The URL can be used to link to this page

85-08-13 CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTR MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS Approve Minutes of July 9, 1985, Regular Meeting Pg. 1933-1944 Approve Minutes of July 11, 1985, Special Meeting Pg. 1945-1947 Approve Minutes of July 23, 1985, Regular Meeting Pg. 1948-1957 .pUBLIC.HEARING; To Discuss and Hear Citizen Comments Regarding the Acquisition of Continental Telephone's Mound Exchange and Related Equipment and Facilities in the City of Mound Pg. 1958-1962 PUBLIC HEARING; To Consider a Request from the Housing & Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound to Amend and Modify the Town Square Redevelopment Project and to Amend and Modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan Pg. 1963-1993 PUBLIC.HEARING; To Consider Revocation of a Conditional Use Permit to Operate a Minor Boat Repair Business at.5542 Lynwood Blvd. (Blue Lagoon Marina) CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING; To Consider an Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Provide for a Planned Industrial Pg. 1994-2007 Area (P.I.A.) on the Site Occupied Formerly by the Tonka Toys. Plant CONTINUED. PUBLIC HEARING; To Consider the Issuance of a Conditional Use Permit to .Balboa Minnesota Co. to Establish a Planned Industrial Area (P.I.A.) at 5300/ 5340 Shoreline Blvd. (former Tonka Toys Plant) Pg. 2008-2014~ Pg. 2015-2056 Resolution Setting Operations Permit Fee - Suggested Fee $~D~,~'O0~ Refer to Pg. 2008 ~.Resolution Granting an Operations Permit for Lunalite, Inc. at 5340 Shoreline Blvd. pUBLIC. HEARING; On Proposed Vacation of Unimproved Portion of Northern Road abutting Lots 24, 25 & 26, Plat of Subdivision of Lots 1 & 32 Skarp & Lindquist's Ravenswood (4800-4804-4810-4820 Northern Road) Pg. 2057-2058 Pg. 2059-2064 Page 1 930 13. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Consideration of a Variance Request to do Structural Repairs for Upgrading a Private Home to Building Code. Home Located at 2624 Westedge Blvd. Applicants: Aaron M. Applequist & Mary J. Pacholke Pg. 206 5-2077 Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present Proposed Agreement: Continue and Expland the City-Wide Recycling Program from October 1, 1985, to September 30. 1986, with Beerman Services Cost: $985.00/Month = $11,820/Year Pg. 2078-2090 Request of the City to Repurchase Six Grave Sites in Cemetery - Owner Does Not Want to Use. Cost - $480.00 Pg. 2091 Request of the Planning Commission to Appoint Mr. William C. Thai, 4737 Dorchester Road to fill a Vacancy on the Planning Commission for the Remainder of a Term Set to Expire December 31, 1985. Pg. 2092-2094 Consideration of Quotation to do: Fire Truck Repairs on lq7B-Mack Truck (#12): A. Truck Utilities & Mfg., Inc. - $2,300 Custom Fire Apparatus, Inc. - $1,620 Fabri.cate ~ In~tall New W~ter Tank B. Custom Fire Apparatus, Inc. - $4,300 Truck Uti%ities & Mfg., Inc..- $5,200 Pg. 2095-2]01 Consideration of Solicited Proposals to do a Study on the Beachwood Road Pond: Study Costs~ Hickok & Associates - $1,800 Bonestroo - $ 600 Pg. 2102-2106 Update Report on Lynwood Blvd. M.S.A. Project - City Engineer Pg. 2107-2109 Review & Approve Five Year M.S.A. Street Improvement Program Pg. 2110-2114 Request to Clarify & Correct Errors Found in Resolution #78-527 - City Clerk Pg. 2115-2118 Considertion of a Petition to Upgrade the Private Section of Denbigh Road Pg. 2119-2130 Consideration of a License Application for a Restaurant License at 5908 Three Points Blvd. Pg. 2131-2133 Consideration of a Technical Assistant Grant Award from HUD/SBA to Provide Assistance, if Requested, to help Set-up an Incubator Center in the old Tonka Facility. City Cost to Come from Previously Obligated CDBG Funds Pg. 2134-2142 Page 1 931 25. 27. Payment of Bills Pg. 21 43-21 55 Set Date for a Public Hearing to Consider ~o Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Lots 7-13, Block~6, The Highlands - ~gested Date: SeDtember 10~ 1985 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Update on Joint Compensation Study B. Letter from NSP on New Street Lights C. Twin City Testing Report on Paint on Water Tower on Evergreen D. Monthly Liquor Report E. Newsclipping Re: Lake Virginia/Lake Ann Sewer Line F. Metro Council Report on Above Sewer Line G. Newsclippings on Garcia Ruling H. Increase in City Insurance Costs - Newsclipping Metro Council Review - July 12, 1985 J. District #277 School Board Minutes K. Metro Council Waste Line Newsletter L. League of Cities Memo on Federal Budget Pact M. 'League Seminar on Strategy Planning Regarding Tax Increment Financing & Other Development Tools N. Memo Regarding "New Laws" Concerning Collecting. Utility Bills Pg. 2156 Pg. 2157 Pg. 2158 Pg. 2159-2161 Pg. 2162 Pg. 2163 Pg. 2164-2174 Pg. 2175-2177 Pg. 2178-2179 Pg. 2180-2181 Pg. 2182-2184 Pg. 2185-2186 Pg. 2187-2188 Pg. 2189-2190 Pg. 21 91 Page 1 932 139 July 9, 1985 MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING JULY 9, 1985 The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on July 9, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers as 5341 Maywood Road, in-said City. Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Phyllis Jessen, Gary Paulsen, Russ Peterson and Steve Smith. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Attorney Jim Larson, Building Inspector Jan Bertrand, Council Secretary Bonnie Kirtz, and the following interested citizens: Todd and Kimberly Yilek, Steve Pringle, Rock Lindlan, John Thorsen, Harlan Bruce, Bob McClellan, Tim Ashenfelter, Bill & Joyce Clark, Tom Reese, Houghton Smith. The Minutes from the June 25, 1985, Regular Council Meeting were presented for consideration. MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Jessen to approve the Minutes of the June 25, 1985, Regular Meeting, as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. RESPORT FROM CITY ATTORNE][ REGARDING CONTINENTAL PHONE The City Attorney reported that several meetings ago the Council asked hi~ to look into the removal of the Continental Phone Co. He stated there are 3 options the Council can consider: 1. Remove Contel. : 2. Replace them with another company. 3. The City can operate and run the phone system. M.S. 237.16 provides the phone company with a Certificate of Territorial Authority to.service Mound which is issued by the Public Utilities Commission. This Certificate can be revoked after a hearing showing the failure of the company to furnish reasonably adequate service in the area. He further stated that he did not .think we could prove this, but it is a vehicle. Option 2 is condemnation and M.S. 237.19 provides the authority for a municipality to own and operate a phone company within its own borders. It further provides condemnation of the existing system and the power to rebuild or build a new system. The Mayor asked the City Attorney if the City condemns Contel,'is it possible for the City to contract with Northwestern Bell? The 140 July 9, 1985 City Attorney stated yes, he believed it could because the Statute provides for condemnation, municipal ownership and also would allow the City to hire an agent to operate the company. The condemnation and rebuild would require either a general election or special election with a simple majority needed approve. If the Council wanted to build a new system, the election would require a 65% majority to approve. Councilmember Paulsen asked what the PUC considers adequate service? The City Attorney stated that he did not think Option ~1, to revoke the company's Certificate looked like it would work because Contel has been meeting the PUC's standards of service. Councilmember Peterson asked how the City would determine the value of the Contel system for condemnation? The City Attorney stated he was not sure if PUC commissioners would be determining value because under the Condemnation Statute, the Court appoints commissioners to determine the value. Both sides would present evidence of what they think the phone company is worth. They could then appeal the decision or ask the supreme court to hear the case. The time frame for a condemnation is 180 days under the Statute and if there were appeals it would not delay the ownership transfer ~f the company. The City would:have to raise the issue of the funds necessary to acquire the system thru a referendum vote. The City Manager stated that it appears we would have to do the following: 1. Hold a special election asking the public if they want to condemn Contel. 2. Start the condemnation and have an appraisal done for the value of the company. 3. Hold a second special election for the authority to bond for the purchase of the company. He stated the City may have second thoughts if the cost to buy the company outweighs the benefits of not having Contel own the system. The City Attorney then handed out the Attorney General's Opinion on the City of Elbow Lake's condemnation. He stated this makes it clear that the City of Mound could condemn. The Mayor stated at this time he would like to recognize the Continental representatives present and asked if they would like to make a statement. Harlan Bruce stated that the phone company would like to respond to any problems people are having and they want to continue to provide high qaulity service. The Mayor then opened the meeting up to citizen input. 141 July 9, 1985 Steve Pringle, 5021 Woodland Road, stated that he is part of a committee calling themselves "Telephone Task Force". They have 2 goals: 1. To petition the Council to call for a referendum vote to retrieve the franchise from Contel thru condemnation. 2. The make it known to the PUC that the citizens of Mound are not satisfied with Contel and want to stop phone rates from increasing even as the condemnation proceeds. Rock Llndlan, 2561 Lakewood Lane, stated he is also a member of the Task Force. He stated it appears the authority to start condemnation is in the hands of the City Council and they can proceed. He further stated that he hoped there would be a showing that people are disgusted with the high-handed and non- compassionate methods Contel uses in raising rates. He hopes St. Bonifacius, Minnetrista and Maple Plain will join the City of Mound. Condemnation is the dead sure way to keep the rates down but the City will have to carefully look all the figures over before it takes over the phone company. John Thoresen, 5845 Farifield Road, stated that he has been fighting with Contel for sometime over the refund. He also stated that he blames the PUC in the last refund procedure. He urged the City to arrive at a fair price for the company and purchase it without a fight or condemnation. He then asked if a questionairre had been sent out in the utility bills asking for feedback from the. people. The City Manager stated that only 1/3 of the City'is billed at one time and it would take 4 months to get the information. He futher explained that a referendum vote would serve as a way to get this done quickly. The Mayor°stated that he understands the phone company may offer a rate reduction in the Mound area. Harlan Bruce, Contel Rep., stated that they have filed an update with the PUC but he cannot positively say that it would result ~n a rate reduction. The Mayor further stated that he has repeatedly asked Contel what their true cost of service to Mound is and has gotten no response. Nor has he gotten a response to whether an extended area service option could reduce rates. The Contel Rep. stated that the PUC has a freeze on extended area service at this time. The Mayor again asked for a cost breakdown of EAS. The City Attorney stated that Contel has said they do not know what the cost is. The Contel Rep stated that you could figure this by taking the outstate rate minus the metro rate and that would give you the cost of EAS. Kim Yilek asked Contel what was so special about their service 142 July 9, 1985 that they can charge double what other systems charge? The Contel Rep. explained that his company bought up Mound as a small exchange that they consider basically rural (2 customers per mile) where N.W. Bell has 40 customers per block and this makes the costs extremely high. The Mayor stated that this is exactly what the City of Mound is saying is wrong with Contel's charges. The cable T.V. hookups are 60 customers per mile so why is Contel charging us for 2 customers/per mile. The Contel Rep. stated that this is somewhat true, but there are only 2 rates, the metro and the rural. Rock Lindlan stated that Tad Jude is sponsoring a meeting on July 15, 1985, of the members of the Senate Public Utilities Subcommittee and the Hearing Examiner for the PUC will hold a public hearing on September 12, 1985, regarding Contel. He urged everyone to attend. The City Attorney added that the metro class got a 30% increase in the EAS rate where EAS in the rural area was not raised. This is the refund case that is now in the Supreme Court. He stated that Contel actually has three rates, metro, non-metro below 1200 and non-metro abov~ 1201. The Metro rate has EAS b'uilt in and we have not been able to tell what the EAS costs are, nor can we get the information from Contel. Our contention is that you cannot compare 'Mound to a non-metro area because EAS is included in the Mound rates. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Paulsen hold a public hearing at the first meeting in August to find out if the public supports the City starting condemnation proceedings against Contel and at that time the Staff present an estimated cost for a referendum vote and an estimated cost of the acquisition, with the intent to have the Council, at that time, authorize condemnation proceedings against Contel. Councilmember Smith asked when we could hold the special election if it was authorized. The City Attorney stated he would have to research that. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. BLUE LAGOON MARINA - EDGEWATER DRIVE RESIDENI$ The City Manager explained that several residents of Edgewater Drive have asked to appear before the Council regarding violations of Blue Lagoon Marina's Conditional Use Permit. Todd Yilek, 4861 Edgewater Drive was present and stated that at a previous last Council Meeting the Council gave a Conditional July 9, 1985 Use Permit to Steve Pauly to operate a minor boat repair in the Downtown area and that one condition was that he was not to use the Edgewater Drive facility for trafficing boats or repairs of boats. He has now violated that condition and the neighbors have documented the violations. The Council discussed the violations and the process of dealing with Mr. Pauly by holding a hearing to give him a chance to respond to the allegations. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Jessen to hold a hearing at the next meeting to consider holding a Public Hearing on the revocation of Steve Pauly's Conditional Use Permit. Councilmember Smith stated that another alternative would be to have charges filed for each act in violation, with the residents as witnesses. The vote on the motion vas unanimously in favor. carried. Motion MOTION made by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Paulsen instructing the City Prosecutor to investigate the charges, interview the witnesses and to initiat~misdemeanor charges against Mr. Steve Paul~j.~The vote was unanimously in favor. .Motion carried. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked if there were any comments or suggestions from citizens present. CHAFMAN PLACE Tim Ashenfelter, 5573 Bartlett Blvd. stated that he is part of citizens committee of residents in the area who were present when Chapman Place was approved and were against the project. He stated that they have heard that recently 2 changes have been made to the project which are major in nature. They are, that the 1st floor amenities (full three story atr.ium and the commons room) have been removed from the plan without approval of the City Council. He stated they feel this is cheapening the project and the neighbor's property values will go down because of it. The Building Inspector stated that the plans that were attached to the original resolution #84-204 were for a 35 unit building and the Council approved a 29 unit building which did not have an atrium or commons area. Mr. Ashenfelter disagreed and stated that it was their understanding that the building would be exactly as the plans / 144 July 9, 1985 showed, with all the same amenities. The City Attorney stated that the only thing the City can do by law is assure that the codes are met (building and zoning) and the density is correct. It cannot force a builder to build an atrium or commons area or tell them how much money to put into a structure. The Mayor suggested that maybe the best way to proceed would be to have the Engineer, Building Inspector and 2 Councilmembers meet with the neighbors and look at the plans and the site and get more detailed answers for their questions. The following persons echoed Mr. Aschendfelter's statements: Bob McClellan, Bill Clark, Joyee Clark, Tom Reese, Houghton Smith, John Thoresen. The neighbors disagreed with the City Attorney's opinion but stated they would still like to meet with the contractor, building inspector and Councilmembers to discuss and go over the problems and get some answers to their questions. They decided to meet on Thursday evening at the home of Houghton Smith. GANZEL SEWER HOOK-UP AT 4809 BARTLETTBLVD. The City Manager explained that Mr. Ganzel took out a permit to hookup to the city sewer system in 1965, but never had it done. For the past 20 years he has had a septic tank at the rear of his yard. His neighbor, Mr. Flemel, and he had a disagreement which resulted in a re-survey of their respective properties. The result was that the driveway Mr. Ganzel had been using to get the rear of his property, including his septic tank, is on Mr. Flemel's property. We have tried to work out a satisfactory easement arrangement but the two parties will not agree. MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Smith to authorize the City Attorney to prepare the necessary paperwork ordering Mr. Ganzel to hook-up to the sanitary sewer and remove his septic tank from the property. All costs to be assessed back to the property. