
said Surfside~ Inc. isherebylicensedandauthorizedto
o~tea multiple dock subject to the variance Order of January 22, 1975
and to existing and future density policies and regulations adopted by
the LMCD Board of Directors
· for the p~ri~ of the 1'9~3 dock season and
ending December 31, 19 83 subject to all the conditions and provisions of said Ordinances.
Given under my hand and the corporate seal of the LAKE MINN~T~KA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
this 24th day of A~ugust A.D. 19 83.__ ~~~ --
E~cutive Direr:tot 'F/a~fk Hixa Chairmlt~' Roan Bro~
at_c- 14~·
MINNEI-IAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT
P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
BOARD OF MANAGERS:
David H. Cochran. Pres. * Albert L. Lehman * John E. Thomas * g~rbara R. Oudmufldson * Michael R. Carroll
LAKE MINNETONKA
MEETING NOTICE
A special meeting of the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District will be held on Thursday, September 8,
1983, commencing at 4:00 p.m., in the main conference room at
the offices of E. A. Hickok and Associates, 545 Indian Mound,
Wayzata, Minnesota, for the purpose of holding a work session
to prepare proposed 1984 district budgets. The entire work
session will be devoted to board and staff discussion of the
proposed budgets. No action will be taken by the board at the
above work session. 'A public hearing on the proposed budgets
will be held September 15, 1983. Persons having comments or
questions regarding the district's proposed budgets are urged
to attend the public hearing on September 15, 1983, to be held
at the Wayzata City Hall, Wayzata, Minnesota.
DATED: August 24, 1983
0227o
MOUND m SPRING PARK
MIAINE7'RISTA tuNA VARRE
SEPTEMBER, 1983
westonka area chamber commerce
"CHAMBER WAVES"
S~:~T. ~:N~:NR~L M~",TING:
Minneton~ M~ .... - Wed.~. Seot. 2~
Special Guest SpeaKer: Mr. Hugh Strawn, V.F. Minnesota Insurance
Information Center, wzth a spectacu±ar Z'llm on the Donaldson/North-
western Ban~ Bldgs. Fzre --- BUSINEs~ ~O~L~ - ARE YOU PR~F~J{ED?
The new By-Laws w~ll also be presented ~'or dxscussmon and approva£.
rlease call your reservations in to the Chamber o~'fzce Dy Sept. 20
~'/2-6780 - Social 6:00-7:00 - DZnner 7:00 - Program - ~:O~ - $9.00
FRJ~SIDENT'S LETTER:
I asked ~aul ~ond I'or the right to use his space this 'month because
I had something dear to my heart to comment on. As I was privileged·
to watch the ground breaking ceremonies for our new Senior Housing
Project the other day, one of the Seniors .aid to me 'that we really
were going to get this area moving forward and feeling betterabout
· itself,' weren't we?'. Although I've n~nver made any secret of how ·
special our WestonKa seni0.rs, are and how good they have been to me,
I hadn't really stopped.to'consider what they have accomplished in.'"
a few short years -'the'~new Senior Center with its Congregate Dining
Area,the Senior Gift Shop,.the ~enior Van~ the Special Housing Project,.
an ever growing activities schedule and an eager willingness to.pitch
in whenever the community calls. With their zest for living and sense
of renewaL, they have set a fine~e~xmple ~or the rest of us; and I
just wanted to tell them how muc,~..~.~at has meant to me personnally.
When my own well'of enthusiasm ~;.~low, a stop at the Senior Center .-
fills it back up! THANK-YOU S~N~0~/'or showing the way and setting - -.
such a ~zne example.
Chic Remien, Exec. V.P.
GOLF OUTING: A flooded course is about the only .thing that could stop
)o~ ~ ~~ ~ our ~th Annual Gol~ Outing..Its been rescheQuled ~oe Tues.
· , ~ept. 13th - ~:30 Shotgun, '/:30 Dinner, Golf and Dinner
is $15.00 and Dinner only is $?.00. You don't have to be
. ~ a golfer to enjoy the evening, its fun just to come for
r~ dinner! Beer and Mix Zncluded, B.Y.O.B. If you had res-
ervations for the original date and bannot make this one
please be sure to call the Chamber office and leave a
message. Remember allD00R FRIZz5 ARE W~LCOME!! Contact
Chairperson Ron Norstrem with questions ( 472- ~989)
Sept'~ -
13-
13-
SEFTEMBER CALENDAR
Governmental Affairs Council - Lafayette Club, '7:30 A. M.
Regrets only (471-~4~3). This meeting will I'ocus on
establishing the committee's areas of ffocus an~ interest
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' Meeting - Twin Birch, 7:00 A.M.
Mound Retail Council - Mound City Chambers, '?:30 A.M.
13-
14-
21 -
Gol[ Outing - Burl C.C. - See preceeding article
Navarre/Spring Park Retail Council - Pare Bench Eatery, 8:00 A.M
A stalwart group has been working on organizing this
Councz±. Iff you support their efforts and are a merchant
in Spring ParK/Navarre please make an effort to attend this
meeting. 'Non-Chamber Members are welcome! The Agenda will
be the formal organization of the group and an October Event.
General Membership mee..~ng'- M~nneton~a Mist, 6:ou~'/:oO ~oczal
7:00. Dznner, 8:00 ~ro~ram - ~peaKer: Mr. Hugh ~trawn
Reservations are hel~ul~ (472-6780) ~W.ou
New By-Laws w~±l oe presentec ~'or approval. 1~83/84 Member-
ship Directories will be available!
You are. welcome to attend any of the above meetings. Any questions
please call Chic Remien or Paul Pond (472-2222J
WELCOME Nh~ CHAMBER BUSINESSES
CHICKEN TRACKS:
BAIN CO. - Jim Bain 472-570~
~*A.Nominating~Committee consisting of Ron' Norstrem
Jerry Longpre (472-313U), and John Burger was established at the~
last Boar~ o~ Directors' meeting. They will be re§ponsible
establishing the slate lot"the 1984 Officers and ~irectors
Election.'~ Please contact' them with ~ny nominations. John's no.~3-3DD~
*Welcome 'Dace Pare Bench!
*Be watching for Merrill-Lynch's Open House At their new oi'/'ice
~ ~I~ OF MOUND ....