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MISCELLANEOUS LICENSES MOTION made by Councilmember Jessen, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to renew and authorize the issuance of the following licenses: Renewai- On-Sale Beer License - Mound Lanes (7-1-85 thru 6-3-86) New Licenses - Cigarette - Blue Lagoon Marina Restaurant - Blue Lagoon Marina 145 July 9, 1985 (balance of the license year) The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. LMCD CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING BOAT STORAGE The City Manager explained that the LMCD is considering an amendment to the LMCD Code, intending to provide for the storage of two boats at noncommercial docks and mooring on the Lake, rather than four as now permitted. They feel this would eliminate commercialization of residential property and the density problem on the Lake. It would not apply to boats 16 feet or under or boats with motors of 10 H.P. or less. The Council discussed this issue and the consensus was that they did not wish to dictate what could be done on private lakeshore as far as the number of boats was concerned. No action was taken. QUOTATIONS ON MICROPHONE SYSTEM FOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS The City Manager explained that the current microphone system was installed in 1974 and has been consistently malfunctioning. It is out of date and not repairable, thus we have solicited quotations for its replacement and the following were received. Windward Communications $1,195.00 Alpha Video & Audio $1 ,790.00 This was not a budgeted item, but it could be taken from Revenue Sharing. .' MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Smith to ap.prove the quotation of Windward Communications in the amount of $1,195.OO for the replacement of the audio system in the Council Chambers. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried, r AMENDMENT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE REGARDING HEALTH INSURANCE FOR PERMANENT PART-TIME EMPLOYEES The City Manager explained that Hennepin County has advised the City that permanent part-time employees are not eligible for health insurance coverage with the insurance providers unless the the City contributes toward the coverage. Our Administrative Code, Section 14.02, says that permanent part-time employees shall be eligible for hospitalization/major medical insurance benefits under the group policy at his/her own cost which will be deducted from the employee's pay. It is being recommended that this be amended in the Administrative Code to delete the above and add the following "permanent part-time employees are not eligible for hospitalization/major medical insurance benefits". MOTION made by Councilmember Jessen, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to amend the Administrative Code as 146 July 9, 1985 recommended above. Motion carried. The vote was unanimously in favor. BALBOA/CITY OF MOUND LEASE AGREEMENT FOR AREA IN TONKA BUILDING The City Manager explained that Balboa has now removed all the items in the Agreement that the City asked to have deleted and it is now ready to approve. MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Jessen to authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to enter into an Agreement, as submitted tonight~ leasing a storage area in the Tonka Building from Balboa Minnesota Co. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CONSIDERATION OF DOWNTOWN PARKING PLAN The City Manager stated that for several years the Downtown Advisory Committee and the Police Department have .tried to regulate the parking in the Downtown area to assure that the parking spots closest to the businesses are not being used for all day parking. He then showed the Council the Parking Zone Map that has been developed. The businesses have all seen the Map and like the ideas.' This would also delete a number of items in Chapter 46 of the City Code relating to parking and incorporate the new Map: Peterson moved and Jessen seconded the following ordinance: ORDINANCE ~480 ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 46 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO PARKING The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. DISCUSSION ON BEACHWOOD/ROSEDALE POND The Council discussed this problem again and went over the solution which the City Engineer has estimated will cost $19,000. The Council discussed the fact that there could have been a mistake made by someone when the road and storm sewer were put in in 1978 and decided that the City should contact other engineers to obtain other estimates and possible remedies for the problem. The City Manager stated he would check with other engineers and get back to the Council on this. No action was taken. SET DATES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS RE: PLANNED INDUSTRIAL AREAS MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Paulsen to set July 23, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. for 147 Jul 9, 1985 public hearings on the following: A. Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Adding "Planned Industrial Area" as a Conditional Use. and B. Consider a Conditional Use Permit to Establish a Planned Industrial Area at 5300/5340 Shoreline Blvd. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS The bills were presented for consideration. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to approve the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list, in the amount of $169,9~0.~6, when funds are available. The Council asked about the goose problem on lakeshore areas. The City Manager reported that we now know of a company that sells plastic swans and they will cost $130.00, plus shipping for a family of 5 swans. The Council then added this item to the bills for approval. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING NORTHERN ROAD VACATION MOTION made by Councilmember Paulsen, seconded by CouncilmemberoPeterson to set August 13, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. for a public hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of Northern Road. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. JOGGING TRAIL NEAR GRAND¥IEW MIDDLE SCHOOL The City Manager explained that we have HUD money that could be used to install a jogging trail near Grandview Middle School. The PTA and the PTO at Grandview made the suggestion and have agreed to provide the labor to install this on a volunteer basis so all the City would provide is the rock. We have obtained two quotations for rock as follows: 1. Byran Rock $2,440.00 2. Mueller Rock $3,420.00 MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to approve the quotation of Bryan Rock in the amount of $2,~0.00 for the rock to install a jogging trail. This to be paid for out of HUD funds for parks. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. July calendar 148 July 9, 1985 B. Letter and material regarding Fair Labor Standards Act. C. Letter from DNR regarding geese on lakeshore. D. Notice of Contel Rate Hearing - September 12, 1985. E. Letter from Hickok & Associates regarding George Boyer. F. News clipping regarding EEOC comment on Comparable Worth. G. HEI news clipping. H. AMM report on legislative summaries. Letter from Hennepin County Health Dept. regarding Captain Billy ' s. The City Manager explained that the City received a copy of this letter and there appears to still be violations according to the Health Dept. Councilmembe~ Jessen, after reading this letter, suggested this be discussed tonight because the City issued them a Restaurant License and could ultimately be held responsible if something should happen as a result of the Health Dept. violations. The City Attorney suggested that the Council have the owner of Captain Billy's come in and answer the charges of the Heal'th Dept. The Mayor suggested directing a letter to the owner asking him to come in so the City Council can hear his explanations of why he has not complied with the Health Dept. and strongly urge him to take care of any health hazards that could endanger citizens in the interium. The City Attorney stated that if there are immediate hazards to the public the Health Dept. can shut the operation down right away. The Building Inspector. stated that the Health Dept. would rather leave that up to the City. The City Attorney explained that for the City to do this would require a public hearing for the violation of his Conditional Use Permit. MOTION made by Councilmember Jessen, seconded by Mayor Polston to request the County Health Department to shut down Captain Billy's immediately if there are immediate hazards to the public. Discussion by the Council on why the Health Department has not taken any formal action if hazards exist. The Building 149 July 9, 1985 Inspector stated that they would rather have the City take formal action rather than get involved in politics. Councilmember Peterson suggested that since the letter not only states, "Comply with all violations IMMEDIATELY" , but also stated, "Compliance will be verified at the next routine inspection", maybe we should wait until then and if they have not complied, then agree to shut them down. Councilmember Smith agreed. The Mayor withdrew his second, and Councilmember Jessen withdrew her motion as stated above. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Paulsen to ask the County Health Dept. (Joan Gilchrist), to inspect Captain Billy's tomorrow and if immediate health hazards exist, shut the operation down as far as food service is concerned. The vote was unanimously in Favor. Motion carried. J. Liquor Store sales report for June. K. General investment report news story. L. Wall Street Journal clipping regarding zoning. M. Action Alert newsletter - LMC. N. June financial .newsletter -'Public Financial Systems. O. Metro Council Review -June 14, 1985. The City '~anager reminded the Council of the Boat Tour on July 16, 1985, and the Bus Tour scheduled for July 30, 1985. Councilmember Paulsen stated that h~e would not be able to attend the July 30th function. MOTION made by Councilmember Jessen, Councilmember Paulsen to adjourn at 10:40 P.M. unanimously in favor. Motion carried. seconded by The vote was Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk BILLS ...... JULY 9, 1985 Computer run dated 6/29/85 .... Batch 854064 Computer run dated 7/3/85 .... Batch 854065 135,488.37 29,452.09 TOTAL BILLS 164,940.46 150 July 11, 19§5 MINUTES SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING JULY 11, 1985 The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in special session on July 11, 1985, at 7.50 P.M. in the City Council Chambers at 5341Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Phyllis Jessen, Gary Paulsen, Russ Peterson and Steve Smith. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Attorney Curt Pearson, the Mound Housing & Redevelopment Authority, Fran Clark City Clerk, and the following interested Scott Anderson., Fred Guttormson, Greg Gustafson, Dave Hultquist. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. CASE 85-4R0: C. R. MANUFACTURING~ CONSIDER APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO MANUFACTURE VARIOUS PLASTIC PRODUCTS AT 5R40 SHORELINE BLVD. Greg Gustafson explained that this Conditional Use Permit would allow C.R. Manufacturing to manufacture various plastic products in about 66,800 square feet of the old Tonka Building. They will employ approximately 50 people .per shift. He further explained that their idea for-the Tonka B'uilding is to lease the old Tonka building as 8 separate buildings according to the areas. The Council will be asked at a future meeting to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance adding a Planned Industrial Area for the old Tonka Building. The Mayor opened the Public Hearing ~nd asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak for or against the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit to C.R. Manufacturing, at 5340 Shoreline Blvd. No one responded. The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. The Mayor then read the recommendations of the Staff which were as follows: The- interior improvements be completed in full compliance with all applicable sections of the Uniform Building Code. That Balboa Minnesota Company shall prepare a plan for the paving of the parking lot on the west end of the building depicting driveways, parking stalls, truck access areas, landscaping and a defined point of ingress/egress onto Shoreline Blvd. Such plan, subject to review and approval of the City Planner and City 151 July 11 , 1985 Engineer, shall be prepared and fully implemented within 90 days of final approval of this conditional use permit. 3. That modification or alterations to the exterior of the building be expressly prohibited pending submittal of a comprehensive exterior remodeling plan for the entire structure by Balboa Minnesota Company. Peterson moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~85-83 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR C. R. MANUFACTURING ON PID #13- 117-24-34-0066 (5340 SHORELINE BLVD.) The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. pAYMENT OF BILLS The bills were presented for consideration. MOTION made by Councilmember Paulsen, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to authorized the payment of bills as presented on the list, in the amount of $72,184.31, as funds are available.' A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MOTION' made by Councilmember Paulsen, seconded by Councilmember Jessen to adjourn at 8:05 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk BILES ..... JULY 11, 1985 Butch's Bar Supply mix 358.90 Bowman Distrib parts 161.78 Coca Cola mix 337.70 Coast to Coast supplies 140.09 City Club Distr beer 3,909.50 CleanStep Rug rug rent 41.84 Copy Duplicating copies 15.OO Day Distrib beer 4,811.87 EastSide Bev. beer 4,874.16 First Bank Mpls Serv Chg 8.00 Frame Factory map 118.50 Glenwood Inglewd water 45.75 Goodall Rubber hose 91.31 Eugene Hickok wtr sampl 143.OO Happy's Potato Chp Snax 117.35 Kool Kube Ice Ice 215.50 Lowells auto parts 177.70 Lutz Tree Serv removal 1,890.O0 Marina Auto supplies 337.61 Minnegasco June gas 6.37 Wm Mueller Blacktop 8,327.50 MN Suburbn News empl ad 13.O0 Mark VII Distr beer 1,558.80 Mpls Oxygen oxygen 23.04 Mtka Seaweed removal 700.00 Martins Navr 66 towing 87.00 MISCO thimble 33.59 Navarre Hdwe supplies 341.74 N.S.P. June elec 3,316.99 Nelson Enterprises June Frt 122.90 Pepsi Cola . mix 434.35 PDQ FoOd Stores gasoline 1,465.,22 Pog reba Distr -~eer 5,360.85 Royal Crown Bev mix 135.10 Rex Distrib beer 140.OO Stevens Mkt supplies I12.23 Spring P~ Car Wash washes 91.25 Sterne Elec repairs 251.87 SOS Printing zone bks-flyrs 333.50 JL Shiely Co sand 49.14 St Boni Ford repairs 20.75 Twin City Juice mix 32.73 Tri State Bev mix 102.00 Thrifty Soydr Drug supplies. 5.68 Thorpe Distrib beer 7,093.05 T-Shirt Ink shirts 116.40 Thurk Bros Chev Switcl~ 70.00 Wurst Pearson I4aml Prosec 1,00~.00 Widmer Bros. Marsh Rd 75.00 Wes tonka Sani tatn garb 130.00 Warner Hdwe Preserv 26.94 State Treas FICA 1,458.22 P.E.R.A. PERA 2,489.17 Bjorks Country Stone walls 18,859.37 TOTAL BILLS 72,184.31 17 2 152 July 23, 1985 MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING JULY 23, 1985 The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on July 23, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at 5341Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmember$ Phyllis Jessen, Gary Paulsen, Russ Peterson and Steve Smith. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Attorney Curt Pearson, City Planner Mark Koegler, Building Inspector Jan Bertrand, and the following interested citizens: Steve Pauly, Todd and Kimberly Yilek, Aaron Applequist, Mary Pacholke, Greg Gustafson, Scott Anderson. The Mayor opened the Meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. He then asked that 2 items be added to t~e Agenda tonight. 1. A public hearing on accessory apartments in single family residential districts. 2. Report from the Hennepin County Health Dept. concerning Captain BiIly's Restaurant. ~ The Minutes from the July 9, 1985, Regular Council Meeting were presented for consideration. The City Attorney asked that the Council continue these Minutes until the next meeting in order to allow Jim Larson (City Attorney at the July 9th Meeting) time to review them. MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Jessen to continue the Minutes of the July 9, 1985, Regular Meeting until the August 13, 1985, Regular Meeting. The vote was unanimousiy in favor. Motion carried. CASE ~85-4t2: AARON M. APPLEOUIST & MARY J. PACHOLKE~ 2624 WESTEDGE BLVD.~ HOUSE SIZE VARIANCE TO DO STRUC- TURAL REPAIRS The Building Inspector reported on the structural modifications that would be needed on this undersized home. She further explained that according to the Zoning Ordinance a nonconforming structure can have modifications worth up to 50% of the fair market value of the structure. The building is currently valued at $5,400. The listed modifications that she listed on June 28, 1985, would exceed 50% of the value. Therefore, she recommended that the Council declare the building unsafe and proceed to have it removed. July 23, 1985 The applicants, Mr. Applequist and Ms. Pacholke, were present asking that the Council grant them a variance and give them time to repair the unsafe conditions and bring the building into conformance with the zoning and building codes. They submitted a petition signed by 90 persons asking that the applicants be granted a building permit and variance. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Paulsen directing the City Attorney and the Building Inspector to prepare a resolution, setting down facts of what has to be done to bring the building into conformance, and also that the applicants provide a bond or letter of credit to have the work done within 2 years. This resolution to be brought back to the City Council for approval at the next meeting, August 13, 1985. The City Attorney asked the applicants if they were the fee owners of the property. The applicants stated no, they are buying on a Contract for Deed from an estate. The City Attorney pointed out that the people from the estate would also have to agree. He further stated that in his opinion, enforcement of a bond or letter of credit of this type would be difficult. The City Attorney asked if the applicants intended to live in the unsafe structure as they made improvements. The applicants stated yes and they would be willing to sign a waiver not to' hold the City liabel for their safety. The Council asked that ~the safety improvements be the applicant's first priority for improvements. The Building Inspec. tor will prioritize these in the resolution. The Council also asked that the applicants work with the Building Inspector. The vote on the original motion was unanimously in favor__. ~ Motion carried. Councilmember Smith suggested that the Planning Commission loo at an ordinance to inspect homes for code violations/kwhen they are placed for sale. The Mayor suggested that the Staff research this instead of the Planning Commission. Councilmember Smith agreed. The' Council agreed that this would be a good thing to look into. BLUE LAGOON MARINA~ STEVE PAULY The City Manager explained that there was not enough publication time for a public hearing at this meeting, but that Mr. Pauly is present to answer the Council's questions. The official pub.lic hearing to consider revocation of Mr. Pauly's Conditional Use Permit at 5542 Lynwood Blvd. will be held August 13, 1985. 154 July 23, 1985 Mr. Pauly stated he has read the letters from the residents of Edgewater Drive. He stated that it was his understanding that as long as he operated the facility on Edgewater Drive (previously Martin & Sons) as it had been operated in the past, there would be no problem. He contended that he is doing nothing more than what Dick Martin did at the site. He further stated that he would bring Dick Martin and his mechanics in for the August 13, public hearing to prove this. The Council discussed the Edgewater Drive site as it related to the B-2 zoning district and its nonconforming use. Mr. Pauly left. Some of the residents near the Edgewater site reiterated their concerns and problems as they were written in the letters to the Council. No action was taken. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT OF SECTION 2q.640.R TO ESTABLISH PLAN- NED INDUSTRIAL AREA (PIA) BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The City Planner explained that the Planning Commission has been reviewing and considering this PIA for some time. Exhibit 1 is the draft that the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended. After the last Planning Commission Meeting the City Attorney and the City Planner sat down and the City Attorney pointed out some problems with Exhibit 1. Thus, Exhibit 2 was drafted. He pointed out that the real distinction between Exhibit 1 and 2 is that #2 puts in more specific permitted uses and more language into the ordinance rather than the Conditional Use Permit. If Balboa came in with a use not listed in ~;2, then the ordinance would provide a new catagory known as an Operations Permit. Since it would not be called a Conditional Use Permit, a public hearing would not be required (as is required under State Statute). This would streamline the process and cut down on the time required for publication and hearing time. But he further stated that it would not eliminate a public hearing if the Planning Commission and the City Council felt there was a need to hold one. It is only an option. Exhibit #1 put the weight on the Occupancy Permit and the Staff to make a determination of the appropriateness of a particular business. The Mayor opened the Public hearing and asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak for or against the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. GREG GUSTAFSON, attorney for Balboa Minnesota Co., stated that he could live with either Exhibit being adopted and agreed with the City Attorney that Exhibit #2 was probably a better approach. 155 · July 23, 1985 MAYOR POLSTON stated that he favored Exhibit 2 because he felt this is a legislative action and did not want to put a burden on the Staff to decide for one business or against another. The City Attorney explained that Exhibit #2 protects both the City and the applicant. TOM REESE, Planning Commission Member, stated that the Planning Commission reviewed both Exhibits and their concern with Exhibit #2 was that the SIC Code is too broad to adopt as it is in Exhibit #2. The City Planner went over a number of SIC items that could be deleted from the proposed ordinance amendment. The Council discussed changing the language in Section 23.650.7, subd. 2. to read "Approval of a planned industrial area operations permit shall be by the City Council after review and recommendation by the City Planning Staff". The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. MOTION made by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Peterson directing the City Planner to review Exhibit #2 with the Staff, Balboa and Planning Commission members, working out the permitted uses in the Operations Permit, and bringing the 'draft back to the Council for final action on August 13, 1985. Also adding grounds for Staff denial of Operations Permit. The City Attorney explained the difference between a Conditional Use Permit and an Operations Permit. Discussion on Section 23.650.7, ~ubd. 1 of Exhibit #2. Discussion on both Exhibits and controls of each. The vote on the original motion was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ON APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH PIA AT 5~00/5R40 SHORELINE BLVD. The City Planner stated that the Conditional Use Permit Applicaton of Lunalite, Inc. is not before the Council this evening. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Smith to continue this item to the August 13, 1985, Regular Meeting and the Staff will take an application for this Conditional Use Permit for consideration at that time. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 156 July 23, 1985 PUBLIC HEARING: ACCESSORY APARTMENT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT The City Manager gave the background of this item. A small subcommittee of the Planning Commission was to study this. They did and did not come up with a plan. Mr. Ke¥in Norwood has asked for a public hearing on this to present his case to amend the R-1 zoning district to allow accessory apartments. Mr. Kevin Norwood gave the background from a previous meeting. He stated that the accessory apartment in his home was rented out by the previous owner. Mr. Norwood stated he was able to purchase the home based on the rental of the accessory apartment. He and his father's feeling is that the City has many of these accessory apartments and needs to deal with the problem. The City Manager stated the issue is,.does the Council want to modify and broaden the Zoning Code to allow accessory apartments in the R-1 district. The consensus of the Council was that they did not want to do this. The Mayor closed the public hearing. MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Mayor Polston that the residential districts in the Zoning Ordinance will ~emain as they are .and no changes will be made as a result of this public hearing. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CAPTAIN BILLY,S R~$TAURANT The City Manager explained that the County Health Dept. has reinspected Captain Billy's and have submitted a letter to the City stating that they did not find any immenent health hazards in the restaurant as of July 19, 1985. Mr. Alexander was present and explained some of the problems he has had with the County Health Dept. No action was taken on this item. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked if there was anyone present who had comments or suggestions for the Council. Larry Connolly, Hazelwood Lane, asked when his street was going to be repaired. The City Manager stated as soon as the contractor who is in charge of the job can get it done, which should be within the week. 157 July 23, 1985 LICENSE APPLICATIONS MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to authorize the issuance of a Charitable 3.2 Beer License and a Public Dance License to Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church for August 3 and 4, 1985. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REOUEST FOR PAYMENT - VOLK TRUCKING & EXCAVATING - CAMBRIDGE STORM SEWER MOTION made by Councilmember Paulsen, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to approve the payment of $4,892.60 to Volk Trucking & Excavating Company for the installation of the Cambridge Road storm sewer. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REOUEST FOR PAYMENT - VOLK TRUCKING & EXCAVATING - PORT HARRISON TOWNHOMES MOTION made by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Paulsen to approve the payment of $4,690.04 to Volk Trucking & Excavating Company for the sanitary sewer and watermain extensions at the Port Harrison Townhomes. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1985 MET COUNCIL POPULATION FIGURES FOR MOUND The City Manager reported accor'ding to this report Mound is the 8th fastest growing City in Hennepin County (out of 47 cities). He stated that if the City keeps growing at this rate it should reach the .10,000 mark by 1987 or 1988. BASS FISHING CONTEST AUGUST 25, 1985 MOTION made by Councilmember Smith~ seconded by Councilmember Paulsen to approve the Bass Fishing Contest on August 25, 1985, from 5:30 A.M. to 3:00 P.M., adjacent to Mound Bay Park~ but prohibiting the use of loudspeakers. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2R.412.2(5) STANDARDS & REGULATIONS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA (PDA) MOTION made by Council member Jessen, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to set August 2~, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. for a public hearing to consider ana~endment to section 23.412.2(5) of the Mound Zoning Code setting standards and regulations for Planned Development Area (PDA). The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 158 July 23, 1985 AFPROVAL OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR 198~ DEPOT REMODELING & SET DATE FOR BID OPENING The City Manager explained that the Park Commission has recommended approval of the specifications submitted for the 1985 Depot remodeling project. MOTION made by Councilmember Paulsen, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to approve the specifications for the 1985 Depot remodeling and setting August 8, 1985, at 10:00 A.M. for the bid opening for this project. The Council asked that a completion date be put into the specifications so that is might be done'this Fall. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS The bills were presented for considertion. seconded by TUXEDO. BLVD. SAFETY PROJECT The City Manager explained that because this project is being done with M.S.A. funds the Council needs to pass a resolution agreeing to parking restrictions on Tuxedo Blvd., between Dorchester Road and Lamberton Road. Peterson moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #85-84 RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AGREEMENT RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON TUXEDO BLVD. BETWEEN DORCHESTER ROAD AND LAMBERTON ROAD The vote was unanimously in 'favor. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS Motion carried. A. Invitation for Council to LMCD Boat Trip. B. Letter from Hickok & Associates re: Water Tower. C. AMM Committee Openings. D. Report from MTC Regarding Route 51 Bus Route. E. 1985 Elected Officials Salary Survey. MOTION made by Council member Jessen, Councilmember Paulsen to approve the payment of bills as submitted on the pre-list, in the amount of $110,366.81, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. .~ 159 .. July 23, 19B5 F. Letter from Community Health Dept. G. Letter from LMCD Regarding Parking. H. Status Report - Comparable Worth Study. I. Watershed District Agenda - July 18, 1985. J. Watershed District Minutes - June 20, 1985. K. Farmer's Market Announcement. L. &. M. News Story - Wall Street Journal. N. Solid Waste Update - Dept. of Environment & Energy. O. Metro Council Review - June 28, 1985. P. AMM Newsletter - June. Q. LMCD Letter re: Surfside. R. Letter from Hennepin County Board re: Seeking Applications for Community Action Agency Board. S. Letter from Brian Johnson re: Tuxedo Blvd. Safey Improvements. T. Hennepin Country Solid Wast~ Management Advisory Committee Minutes - April 24 thru July 10, 1985. U. News Clipping - Wall Street Journal. o° CONTEL DISCUSSION The City Manager presented the hea~'ing notice and the proposed question that has been prepared by City Attorney Jim Larson. The City Attorney, Curt Pearson, stated that he has no problem with the hearing notice, but he would like to review the question with Jim Larson because it:is not really a question. MOTION made by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Smith directing the Staff (City Manager and City Attorney) to prepare a feasibility study on whether or not it is feasible for the City to condemn Contel, getting costs, etc., and answers to certain questions before the public hearing on August 13, 1985. If the study is not complete by the hearing date, then the Council can continue the public hearing until it is complete. There was Council discussion on various approaches, costs, timing, etc. 160 July 23, 1985 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MOTION made by Councilmember Paulsen, seconded by Councilmember Jessen to adjourn. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk BILLS JULY 23, 19~ Computer run dated 7/18/85 Batch 854071 Batch 854072 78,034.41 22,749.76 100,784.17 Volk Trucking & Excavating Volk Trucking & Excavating 4,892.60 4,690.04 TOTAL BILLS 110,366.81 City of Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF HEARING ON THE ACQUISITION OF CONTINENTAL TELEPHONE'S MOUND EXCHANGE AND RELATED EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MOUND TO WHOM 1T MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mound will meet at the City Administrative Offices, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 p.m., on Tuesday, August 13, 1985, to consider whether to set a date for a special election wherein the voters in the City of Mound would be asked to vote to give the City Council the authority to acquire or condemn the Mound telephone system from Continental Telephone. ~ontinental Telephone customers in the M'~)und exchange area are invited to comment orally or in writing at this meeting. Francene C. Clar~, City Clerk Publish in The Laker, August 5, 1985 Marlin Sicheneder 5732 Sunset Road Mound, Nku. 55364 472-2497 Aug. 13, 1985 City of Mound Mound, 5~n. 55364 Gentlemen: We are in favor of the City of Mound setting a date for a special election wherein the voters in Mound would be asked to vote to give the City Council the authority to acquire or condemn the Mound telephone system from Continental telephone. We have had problems with Continental. Both Mayor Polston and 5~r. Elam have copies of correspondence relating to these problems. August 5, 1985 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER~ Enclosed is a proposal from Dahlen, Hoedeman & Co. regarding a study on Contel. Mr. Dahlen was formerly with Peat, Marwick & Mitchell, C.P.A. and performed all the rate related analytical work for the City of Mound in its 1983 rate intervention effort. Because he became very informed on Contel and its various corporate policies, he seems to me to be the most logical person to perform the type of analysis required to help determine the costs/rates if the City were to acquire the phone company. As you will note, he has the proposal broken down into two parts. A preliminary cost at' $5,000 to $7,000 and a full study at $15,0OO to $20,000. Curt's work would be on top of this. An estimate of that could easily put the cost to around the $30,000 range which I had already estimated. Since our meeting, Curt and the Mayor met with officials at the Public Utilities Commission to review the issue and discuss their ideas. The Mayor and City Attorney have now set a meeting with Contel officials in Bloomington to try and more effectively determine their position on all of this with regard to selling the system to someone else versus having to condemn it. Some of that information should be available at the public hearing. I have asked Mr. Oahler to attend the meeting to review his proposal and answer any questions you have. At this point; I am not doing anything else and I am not going to approve a $5,000 study until you give the O.K. If there are any questions, please call me. JE:fc enc. equal opp:~rtun~ty Empa_~yer that does not d~scriminate on ~r~e bas;s of race, color, national origin, or handicapped status / ~ k~"""(~' in the adm;ss~on or access to or treatment or employment in, its programs and activibes, / /,..~ / DAHLEN, HOEDEMAN & CO. 1330 TCF TOWER 121 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 (612) 349-6868 August 3, 1985 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: This letter is our proposal to assist the City of Mound in reach- ing a decision regarding telephone service within Mound. The study which we propose to undertake is designed to determine whether rates would be lower if Mound were a separate telephone system. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Continental TelepNone Company provides telephone .service within the City of Mound. Rates charged by Continental are significantly higher than those charged by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company in service areas that adjoin Mound. In addition, Continental Telephone has sought frequent and substantial rate increases. Based on the City's experience with Continental's rates, the City desires to investigate the possibility of acquiring Continental's telephone service territory within Mound. Specifically, you are considering submitting to voters the issue of condemnation of Continental's telephone system within Mound. STUDY APPROACH AND SCOPE We propose to conduct the proposed study in two phases. This approach requires a minimal initial commitment of funds to inves- tigation of acquisition o'f the service territory. In the first phase, the project will be screened to determine whether any further investigation is worthwhile. In the second phase, we will prepare a feasibility study which projects the required rates. Phase I The first phase, screening the proposed acquisition, would be based on either Continental's responses to information requests submitted as part of the rate case or on our estimates. In addition to screening the proposed acquisition, we will identify Mr. Jon Elam Page 2 issues which must be resolved before Mound reaches a conclusion on acquisition of the service territory. The screening will include the following: Estimate of the purchase price for the service territory. Identification of additional costs of establishing a separate telephone operation in Mound. Estimate of Continental's operating and maintenance costs in the City of Mound. Estimate of the cost of operation and maintenance of a separate telephone operation in Mound. Preliminary comparison of estimated future rates of Continental and of a separate telephone system. At the end of our Phase I efforts, we will prepare a summary report including our recommendations. Our recommendation regard- ing further study of acquisition of Continental's service terri- tory within the City of Mound will be based on our comparison of projected rates of Continental and of a separate telephone sys- tem. Phase II The second phase, a feasibility study, will be based primarily on Continental's response to information requests submitted in the current rate case. However, we expect that additional infor- mation may be required which will be unavailable from Continental including, for example: Cost of.separating n6n-Mound customers from the existing system. Cost of establishing interconnections with other telephone companies to permit extended area service. Cost of operation of separate system. These and other questions that will be raised may require en- gaging engineers or other professionals to address these ques- tions. There are two key activities in the feasibility study. The first is the development of a plan for the operation of the separate telephone system. We will work with the City staff to identify alternative plans and to develop a plan for the operation of the separate system. The second step will be to prepare detailed projections of the rates which the "Mound" telephone system will require in order to cover its costs. We will also prepare projections of Continen- tal's rates under varying assumptions regarding the approaches which Continental and the Minnesota Public Utility Commission will take in setting rates in future rate cases. To permit comparison of the rates of a separate telephone system with Continental's rates, we will make sets of projections based upon the same assumptions. Mr. Jon Elam Page 3 The rates for the separate telephone system will be estimated based upon operation and maintenance costs, general and adminis- trative costs, either debt service or the cost of capital based on the system capital cost and any other costs which will be incurred in the organization and operation of the separate tele- phone operation. We will prepare a feasibility report which will include compari- sons of the rates charged by the "Mound"system compared to rates charged by Continental. This report will also present an analy- sis of the risk of the proposed system and will identify unre- solved issues. FEES AND SCHEDULE Our fee is based on the expected number of hours extended by our standard hourly rates. We estimate that our fee for the proposed scope of work is $5,000 to $7,000 for Phase I and $15,000 to $20,000 for Phase II. As an alternative, we could conduct the study in a single phase. We estimate that our fee for a study conducted in a s%ngle phase would range from $18,000 to $25,000. The fee for a single phase approach is lower because we would not generate a report at the end of Phase I. We are able to b~gin the work described within'one week after being authorized to begin. We expect that Phase I will be complete within four weeks after beginning. Although the scope of work in Phase I is limited, the four week period is required to allow for the time delays expected in Continental's response to information requests. The time required to complete Phase II is in the range of 8 to 12 weeks. We are aware of the difficulties which have plagued Mound in its dealings with Continental and of the unreasonably high rates which are charged by Continental for telephone service in Mound. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you to finally resolve your concern for reasonably priced telephone service in Mound. Very truly yours, DAHLEN, HOEDEMAN & CO. Derick O. Dahlen L~J Z LLJ Z Z LJJ ~S I--- Z Ll.I Z CS) CS) CZ:::: I--- b~J UJ I. JJ I. JJ LIJ Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N I I I I I I I--" ~ ~ Z Z Z I~J. 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I ¢_ ,-'-I ~ ~ ,,.,%1' Lf~ I LI.I LLI ILl LLI LIJ I-'- Z Z Z Z Z U.I 0 0 0 0 0 (/') N N N N N Q... 0 UJ Z 0 Z UJ / 0 0 0 0 0 0 I _J _J U LU U 0 Z 0 z 0 __1 .._1 Z 0 ~' U 0 z 0 _J .._1 ,,~ z 0 ILl ._J ._1 Z 0 Marlin Sicheneder 5732 Sunset Road Mound, ~4n. 55364 472-2497 Aug. 13, 1985 City of 5~ound Mound, Mn. 55364 Gentlemen: We are in favor of the City of Mound setting a date for a special election wherein the voters in Mound would be asked to vote to give the City Council the authority to acquir~ or condemn the Mound telephone system from Continental telephone. We have had problems with Continental. Both Mayor Polston and 5~r. Elam have copies of correspondence relating to these problems. S ' cere - ( ~Jos~/Chine .2~icheneder / ~ t MOUND, MINNESOIA NOTICE OF HEARING ON THE APPROVAL OF THE TOWN SQUARE PROdECT AS AMENDED AND MODIFIED, THE AMENDED AND MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND THE AMENDED AND MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, August 13, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. at the'City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, the Mound City Council will hold a hearing on the approval of the Town Square redevelopment project as amended and modified, the amended and modified redevelopment program, and the amended and modified Tax Increment Financing Plan. The Town Square pro- ject is generally bounded by Lynwood Boulevard to the south, Commerce Boule- vard to the west, Church Road to the north and with an eastern boundary beginning at a point along the southern right-of-way of Church Road and extending southerly 190 feet, thereby, extending approximately 60 feet east and then extending southerly approximately 160 feet to a point of intersection with the northern right-of-way of Lynwood Boulevard. The site's boundaries encompass an area of approximately 3.2 acres. The City Council will specifically consider the following: 1. That land in the project area would not be made available for redevelopment without financial aid being sought. That the redevelopment plan for the redevelopment area in the locality will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the redevelopment of such areas by private enterprise. 3. That the redevelopment plan conforms to a general plan for the development of the locality. 4. That the propgsed tax increment financing district is a redevelopment district. 5. That the proposed redevelopment, in the opinion of the municipality, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of the tax increment financing is deemed necessary. 6. That the amended and modified Tax Increment Financing Plan conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. That the amended and modified Tax Increment Financing Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the municipality as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the project by private enterprise. 8. That the municipality elects the method of tax increment computation set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 3, Clause (a). All persons appearing at said hearing will be given an opportunity to be heard. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk Publish in The Laker July 22, 1985 L uo!~3Ol l 3 N N I IM 3 N ~ 9 N 'punoh/ £96~ '£~ Slnf LUeJ§OJcl :lUatudola^ac! DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM CONTENTS Introduction .......................................... 1 District Description ......... . ........................ 1 Planning Context ...................................... 1 Existing l~nd Use and Land Use Controls ............... 1 District Boundaries ................................... 2 Parcels ............................................... 3 Buildings ............................................. 4 Transportation ........................................ 5 Utililties ............................................ 5 District Objectives ................................... 5 Development Program ................................... 6 Zoning ................... ~ ............................ 7 Ut ilities. ~ ........................................... 8 Redevelopment Project Area ............................ 9 Existing Development .................................. 10 Preliminary Site Plan ................................. 11-12 Development Program Implementation .................... 13 Fiscal Tabulations .................................... 13 Town Square Development ............................... 14 1984 Fiscal Tabulations ............................... 15 SECTION 1 - DISTRICT OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION Mound's commercial sector is an important element in the structure of the community. The downtown commercial area is a major contributor to the City's tax base, it provides employment opportunities and it provides essential Goods to community residents. The purpose of this development program is to focus on the downtown area and to review the Town Square redevelopment proposal submitted by a consortium of local businesses. This review will focus on existing conditions, outline the City's objectives, analyze the proposed development plan and investigate tax increment financing as an implementation method. DISTRICT DESCRIPTION Town Square is located in the east central portion of the downtown area. The district is bounded by Commerce Boulevard to the west, Church Road to the North and Lynwood Boulevard to the south. Along the east side, the district abuts Lots 2 through 5 of Lakeside Park, A.L. Crockers' first division, Mound, MTKA and Lot 6 of Koehler's addition to Mound. The boundaries encompass a total area of approximately 2.4 acres (see Figure 2). PLANNING CONTEXT Mound's commercial area has been addressed in a number of recent municipal plans. The City's Co~prehenslve Plan which was adopted in 1981 concluded that "If future revitalization of Mound's downtown takes place, redevelopment techniques must be applied." In 1982, the City prepared a design guide for downtown Mound which established guidelines for the development and redevelopment of the commercial area. The purpose of the guide was to "develop an aesthetic philosophy that would help curb economic and physical deterioration and to present the community with exciting, attainable goals and guidelines to start a revitalization program." Redevelopment of the proposed Town Souare District is consistent with the recommendations found in both planning documents. EXISTING LAND USE AND LAND USE CONTROLS The Town Square District is composed of 11 separate parcels (Figure 3) containing a mixture of commercial uses, vacant buildings and residential structures. Primary commercial uses include the Mound Clinic, a pharmacy, a dry cleaners and a Tom Thumb convenience store. Two occupied residential structures are located on the east side of the site (Figure 4). 1 56 , RD .. ~8ALSAM ~:~ RD PARK oF LOT ]2 -3- · CHUF~H RD IZ ' District Boundaries 2 figure 2 Town Square.. Mound, MN N Parcels 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. figure 3 I~?~ City of Mound Medical Properties, Inc. Th~nas L. Giesen/Paul E. Busche Eugene Bickman Medical Properties, Inc. M. E. Mueller Medical Properties, Inc. 8. M. E. Mueller 9. George Shepherd/John R. Morrison 10. M. E. ~ueller 11. George Shepherd 3 Town Square.. Mound, ~'~'~" ~' ~'°° ~°° ~ '~"' ~lllll]lll'lllllll '"-I~,?~ Lynwood Church Road E I Buildings figure 4 A. House B. Mound Clinic C. Mueller Pharmacy D. Laundromat E. Tom Thumb F. Garage G. House 4 Land uses within the area are subject to the requirements of the Mound zoning and subdivision ordinances and the regulations of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Additionally, transportation related items such as curb cuts on Commerce Boulevard (County Road ll0) will require review and a permit from Hennepin County. As shown on Figure 5, all of the Town Square property is presently zoned Central Business (B-l) except the northeast corner which is zoned two-family residential (R-3). Implementation of the Town Square proposal will require the rezoning of the R-3 parcel to B-1. Development of a commercial center is generally consistent with the B-1 provisions of the Mound zoning ordinance. TRANSPORTATION The existing transportation system in the Town Square area contains problems internally with access for delivery vehicles and potential vehicles/pedestrian conflicts and externally with site distance and intersection alignment problems at the intersection of Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. The site is bounded on three sides by roads. Commerce Boulevard to the west which is designated as a minor arterial is a county road, Lynwood Boulevard to the south ]sa local MSAS street and Church Road on the north is a'local street. This road system provides both visibility and accessibility to the property and will serve as a suitable besis for .future development. [TrlLITIES The district is completely served by water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage facilities (Figure 6). All of these systems have adequate capacity to handle redevelopment in the area. Depending on the final site planning configuration and road alignments, it is likely that portions of the existing utility system will require relocation. SECTION 2 - DEVELOPMENT PLAN DISTRICT OBJECTIVES The Town Square District is a major component of Mound's downtown area. In recent months, the City has seen the closing of its largest industry, the Tonka Corporation, and the loss of several businesses. These occurrences have~ highlighted the need for revitalization of the commercial area and have led to the establishment of the goal of strengthening the existing business base, redevelopment of substandard or inefficient areas and.attracting new businesses to the community. In support of the redevelopment aspects of this goal, the following objectives have been developed: Promote land use and development that is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. 5 Encourage new commercial development to strengthen the tax has,, provide additional employment opportunities and expand the services available to Mound residents. Promote development which will help reverse declining valuation trends of commercial property. Acquire and remove buildings that are obsolete, inefficient or under utilized. Provide appropriate quantities of land in suitable locations for the expansion of existing businesses. Provide adequate infrastructure to serve both new and existing development. Provide the necessary framework for the expansion of redevelopment efforts by private enterprise. Remove existing deficiencies in the pedestrian and vehicular elements of the transportation system. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM In late 1983, the Mound City Council established a redevelopment project area as shown on Figure '7. Town Sauare represents the first redevelopment district proposal within this project area. Existing development in the Town Square area (Figure 8) consists of the Mound Medical Clinic, and optometrist's' office, Mueller Pharmacy, Shepherd's Laundry, Tom Thumb convenience store, a vacant truck maintenance facility formerl~ used by Tonka Corporation and two occupied residential structures. Structural deficiencies and land use problems were documented in the Town Square Qualification Report as amended, ~pril, 1984. The redevelopment proposal for Town Square was instigated by a local group. At the present time, the State Bank of Mound and the Mound Clinic are the primary owners of the project. Upon c(xnpletion of the project, it is anticipated that additional owners will be involved. The Town Square site plan involves the clearance of existing buildings within the protect-area and the construction of a retail center and free-standing bank facility (Figure 9). The project has been designed to provide needed expansion space for the bank, clinic and a local drugstore and leaseable space for new business opportunities. The northwest portion of this site contains most of the parking area which will be available in off-peak times for use by the church to the north and the Pond Sports Center on the west side of Commerce Boulevard. 6 Z d~lA/ :~u!uoz ./ / .3,,V~7 ~ NW 'punow .. aJenbs UAAOI Town Square.. Mound, MN 0 ~o ~,o0 ~oo ~ . . ~g~~.A~m~! '~ 1~7 Utilities figure 6 , , Sani.tary Sewer -'--- Water --- Storm Sewer O Manhole or Catch Basin 8 /72~ Town Square .. Mound, MN ,f L A K E M I N N E Redevelopment Project Area 9 ,f~ig~u, re 7 ': ' CLINIC ~Bml~ ~rL ~ /~ v v ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ i~ SITE ................. .~ .... ~ 2'.~~ ....... ~ ~ BLVD ~; ~ BANK DRUG ~~,.; I ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~{ ~ POST ~ "~ V~LL~OS e ~ ~ OFF~CE STATE ~ ; ~:] gQUIRE CONTINENTAL ~". ~ TELEPHONE / i ~,-~ Existing Development ~o. ~o,,~ ~ 1727 TOWN SQUARE SITE BLVD Preliminary Site Plan figure 9a site work I~ank lo.~so,~ ./ compact pnrki*,g landscaped 55' truck 8,800 Site Plan ~2 figure 9b /~77' Along the southern end of the site, the City of Mound is contemplating simultaneous state-aid improvements to Lynwood Boulevard. Plans call for the relocation of the existing road to align the segment of Lynwood Boulevard east of Commerce Boulevard with the segment to the west of Commerce Boulevard at a common intersection point. Such a realignment would require removal of the Anderson Building and the bakery located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. The Town S~uare proposal calls for the acquisition of Parcels 1 through 11, as shown in Figure 3, during late 1985. Construction of all proposed commercial facilities is anticipated to occur during 1985-1986. Projected development quantities and costs are shown on Figure 10. The projected Town Square development involves both expansion space for existing businesses and space for new businesses. The project represents a more efficient utilization of the existing land area and an increase in the amount of floor area of commercial uses. Both of these results are consistent with the City's goal of revitalizing the existing business segment and the provision of new business opportunities. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION Implementation of the Town Square development program is dependent upon joint action and investment by both the City of Mound and the private sector. In order for the project to be financially feasible, the City will assist in property acGulsltions, relocation, demolition and administrative and legal expenses. The City of Mound has entered into a contract with a private developer. The development contract provides specific details pertaining to the Town Square project. The implementation of the development program will be subject to all zoning and environmental controls by the City of Mound, t~ Watershed District and all applicable state agencies. The developer would be required to receive all municipal zoning and building permit approvals from the City and adhere to specified standards and requirements during construction. The City's participation will be limited to site acquisitions, relocation, demolition and administration. All construction and operation of new facilities will be the responsibility of the developer and/or property owner. Administration of the development program will be carried out by the City Manager, City Planner and City Attorney or by individuals assigned by the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority. FISCAL TABULATIONS A tabulation of taxes payable, market values, assessed values and appraised values appear in Figure 11. 13 figure 10 TOWN SQU. ARE DEVELOPMENT Floor Area New Construction Year Square Ft. Unit Cost1 Per Sq. Ft. Total Cost2 Retail 1986 15,100 Drug Store 1986 9,500 Bank 1987 13,000 Clinic 1986 16,700 75 60 83 70 $1,132,500 570,000 1,079,000 1,169,000 TOTAL 54,300 $3,950,500 Source: Preliminary Construction Estimates Ail costs expressed in 1985 dollars. 14 / 0 CD 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 II II II II II II II II II 0 0 0 + + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c) o c) ! C) C:) (::D C) ~ 0 0 o o o 0 o 0 0 II II II o 0 0 0 I 0 + + + Tax Increment Financing Plan, July 15,1985 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN CONTENTS Objectives, Assumptions and Conclusions ........ ~ ...... 1 Cost of Development ................................... 1 Bonded Indebtedness to be Incurred .................... 1 Tax Increment Financing Analysis ...................... 3 Source of Revenue - Tax Increments .................... 4 Recommended Duration of Tax Increment Financing Plan.. 4 Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................. 4 Impact o~ Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................. 5 OPJECTIVES, ASSUMPTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The Town Square Redevelopment District as defined in the Proposed Development Program dated July 15, 1985, is intended to improve cc~,mercial properties within the overall redevelopment pro%ect area as desianated by the Mound City Council. The objective of the City is to strengthen the existing business base through the redevelopment o~ substandard areas and the attraction of new businesses. The Town Square Tax Increment Financing Plan will provide the necessary funds for land acquisition, relocation,ldemolition and administrative expenses. Cost projections were prepared by Smiley/Glotter Associates, Yon Klug and Associates, Inc., and City staff. Debt service projections, based on current bond market conditions, were provided by Miller and Schroeder Municipals, Inc. Based upon assembled data and specified financing assumptions, tax increment financing as outlined in the Town Square Tax Increment Financing Plan is a feasible method for funding the redevelopment of the Town Square area of downtown Mound. COST OF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM The cost of the Town Square Development Program is based on the preliminary development plans which were reviewed informally by the Mound City Council and City staff for consistency with identified municipal p]ans and ordinances. City participation in the Town Square project will include costs for acquisition, relocation, demolition and administration. These costs are estimated as follows: Original Project Cost Capitalized Interest $1,125,000 250,000 Original Total Cost $1,375,000 Increased Land, Relocation and Expenses Demolition and Grading Capitalized Interest Original Project Cost Total Amended Project Cost BONDED INDEBTEDNESS TO BE INCURRED $ 375,000 225,000 400,000 $1,125,000 $2,125,000 The sale of tax increment bonds will provide the funds necessary to implement the Town Square proiect. The proposed bond issue will occur during the third or fourth quarter of 1985 and have annual principal and interest due on March ], ]986, throuDh 2004. Figure 12 contains a debt service schedule for the project. figure 12 G. Oo issue Date: 9/01/85 Sett!emen~ Date: !0/0!/85 First Coupon: 3/01/86 City of Mc, ur, c, Tax ir, crer~er, t Bonos of 1985 Debt Service Schecu!e Date P'r i r,c i oal Couoor, i r,t erest 3/01/86 0.00 0. 000 91,307.50 3/01/87 0.00 0. 000 182,615.00 3/0!/88 20,000.00 6. 400 !82,615.00 3/01/89 25. 000.00 6. 600 181. 335.00 3/01/90 30,000.00 6.9'90 179, 685.00 3/01/91 35,000.00 7. 200 177,615.00 3/01/92 50,000.00 7. 400 175, 095.00 3/01/93 60,000.00 7. 600 17i, 395.00 3/01/94 70,000.00 7. 800 !66,835.00 3/01/95 110,000.00 8. 000 161,375.00 3/01/96 !20,000.00 8. 200 152, 575.00 3/0i/97 130. 000.00 8. 400 i42, 735.00 3/01/98 i40,000.00 8. 600 131, 815.00 3/01/99 175,000.00 8. 700 119,775.00 3/~ !/'30 I95,000.00 8. 800 104,550.00 3/01/01 225. 000.00 8. 900 87, 390.00 3/01/02 235,000.00. 9. 000 67, 365.00 3/01/03 245,000.00 9. 100 46,215.00 3/01/04 260,000.00 9. 200 23, 920.00 Deot Service 91,307.50 182. 615. 00 202,615.00 206,335.00 209,685.00 212,615. ~0 225,095.00 231,395. 00. 236,835.00 271,375.00 272,575.00 272. 735. 00 271,815.00 294,775.00 299,550.00 312. 390.0~ 302,365.00 291,215.. 00 283, 92,8.00 TOTALS 2,!25.000.00 2.546,212.50 4,671.212.50 Accrueo Interest to 10/01/85 = 15.217.92 Total Bond Years = 29038. Gr,=,ss Interest Cost = $' 2.546.212.50 gvera=e Couoor, 8.7~9% ~iC = 8.915% gverace Life = 13.66 Years Discount ~ 98.000 42.500.00 File: rm~ur, o. dbt Preoared Oy MILLER & SCWROEDER MUNICIODLS: 7111/85 2 figure 12 (continued) 91 1/8~ I~'/ I/Bi 3/ I/SB [/ 1/06 l~/ 1186 31 61 1 31 1/88 9/ IIM 31 I/~ 6/ l/~ ~1 1/91 91 1/~1 1~ l/~l 31 1/~ ~I 1I~ ~/ I/~E 1~/ Ilk ~/ 1/9~ 3/ 61 l/~i ~/ 1/~ ~/ I/~ ~/ I/~5 I~ I/~ 3/ ~1 1I% 1~ 31 1/~ BI 1/97 9/ 1/~7 IZ/ 31 1/38 91 1/98 ~81 1I~ 1~ I/~ 3/ 1/~ 6. 9~I 6. ~i si~.. 589 7,~5 7. P45 91,~ ~ 318,~ 5, ~1 5, ~ 1 3~3.8~ 3~MI 3, MI 9!,~ ~ I$1. ~8 1, ~7 IOZ. 614 161, ~ 3.~ 1~,~ ~37~ 1~,87fl 917 Ile, 7~ 1~171 ~ ~ ~. ~ 93, ~ 72, ~ 3,{17 3,~17 91,~ ~,517 I1~,~73 1.~ 11~ lig.~ 1,~ 119.~ 3, 118 3, 118 89, 9~ 91,315 ilg.~ 1.5~ 1~,~ · ~11,~ L 4~6 3, R76 87, ~ 1~. ~9 ~17 3.517 ~,7~ 119,7{~ 3,311 3,311 8~, l~ 4.~1 4,341 ~, ~ . 139.~1 8]} 1~,~1 4,471 1,471 ~11.4~ 3, ~ 3. H~ 63.~ 128, l~ 151,376 1,113 lll.q9 ~15.~73 IC~. 376 Z. 7~ 153.1~ ~,~ 1~,391 1.187 157.~B 3.~5 3.~4~ ~.889 271,47~ ~, Z73 4, ~73 l~. ~ 4~. 169.15~ I. ~ 17~. ~8 ~ffi. 6ffi 4,614 ~.61~ 35,~7 169. IM i. 476 17~ ~8 4~. I~ 7,1~ 7, I~4 ~, 117 13l, 1~ 12/ 31 6/ 9! 1/~3 31 I75,918 2.~ 170,513 175,918 5,~ !OI.~ 8. ~I 8. ~1 ~1,513 139.2~ 6, 7~ 6.7~ 1~. ~ 378,637 .;.i31, d59 355.665 74~, .~t~ 4. c~3,£58 s.686,51~ 3 SOURCE OF REVENUE - TAX INCREMENTS Tax increments will provide all revenues required to pay the principal and interest o~ bonds. In accordance with this tax increment financing plan, all captured assessed value will be necessary to finance the development program and, therefore, the City of Mound will retain the full captured assessment value. Figure 12 portrays the debt service requirements, estimated tax increments available, capitalized interest and the projected net accumulation of tax increment revenues. RECOMMENDED DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN In order to minimize financing costs, 100 percent of the captured assessed valuation will be used to produce the tax increment for debt service. The duration of the proposed Town S~uare Tax Increment financing and bond issue is 20 years. However, project revenues from tax increments indicate that sufficient monies may be available prior to 2004 to pay off all remaining bonds. The bonds will be sold with a 15-year call provision so that such a prepayment can be accomplished. Therefore, the actual duration of the plan will be the time required to collect sufficient tax increment revenues to pay all debt service. The duration of the plan will not exceed 20 years. IMPACT ON CrFHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS The projected impact of the Tax Increment Financing Plan on the taxing jurisdictions in which the district is located is shown on Figure 13. The impact is less than .07 percent of the total valuation for all jurisdictions except Sdhool District No. 277 which is 1.2 percent a~ the City which is 2.7 percent. This project falls within the 5 percent cap adopted as a policy by the Mound City Council. . Under Minnesota Statute 273.76, Subdivision 3, the City has two options for the calculation and application of fiscal disparities. The City has elected to use Option A which retains all tax increment for the retirement of debt. Because_ of this, the fiscal disparities contribution will be spread over the other commercial and industrial properties in the community. This action, however, is expected to have negligible impact. Tax impact should also consider the "no-build" option. If the Town Square redevelopment does not occur, the assessed valuation of the district will rise from $207,176 in 1985 to $436,489 in 2004, assuming an annual inflation rate of 4 percent. Completion of the Town Square project will result in a projected assessed valuation of $3,769,187 by 2004 when the district expires. Upon expiration, the district will have increased the assessed value of all applicable jurisdictions by $3,332,698. o o -.3 0 o I,..3 ,-<; (1) 03 t'..) I-~ v ..,.I t--4 '~o~ > 0)~o 0 0 ~ ~-0 ~ H JOHN F. BIERBAUM 88 SOUTH SIXTH STREET SUITE 925 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55402-1196 (612) 341-7878 August 1, 1985 Mr. Eldo Schmidt Chairman The Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Contract for Private Redevelopment/Town Square Dear Mr. Schmidt: Pursuant to Sections 4.5 and 7.1 of the above mentioned contract between your agency and JRW Properties, Inc., I am enclosing a copy of our commitment from Citibank, N.A. for financing for the Town Square Project. The commitment covers both the construction letter-of-credit and construction financing requirements of the contract. The construction financing commitment is for $3,500,000, which is sufficient with our equity resources to complete construction and leasing of retail and clinic portions of the project. It is contemplated the State Bank of Mound will use its own funds to construct its facility. . Citibank's attorneys have started drafting the loan agreement for the project. I will keep you advised of our progress towards that end. Citibank is in the process of drawing the letter-of-credit for presentation to you. Ver~.truly y~urs, ' F. Bierbaum Enclosure cc: Curt Pearson, City Attorney ,,~John Elam, City Manager CITIBAN¢ ~iV'~!e Banking & investment [icorp Center 53rd Street NY O043 Marjerle F. Futofnick Vice President July 30, 1985 Mr. John Bierbaum c/o The Bellfonte Company 90 South Sixth Street, Suite 925 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Gentlemen: This will confirm that we are prepared to make funds available substantially according to the terms and conditions outlined below. Borrower JRW Properties Inc., a Minnesota corporation. Guarantor A party or parties acceptable to Citibank, N. A. Lender Citibank, N. A. New York, N.Y. Amount $3,950,000 letter of credit Purpose Interest Rate/Fee $3,500,000 construction loan facility LC-performance bond in favor of the City of Mound to assure construction of the Town Square project. Loan-to fund construction costs of the Town Square project in Mound. LC: 1% per annum payable quarterly in arrears. Loan: Citibank Fluctuating Base Rate plus 3/4%, payable monthly, 360 day basis /??/ Availability Facility Fee Maturity Prepayments Security and Supporting Agreements Conditions of Lending Miscellaneous Loan facility to be available until 9/30/86. $26,250 payable upon first use of the construction loan facility. LC expiry 9/30/86. Construction loa~ maturity 10/1/87 Allowed at any time without penalty. First mortgage on the Town Square land and improvements in Mound, Minnesota. Subordination of the City of Mound rights to the land on which Town Square will be constructed. Guaranty by a party or parties acceptable to Citibank N.A. of 1) the Letter of Credit, 2) completion of the property through Certificate of Occupancy and Certificate of Completion, 3) any shortfall of long term funding on the property which is expected to be taken down on or about October 1, 1987. Long term financing for the property is to be arranged and assigned to Citibank prior to any usage of the construction loan facility. Citicorp Real Estate Inc. is to approve disbursement of funds under the construction loan facility. Citicorp Real Estate Inc. loan supervision fees to be paid by the Borrower. / August 20, 1985 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612J553-1950 Mr. Curtis A. Pearson 1100 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 Dear Curt: Enclosed, please find a draft of the resolution for adopting the amended Town Square Development Program and Tax Increment Financing Plan. Please make any changes that you feel are appropriate and either return it to me or forward it to Fran for inclusion in an upcoming City Council agenda. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, VAN DOREN-RAZ ARD-STALLI NGS Zark Koegler City Planner K/kh Enclosure cc: Mr. Jon Elam RESOLUTION NO. 85- 85 A RESOLUTION TO AMEND AND ADOPT A REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND FINANCE PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCE DISTRICT NUMBER 1 PURSUANT TOT HE PROVISIONS OF SEC]TIONS 273.71 TO 273.78, INCLUSIVE, OF THE MINNESOTA STATUTES (CHAPTER 322, LAWS OF MINNESOTA 1979). WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, have determined that it is necessary and desirable and in the public interest to designate, establish, develop and administer a redevelopment district in the City of Mound, Minnesota, pursuant to the provisions of Sections 462.411 to 462.585, inclusive, and the Minnesota Statutes: and WHEREAS, the HRA has referred the redevelopment plan and the tax increment plan to the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, and they have consulted with regard to the proposed district and have recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the HRA and the City Council of the City of Mound have determined that tax increment financing will be necessary to finance the public costs associated with the redevelopment project within the tax increment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.71 to 273.78, inclusive; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on August 12, 1985, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. before the City Council in the Council Chambers in the City Hall in Mound, Minnesota, notice of which has been published once in the official newspaper for the City, not less than ten, nor more than thirty days prior to August 12, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has fully informed the members of the School Board and Board of County Commissions of the fiscal and economic implications of the proposed redevelopment district and tax increment district; and WHEREAS, at said public bearing all persons and parties were given full opportunity to present written or oral testimony, comments, objections, suggestions, and other matters, all of which were duly considered by the Council: and WHEREAS, the creation of the proposed district is necessary and desirable in order to provide employment opportunities, to increase tax base, and to improve the general ecOnomy of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the proposed redevelopment and tax increment district is intended to (a) encourage the retention and expansion of existing intensive businesses, (b) provide land for the expansion of existing businesses, (c) i improve the financial base of the City, (d) provide increased employment opportunities and as much as possible, seek businesses which would employ the unemployed and under-employed, (e) provide a retail service level required by the residents of the community; and WHEREAS, the HRA and the City of Mound are prepared for the relocation of individuals, families, and businesses that may be displaced as a result of carrying out the project; and WHEREAS, the proposed redevelopment would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary; and WHEREAS, the amended tax increment financing plan will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the municipality as a whole, for the redevelopment of the district by private enterprise; and WHEREAS, the amended tax increment financing plan conforms to the general plan for the redevelopment of the municipality as a whole; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, finds that the proposed tax increment financing district is a redevelopment district and will result in increased employment and preservation and enhancement of the tax base within the municipality, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Mound, as follows: It adopts an amended finance plan and redevelopment program for said Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 1 and finds: ae That land in the project area would not be made available for redevelopment without financial aid being sought. That the amended redeveloped plan for the redevelopment area in the localitywill afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the redevelopment of such areas by private enterprise. That the amended redevelopment plan conforms to a general plan for the development of the locality. de That the proposed development of redevelopment, in the opinion of the municipality, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of the tax increment financing is deemed necessary. ee That the Amended Tax Increment Financing Plan conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. That the Amended Tax Increment Financing Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the municipality as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the project by private enterprise. That the municipality elects the method of tax increment computation set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 3, Clause (a). The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember seconded by Councilmember . and The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The followin~ Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk Miscellaneous Legal expenses relating to this transaction are for the account of the Borrower. Governing law to be New York state. The terms and conditions of this commitment are not limited to the above terms and conditions. Those matters which are not covered by or made clear in the above outline are subject to the mutual agreement of the parties. This commitment is conditional upon the preparation, execution and delivery of legal documentation in form and substance satisfactory to us and our counsel incorporating substantially the terms and conditions outline or referred to above. The facility is available from the date of the execution of said documents. Should the documents not be executed by September 30, 1985, our commitment will expire. Please evidence your acceptance of the foregoing by signing and returning to us the enclosed copy of this letter on or before August 1, 1985, the date this commitment (if not accepted thereto) will expire. Very truly yours, By Accepted: (Borrower) t ??3 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REVOCATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A MINOR BOAT REPAIR BUSINESS AT 5542 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD - PID # 13-117-24 33 0027 NOTICE IF HEREBY GIVEN THAT on Tuesday, August 13, 1985, at 8:30 P.M. at the Mound City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, the City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the revocation of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Minor Boat Repair Business at 5542 Lynwood Blvd. and on site legally described as follows: Commencing at northeast corner of Lot 5 than west to the northeast corner of Lot 3 than northwesterly to the easterly line of vacated Linden Street and pssing thru a point in east line of said street 20 feet northeasterly from south line of Lot 8, Lakeside Park, A. L. Crocker's 1st Division, than southwesterly along said easterly line to the north line of southwest 1/4 of southwest 1/4 of Section 13 than west to northeast corner of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 588, than southerly easterly and southerly along said Registered Land Survey to the southeast corner thereof than east along the no~th line of Lynwood Boulevard to the east line of Lot 5 than norther to beginning except road, Koehler's Addition to Mound, Plat 61650 Parcel 0360, PID #13-11~-24 33 0027. All persons appearing at said hearing will be given an opportunity to be heard. Frbncene C. Cl~rk, City Clerk Publish in The Laker August 5, 1985 July 11, 1985 CITY of 5341 L ,.--.'~ ,,OO,-, ~OAD /' ! MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364 (612! 472-1155 Mr. Steve Pauly Blue Lagoon Marina 5542 Lynwood Blvd. Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Steve, At the City Council Meeting on July 9, 1985, the Council voted on two items which may be of critical importance to you regarding the Conditional Use Permit which was approved on June 11, 1985. ' After receiving letters and notes from several citizens along Edgewater Drive (copies of which you received previously), the Council voted to conduct a Public Hearing at its Meeting on August 13, 198~, to consider the accusations that you have violated condition 2.b. of your permit. If the Council determines that you did violate this condition, it could mean your Use Permit for the facility at 5542 Lynwood Blvd. would be revoked, meaning you could no longer operate out of that building. The second item is, that the Council authorized the City Prosecuting Attorney, (Jim Larson ~ 338-4200) to prepare a formal complaint against you for violating the same condition. This issue will be before the court system with the witnesses being the various neighbors who submitted the information to the City. Both of these items will require a good deal of time on your part, but as you said the other day it serves to bring to a head the issues relating to what can and cannot be done at the Marina site and it may be worth it in the long run. Sincerely, Elam City Manager JE:fc / HC 4382 (8/83) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA VS Plaintiff, THIRD DIVISION X COMPLAINT Steve Pauley Defendant Name first, middle, last 5542 Lynwood Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Date of Birth Defendant Address Zip Code MUNICIPAL COURT MOUND SUMMONS WARRANT CALENDAR DATE Calendar Date COMPLAINT Kimberly Yilek .; Complainant, being duly sworn, makes complaint to the above-named Court and states that there is probable cause to believe that the Defendant committed the following offense(s). The complainant states that the following facts establish PROBABLE CAUSE: Your complainant resides at 4861 Edgewater Drive in the City of Mound, and states that on June 18, 1985, your complainant observed Steve Pauley's, the defendant above-named, employees at the Blue Lagoon Marina at 4858 Edgewater Drive in the City of Mound pull a pontoon boat off the water, work on it, and launch it back in the water. On June 18, 1995, your complainant also observed defendant's employees take a boat from the water and trailer it away. On June 22nd, your complainant observed the defendant trailering a boat on Edgewater, and on June 23rd, your complainant observed the defendant's employees tow in a very large non-operating boat to his docks. On June 25th, your complainant observed that the defendant's employees stored a boat in the parking lot all day. Also, on June 25th, your complainant observed employees of the defendant doing adjustments to a boat engine and revving the boat engine on the lake at th~ Marina. On June 28th, your complainant observed the defendant's employees working on a very large boat in the water at the Marina, including running the engine in a very loud manner for approximately 45 minutes, on june 28th, the defendant's employees also worked on a Criss Craft type boat engine unit all day long. Also, on June 26th, Nell Froeming of 4866 Edgewater observed the defendant's employees testing a boat and motor at the Marina and carrying the lower unit of a boat into a 'pickup truck. On June 27th, Nell Froeming observed the defendant's employees testing a cruiser on the lake, and on June 28th, the defendant's employees were sanding a cruiser at their dock. The defendant has a conditional use permit which was granted by the City of Mound on June 11, 1985, which precludes testing, ldading or unloading of boats at the Edgewater site of the Marina. OFFENSE Therefore, based upon the foregoing, your complainant states that during the period June 18, 1985, through June 29, 1985, within the corporate limits of the City of Mound, the defendant Steve Pauley and his employees, did: . COUNT 1, load and unload and test boats at the Edgewater Marina, in violation of a conditional use permit issued by .the City of Mound on June 11, 1985 (Violation of a Conditional Use Permit). WHEREFORE, Complainant prays that said offender may be arrested and dealt with according to law. J~.s D.,~on Kimberly Yilek P~s~utor's Name & 5ignature Sworn to and subscribed and complained of before me this Mound Conditional Use Permit Sec t ion Violation of a Conditional Use Permit Charge Complainant's Name & Signature day of 19 Judge of Hennepin County Municipal Court Recommended Bail 105 RESOLUTION NO. 8~-?0 RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO STEVE PAULY FOR 5542 LYNWOOD BLVD. WHEREAS, Steve Pauly (applicant) has applied for a Conditional Use Permit for minor boat repair and sales; and WHEREAS, the applicant has already commenced operation of the minor boat repair and sales facility at 5542 Lynwood Blvd., a conditional use in a B-1 zone; and WHEREAS, the applicant has stated that all repairs will be minor and that engine and transmission overhauls will not be done on the premises, and that only simple exchanges will be done with new or overhauled parts obtained from suppliers; and WHEREAS, the applicant has stated that boat storage will be restricted to storage only on his property; and WHEREAS, the applicant has stated that there ~ill be no boat testing, unloading or loading at the 4850 Edgewater Drive site; and WHEREAS, the applicant has assured the Council that no auto repair will be done on the site;'and WHEREAS, the applicant is applying for a Conditional Use Permit only until August 31, 1985, and the Council has found that said use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses predominant in the area for the next two and one-half months. Nor will such use adversely affect existing adjacent uses through noise, glare or unsightliness for the next two and one-half months. However, the Council also recognized that a downtown development project proposed for adjacent property may change the character of the adjacent uses such that continued operation of the conditional use may adversely affect adjacent uses and may render the conditional use inconsistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the B-1 zoning district in which said use is located. The Council cautioned that should the applicant wish to extend or renew said conditional us% permit beyond August 31, 1985, that the question of the appropriateness of the continuation of said use as detailed herein would be addressed anew. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: It is hereby determined that the proposed minor boat repair and sales facility is until August 31, 1985, in harmony with the general purposes and interest, of the Zoning Ordinances of the City. 106 June 11, 1985 The Conditional Use Permit is granted in accordance with the following conditions: Applicant store all boats and other materials on his property, and not on public street or adjoining properties. There shall be no testing, loading or unloading of boats at the Edgewater site. There shall be no auto repair at 5542 Lynwood Blvd. All repairs done on the premises shall be minor repairs. Engine and transmission overhauls and other major repairs shall not be done on the premises. This permit expires on August 31, 1985. Applicant shall apply anew for a permit for any conditional use after August 31, 1985', at 5542 Lynwood Blvd. or any other B-1 zoned site within the City. By granting this permit the Council is in no way implying that it will renew the permit or issue a permit for another site. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Jessen. The following Counoilmembers voted in the affirmative: Jessen, Paulsen, Peterson, Polston and Smith. T~e following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Mayor Attest: City Clerk June 28, 1985 Dear Bob, Jim, ?hylis, & Steve, ,, Jim & Bonnie Lanns live next door to Steve Pauley's rental business. He very definately is still using and tieing the 2 Blue Lagoon places together. I have a picture taken June 23 being towed in and on Friday June 28 I have another picture of them working on this one. Jim said they started it up and rebbed and ran it for an hour. He work~ nights so he tries to nap during the afternoon. They also worked on boats June 27. They pulled a pontoon out and ~orked on that and put it right back in. They definately did not take it over to Spring Park or Cooks bay. Even if one of Dick Martin's pnntoons sprung a leak with one pontoon sinking down in the water they hauled it over to Spring Park Bay. They definately are not using the property as described and left to be kept at specifications'for the City of Mound~.~S~ be left as is. The noise of people coming in late at night woke me up last ~ight and one other night. Last Sat JUne~ 15 some guys came in rather loud and unruly and I saw one walking on the roofs t~ of the buildings over there. ~en he say me looking out my kitchen window he got down. I didn't get a chance to get a picture. I never in the 7 years I lived here saw people walking on roofs. On June 14, and one'other marning that was before you told us to keep trac~, two fisherman got out of_.tt~e~m~. their cars talking loudly and I looked to see wkat $~ time it ~as ~d it ~:30 a.m. Mariin never opened until~2_~QO ~.m. The guy who painted the fen~ last Sunday June 23 slopped paint on 2 of my brochile plants in the garden I mentioned it to the painter immediately and ~$ also went over there~ Hothing as been done about it. Martin would have aken care of it immediately.. The guy there didn't take my name or phone number. may.~~ ,etty but I work hard inJ~'~t'ee~e and ~ant things to grow. Sometimes I wish the people who think Steve Pauly was a nice guy who did business the right v~ay, ones on council who think he is, lived here for ~while would think differe~y and would have definately noticed a difference from now and before. From now on the votes for council members who are real~y concerned about the residents will get Jim~ and Bonnie's votes. I need to use up film and will do so within l0 days. Jim and Bonnie Lanns 4828 Edgewater Drive ~n ~cch'on B ,.'oaoc 5q o( ~hc /~o~c/ UJc mc?c//~ cs ,5moll, bu~. pc f,' fi'on Ln ~h e d_.ommi 65io0 u~-d~ ~r-~c~._, ~/I h~c Rc~ (pr~~t~d 9-0 Poo/ 343-1272 O'CONNOR & HANNAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3800 I D $ TOWER MINNF-.-AF3OLI$, MINNESOTA 5540~'-2P54 (~51~) 34~-3~BO0 TI'LEX R9-O584 August 12, 1985 Mayor Robert D. Polston Mrs. Phyllis Jessen Mr. Gary M. Paulsen Mr. Russell H. Peterson Mr. Steven C. Smith Mound City Council Mound, Minnesota 55364 Gentlemen and Mrs. Jessen: This firm has been retained to represent Mr. Paul Scherber, who is the owner of certain lakefront property located at 4850 Edgewater Drive in Mound, Minnesota. Mr. Scherber purchased the property from Mr. Richard Martin, who for many years operated a marina and boat rental business on the premises d/b/a Martin & Sons Marina. The commercial activities that were carried on by Mr. Martin as part of the marina business included the rental of boats and boatslips, the on-land storage of boats, sales of marine supplies and equipment and marine repairs, maintenance and fuel sales. All of these activities were lawful, permitted uses prior to the enactment of the current zoning ordinance, which gave the premises a B-2 (general business) classification. The current B-2 zoning classification includes "service shops" among its permitted commercial uses. This use authorization appears to encompass much of the commercial activity that had traditionally been conducted on the premises by Mr. Martin; but to the extent that it is not expressly permitted, any lawful commercial activity engaged in by Mr. Martin at the time of the enactment of the current zoning ordinance became a lawful non- conforming use under Section 3.404 of the Zoning Code. Mr. Scherber acquired the marina premises subject to the foregoing B-2 zoning classification, and the applicable permitted Mound City Council Members August 12, 1985 Page Two and/or lawful non-conforming uses. He subsequently leased the premises to Mr. Steven Pauly. The value of the marina premises, and the lease arrangement between my client and Mr. Pauly both depend upon the continued use of the premises as a commercial marina which would include all of the permitted and/or lawful non-conforming commercial uses referred to above. Mr. Pauly has occupied the premises since May of this year and has been lawfully engaged in the operation of a commercial boat marina, d/b/a Blue Lagoon Marina. The commercial activities carried on by Mr. Pauly consist of the very same commercial activities that have been carried on at this site for many years by Richard Martin, d/b/a Martin & Sons Marina; and by Mr. Martin's predecessor in occupancy. Nevertheless, it has come to our attention that, in conjunction with Mr. Pauly's application for a conditional use permit at another location on Lynwood Avenue in Mound, Minnesota, an effort has been made to restrict or curtail the lawful use of the marina site at 4850 Edgewater Drive. In this regard, the City Council, on June 11, 1985, granted a conditional use permit to Mr. Pauly respecting his use of the property at the Lynwood Avenue location; but without any justification or lawful authority whatsoever, the permit that was issued to Mr. Pauly purports to restrict his use of my client's property at 4850 Edgewater Drive. I have also been informed that, in an effort to enforce these unauthorized restrictions upon the lawful use of my client's property, the City Attorney recently served Mr. Pauly with a Summons and Complaint citing the lawful use of my client's property as violations of the above-mentioned conditional use permit. I do not represent Mr. Pauly, and my client does not wish to influence the decision of the City Council respecting the issuance of a conditional use permit at the Lynwood Avenue location, at which Mr. Pauly is doing business. However, my client does object to the attempt to impose restrictions on the lawful use of the marina property at 4850 Edgewater Drive as a condition to issuing a permit respecting the use of totally unrelated property in which my client has no interest whatsoever. There is no lawful authority upon which the Council can base such an action; and the Council must be made to recognize that its actions have had, and will continue to have, adverse economic consequences. As a result of the unlawful and unwarranted acts of the City Council, the Marina's income is substantially off prior years. By inhibiting Mr. Scherber's tenant (i.e., Mr. Pauly) from lawfully using the premises as a commercial marina, the Council has restricted the ability of Mr. Pauly to generate the revenue required to pay the rental called for under his lease. Substantial rental payments have already been delayed, and the lease is now in default. Mound City Council Members August 12, 1985 Page Three Mr. Scherber's property is located in an area that has always been zoned for commercial and business uses. In fact, the operation of a commercial marina at 4850 Edgewater Drive predates most of the residential property in that area. The City Council's recent attempts to restrict the continued lawful use of this property as a commercial boat marina constitutes harrassment. By their actions, the Council members have encouraged, aided and abetted the neighbors in their attempts to unlawfully drive the marina out of operation. The continued operation of this property as a commercial boat marina is an important and valuable property right for which Mr. Scherber has paid a considerable amount of money. Prior to purchasing the property, Mr. Scherber contacted appropriate city officials and obtained their confirmation that a commercial boat marina could lawfully continue operating at this location. He relied on their confirmation when he purchased the property. The subsequent actions by the members of the City Council constitute a taking of Mr. Scherber's property right to continue operation of the marina. Mr. Scherber intends to hold the City Council members individually and personally liable under state and federal laws, including Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act, for the uncompensated taking of his valuable property rights, and for all damages incurred by the taking, including the economic loss sustained to date, together with his costs and attorney's fees. This letter constitutes formal notice of Mr. Scherber's claim to compensation for the loss that he has already incurred. Any further attempts by the City to restrict Mr. Scherber's lawful operation of a marina at the 4850 Edgewater Drive location will be evidence of bad faith for which Mr. Scherber will seek punitive damages. Sincerely, Thomas R. Sheran TRS/th AFFIDAVIT STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) RICHARD MARTIN, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says as follows: 1. That I owned and operated Martin and Son Marina at 4850 Edgewater Drive, Mound, Minnesota from June 29, 1973 until May 3, 1985, at which time I sold the Marina to Paul Scherber; 2. That during this period of time I owned and operated this Marina, I conducted the following activities at this location: a) Summer boat storage b) Winter boat storage c) Fuel sales d) Boat service and repair (major and minor) e) Engine service and repair (major and minor) f) ' Cleaned and painted boats g) Some launching of boats and in and out service in Spring and Fall h) Marina sales from shop 3. 'That approximately ninety-five percent (95%) of all mechanical and service work was jobbed out to mechanics who performed the service work and repairs at the Marina location; 4. That I hired Keith K~er and Art Ridgeway among others to per- form this service work. Engine service and repairs were performed on everything from small fishing motors to twin engine cruisers; 5. That ~ would bill for the service and repair work and pay my jobbers their service fees when the money w-as collected; 5. That the service and repair work was done in water as well as on shore at the Marina location; 6. That to the best of your affiant's knowledge, these Marina activities were conducted at the Marina by the former owners prior to 1973. FURTHER YOUR AFFIANT SAITH NOT. Subscribed and sworn to before me this /3~L~ of ~q~ ~ , 1985. Notary./ - . -/ RICHARD MARTIN -2- TO THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL I lived in the City of Mound on Edgewater Drive directly across from Martin and Sons for a number of years. During the tine from 1977 thru 19~2; I not only worked for Mar%in and Son, I also leased ;,iartln. Mv job duti~ revolved around ser¢ice service space from Dick operations on the rental b~k~ts, slip custoners, and o'%her boats brought in for repairs. The service Offered included outboard 'and I'/0 repairs, winter storage, winterizing and hull cleaning was offered in the fall. I utilized, the double garage for work area and DJ.ok i{artin supplied the p~rts used for the repairs. I stopped doin~ repairs in i982 when I left Minnesota to move to Arkansas. RTE ~, BOX 15~A BUL~ SHOALS, ARKANSAS 72619 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612_/553-1950 FROM: DATE: SUBJ: City Council, Planning Commisslonand Staff Mark Koegler, City Planner August 7, 1985 Tonkawest Business Center Enclosed, please find the proposed ~lsnn_~e~_ !ndustr~a! Area ordi__qnance amendment and the conditional use permit dr~~ Ba~6~ Mi~n~ta-~. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendment and approval of the Balboa conditional use permit resolution contingent upon the establishment of a $1000 escrow account to-cover staff review and administration. Additionally, the d~aft of the operations permit for Lunalite, Inc. has been included in this packet. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the operations permit resolution contingent upon the payment of a $200 application fee. Add to 23.640.3 Conditional Use Planned Industrial Area subject to the requirements of 23.650. Add the following section: 23.650 Planned Industrial Area (PIA) 23.650.1 .Purpose The purpose of the Planned Industrial Area (PIA) is to facilitate the conversion and division of industrial structures into two or more separate uses in order to promote economical and efficient land use, expand employment opportunities, improve levels of amenities and/or encourage creative design. 23.650.2 Conditional Use Permit The owner or owners of any tract or tracts of land in the Light Industrial (I-l) district may submit to the City Council for approval, a plan for the use and development of such a tract of land as Planned Industrial Area (PIA) by making application for a Conditional Use Permit authorizing completion of the project according to the plan. 23.650.3 Subdivision Industrial buildings may be subdivided into two or-more units under a condominium plat or other appropriate technique providing that the parking requirements and other applicable standards in the Mound Zoning Code and conditional use permit are met. All condominium plats or subdivisions of any nature shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to filing with the county. All plats shall be consistent with the development plan as included in the conditional use permit. 23.650.4 Conditional Use Permit - Procedure Conditional Use Permit Review/Issuance. The conditional use permit review shall include an application for conditional use permit subject to the requirements of 23.505. Additionally, the site plan (master development plan) shall include the following: Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of owners, developer, and designer; name of development, date, north point and scale. Sufficient information on adjacent properties to indicate relationships to the proposed development, including such information as land divisions, land use, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, significant natural features or physical improvements and drainage pattern. Existing site conditions including contours at intervals sufficient to indicate topo_c~aphic conditions (generally two feet). Treatment of transitional zones around the perimeter of the project for protection of adjoining properties, including setbacks and buffer areas, landscaping, fences or other screening, height limitation or other provisions. e® A narrative or graphic explanation of the planning and design concepts and objectives the owner intends to follow in implementing the proposed development, including a description of the character of the proposed development; the rational behind the assumptions and choices made; the compatibility with the surrounding area; and design considerations for architecture, engineering, landscaping, open space, etc. A statement of intent with regard to selling or leasing all or portions of the proposed development. g. Proposed phasing timetable. 23.650.5 Permitted Uses Within any Planned Industrial Area, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following. (Numbers) refer to the Standard Industrial classification Manual, 1972 edition. public buildings public and private utility uses refrigerated warehousing (4222) household goods warehousing and storage (4224) 23.650.6 Uses by Operations Permit within any Planned Industrial Area, no structure or land shall be used for 'the following except by operations permit. (Numbers) refer to the Stahdard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972 edition. Manufacturing of: food and kindred products (20) excluding 2011-2017, 2044, 2046, 2062, 2063 and 2074-2079 textile mill products (22) apparel and other finished products made from fabrics and other similar materials (23) millwork (2431) wood kitchen cabinets (2434) furniture-and fixtures (25) paper and allied products (26) excluding 2611-2631 and 2661 printing, publishing and allied industries (27) leather and leather products (31) excluding 3111 stone,clay, glass and concrete products (32) excluding 3251, 3255, 3259, 3271-3281 and 3292 cold rolled steel sheet, strip and bars (3316) steel pipe and tubes (3317) fabricated metal products, except machinery and transportation equipment (34) excluding 3448 and 3471-3489 machinery, except electrical (35) excluding 3519, 3523, 3531-3533, 3536 and 3537 electrical and electronic machinery, equipment and supplies (36) excluding 3612, 3624, 3672 and 3691-3693 measuring, analyzing and controlling instruments; photographic, medical and optical goals; watches and clocks (38) miscellaneous manufacturing industries (39) Transportatic~, ~ieation and other Public Utilities Including: local and suburban transit and interurban highway passenger transportation (41) general warehousing and storage (4225) Wholesale Trade Including: durable goods (50) excluding 5012, 5031, 5039, 5051, 5052, 5082, 5083 and 5093 nondurable goods (51) excluding 5154-5172 Retail Trade Including: building materials, hardware, garden supply, and mobile home dealers (52) excluding 5271 general merchandise stores (53) food s totes (54) auto and home supply stores (5531) apparel and accessary shops (56) furniture, home furnishings and equipment stores (57) eating and drinking places (58) miscellaneous retail (59) excluding 5983 and 5984 Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Including: banking (60) credit agencies other than banks (61) security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges and services (62) insurance carriers (63) insurance agents, brokers and service (64) real estate (65) combinations of real estate, insurance, loans and law offices (66) holding and other investment companies (67) Services Including: personal services (72) business services (73) automotive repair, service and garages (75) including boats and watercraft miscellaneous repair services (76) motion pictures (78) amusement and recreation services except motion pictures (79) excluding 7948, 7992 and 7996 health services (80) legal services (81) social services (83) nonprofit membership organizations (86) miscellaneous services (89) 23.650.7 Operations Permit - Procedure Applications for operations permits accompanied by the fee as established by the City Council shall be filed with the Building Official. After approval of the Operations Permit, the applicant, owner or developer, before commencing any work or obtaining any building permits, may be required to make a minimum cash deposit of $250. The Council may establish an amount above the minimum deposit at the time the permit is approved and this deposit shall be held in a special Developer's Escrow Account to cover administrative and legal expenses incurred by the City of Mound. Approval of a planned industrial area operations permit shall be by the City Council after recommendation by the City Staff. At the option of the City Council, the City may elect to call a public hearing to solicit public input on an operations permit application. A hearing may be called to review concerns regarding the use or discharge of toxic substances, emissions, special access, parking or loading requirements, noise, storage or other relevant factors. 23.650.7 Criteria for Granting Operations Permits The criteria .for granting Operations permits shall be the same as the criteria listed in Section 23.505.1 for the issuance of conditional use permits. ATTEST: May~r City Clerk Adopted b~ the City Council August 13, 1985 Publish i'n The Laker September 9, 1985 MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 22, 1985 Present were: Vice Chairman Thomas. Reese; Commissioners Robert Byrnes, Geoff Michael Wi 11lam Meyer and Frank Weiland; Council Representative Steve Smith; City Manager don Elam; City Planner Mark Koegler; Building Official Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie Stutsman. Absent was Chair Elizabeth Jensen and Commissioner Kenneth Smith. Also present were the following interested persons: William C. Thal, Nell Weber, Frank Ahrens and Greg Gustafson. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 8, 1985 were presented for consideration. Weiland moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the July 8, 1985 Planning Commission meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Commission moved on to Item 3 of the Agenda. o Planned Industrial Area Ordinance The City Planner, Mark Koegler, noted that this was on the Council agenda to- morrow night. He commented'that since the'Commission last met, this has been kind of an evolving process. He has met with the City Attorney' to discuss this and he thinks they have found kind of a common concensus. What they did was essentially get together the 3 pieces in the packet. First exhibit is the exact ordinance that you've seen previously. Basically, you've approved the concept of Exhibit 1 as long as it went forth consistent with your- thinking; it estab- lished one conditional use permit for the entire structure and used the occupancy permit as a final review of a business prior to its operating in the Tonka struc- ture. The intent of this ordinance was to permit the subdivision of the property and to al Iow businesses to locate in Mound with minimal delay due to municipal review. Exhibit 2.is a revision tO that ordinance and carries out some of the same points with some changes. What really spurred this on was some pretty significant discussion Curt and he had about specific concerns regarding the occupancy permit being the appropriate vehicle for final check for a business going into the Tonka center. Curt commented to him on the great amount of pres- sure that would perhaps be placed on the Building Official or staff person making the decisior=. If there is any suspicion that firm has toxic waste problems or any emission problem, etc., decision on'those conditions should be made by the Planning Commission and Council rather than the staff. That's one side of the concern and the other side is we're trying to provide as expedious of a process as possible to get new tenants/owners into the Tonka building. What they've done is set up new permanent vehicle. Exhibit 2 is a revised ordinance which Planner proceeded to review. 23.650.1 and 23.650.2 is essentially unchanged. 23.650.3 provides for legal platting. Reese questioned that it appears to him that if they're subdividing, theyld have to come up with complete plans and how do we know who is going in there? how would you know parking requirements, etc.? We'd be making them predict what they can't predict now. Koegler stated they're predicting right now. First, we're issuing one conditional use for Tonka building to set up as a PlA. When we look at that CUP, we'll look at setbacks, landscaping, parking lot improvements, etc. of a general nature that will be consistent with industrial use and performance standards. We don't know what the ultimate mix may be. Requirements will become more and more specific as each operations permit issue and use comes in to that facility. Reese questioned that they would not be requiring them to show wall lines, occupancies, square footage, etc. Koegler stated they would require that. Greg Gustafson, Attorney for Balboa, stated he was not concerned with that for Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1985 - Page 2 subdividing, but was concerned under Conditional Use Permit Procedures 23.650.4 that requires names, etc. because they don't know all of that. Reese stated that he sees, in Exhibit B, a departure from what the Commission supported to keep the ordinance broad. Koegler agreed it was a departure be- cause the City Attorney convinced him some points had to be nailed down. If we allowed the ordinance to be too general, we would be setting up problems. Reese liked Exhibit 1 better and had a tough time understanding what wording of some paragraphs in Exhibit 2 meant. Reese had noted on the original Exhibit 1 about adding ground for denial on occupancy permit. Koegler said he would add that in Exhibit 1. Koegler reviewed the differences between Exhibit i and 2; I is very general and as long as business came in consistent with that, the occ~pancy permit was issued by the Building Official after making the final check--she'd have to look at the plan, parking, etc. and make the decision alone. 2 has per- mitted uses and other uses by operations permit; Council would be able to review all of the uses and they would make the decision.' A hearing would not be required; could be optional. Eliminating hearing would cut at least 2 weeks off of process. Greg Gustafson suggested letting the Council make decision on Exhibit 1; they could refer it back to Planning Commission or a public hearing if they think there's a problem. He wants to expedite the process so they can give Toro a date by which they can occupy the building. He doesn't want to get at odds with the staff or City Attorney and doesn't want to minimize the review process. He thinks it very good suggestion to have a review by the Council or Planning Commis- sion, both if necessary, but wants to expedite process and' appreciates the Commis, sion trying to facilitate the leasing of the building. Koegler reviewed the possible courses of action the Commission might take: 1) Endorse Exhibit 1 with the original thinking; 2) Endorse taking mechanics of Exhibit 2 and say that's the way you want to go and 3) Take Exhibit 1 and ask staff to.put paragraphs back in and basically come up with Exhibit 3 which would have grounds for the Building Official's denial. He also commented Commission should debate the language to read Council, Planning Commission, City Manager or whoever you want to make the decision~ (He could hand out this revision at the Council meeting,) Gustafson stated he'd be glad to have Council make the decision, but he questioned if the Building Official isn't in a better position to keep track of parking and so forth than the Council? The Commission discussed the proposals at length including what the time table would be for getting approvals of occupancies for moving into the Tonka building. Michael moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to approve Exhibit 1 as modified adding paragraphs on grounds for denial and on subdivision of industrial buildings. The vote was unanimously in favor. I tern .4. Conditional Use Permit - Balboa Minnesota It was noted that the public hearing was called for the Conditional Use. Permit for July 23, 1985; the staff suggested the Council open the hearing and then continue it to August 13, 1985 Council meeting. (Per City Planner's letter of duly 17, 1985) CITY OF MOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONINC COMMISSION (Please type the following information) Fee Paid _~co . Date Filed ,~./- ~_~- Street Address of Property 5340 Shoreline Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota 55364 Legal Description of Property: Lot_ See Exhibit XXXXX ,,, A~~xxxx 3. Owner's Name Balboa Minnesota Co. D~y ?hone No. 472-1400 Address 5340 Shoreline Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota 55364 Applicant (if other than owner): Balboa Minnesota Co. (same as owner) Name Address Day Phone No. 5. Type of Request: ( ) Variance ]~XX) Conditional Use Permit Planned_ ~nd~strial Area ( ) Zoning Interpretat,on ~evtew ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment ( ') Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: resent Zoning District I-1 Liqht Industrial Existing Use(s) of Property Vacant Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? yes If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Cond±t±onal Use Permit Application of C.R. Mfg. Co., filed June 21, 1985, approved, Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request.*and adopted at a Meeting of Mound C~ty Council July 11, 1985, as Resolution No. 85-83. 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 official of'the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of post ng, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by(taw. i i, / ~ I [ ~ ~ Date 7'/31/85 Signature of Applicant .' ...... ~-, -"-.~ ' Gregory D. Gustafson, ~t~ney for Applicant Balboa Minnesota Planning Commission Recommendation: Co. Date [cil Action: Resolution No. Date ,Procedure for Conditional Use Permit D. Fe (2) Case #_ /'5--Yj Location of: Signs, easements, underground utillties, etc. Indicate North compass directlon. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff' and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. III Request for a Conditional Use A. All information requested below, a site plan as described in Part II, and a development schedule providing reasonable guarantees for the completion of the construction must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. Type of development for which a Conditional Use Permit is requested: 1. Conditional Use (Specify): Planned Industr±al Area (PTA) M±xed off±cq/l±ght ±ndu.~tr±al/warehouse 2. Current Zoning and Designation in the future Land Use Plan for Hound T-1 - Ligh'l- Tnrtr~.c::-I--r']~l C. Development SChedule: 1. A development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable guarantees for the completion of the proposed degetop,meqt~ See Master Re~evelop~ept Plan att~chRd b~re~o (Page_2)Exn~,t. ~ ~reto ~. ~stimate o? cost or the project: $ unable ~o ascertain at tn~s t~me. D. Density (for residential developments only): N/A 1. Number of structures: 2. Dwelling Units Per Structure: a. Number of type: Efficlenc~ 2 Bedroom 3. ~ot area per dwelling unit: 1 Bedroom 3 Bedroom q. Total lot area: IV. Effects of the Proposed Use List impacts the proposed use will have on property In the vicinity, In- cluding, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, 'and, describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts. See attached Exhibit C to Master Redevelopment Plan (Supplement to C.R. Mfg. Co. Conditional Use Permit Application). In addition- thereto, the impact on the surrounding property will not exceed typical light industrial uses. o~ 9ulpaooos .'s~oseuuIN 'puno~l '~aSc~ ep~ae~a~ o~ uo~ppv uIoouI~ m'aqs-,qv. 'LL ~ooI~ 'a. IsnIouI ~t o~ C.t azo~ aL# 'moa-Yz '056L ~o$ ~uamaasa ~o zeos s o~ ~oa~qna 9LO0 $C. ~Z LtL ~-t $o %asj :oK 'G'I xs& · $oaaaqz ~sId papaooaa LInp. eqz o~ ~uIpaooos .'s~uozeuuIN 'punoN '~s~ episa~s~ o~ uo;$;ppv :¥9# ELEL6[ -o~ 9C-00 C.C. 98 4~ ~t :oK 'G'I xw,T, : '9OggL 'os aero oz zuwnean~ '~Z zo~ pies $o saeuaoo Za~aqznos pus aq~ ~s ~Z ~o~ pisa ~o e~auaoo ~semq~uos pus ~sa~qZao~ ~aspuuoq ~IaeqZnos pus 'assr 'qZaog eqZ 'AZ pus 98 'fie aZo~ pl~s $o sau~ ~a~punoq qznos pus qZaos eqZ,'~g Zo~ pisa $o aau;i La~punoq LIaaqznoR pus ~as~ 'qZao~ au$ the duly recorded plat thereof. The Easterly line of Lot 18, Block 11, said Subdivision is marked by Judicial landmarks set pursuant to Case No. 15803. Tax I.D. No: Part of 13 117 24 34 0016 Torrens Certificate: No. 353853 Encumbrances: Lots 13, 14, 15, 17 and 18 are subject to a reservation by the State of Minnesota of all minerals and mineral rights. Subject to an easement to the City of Mound over the North 2 feet of Lots 13 and 14 as shown in Documen~ No. 1396755, filed September 26, 1980. PARCwr. #8: Le,~al Description: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 36, Auditor's Subdivision Number ~nnepin County, Minnesota, and that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 117, Range 24, all described as beginning at a point on the North line of said Lot 36, distant 25 feet West from the Northeast corner thereof, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 15078; thence East to the Northeast corner of said Lot 36, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 16002; thence South along the East line of said Lo~ 36 and its extension to an intersection with a line drawn parallel to and 33 feet Southerly from the Southerly line' of said Lot 36; thence Westerly along ~he last described parallel line to its inSersection with a line drawn South, parallel to the East line of said Lot 36 and its extension, from the point'of beginning; thence North along said last described parallel line 34.15 feet to a point marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 15078; thence continuing North along said last described line 121.9 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: That part of Lot 8, Block 6, Sylvan Heights Addltion~ to Mound-Minnetrista Township, Hennepln County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of-said Lot 8, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 16002, thence East along the North line of said Lot 8, 368.35 fee~ to a point which is 134.4 feet Westerly from the Northeast corner of said Dot 8, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 15805; thence South parallel to 'the Eas~ line of said Lo~ 8, 287,3 feet to the Bouth line of said LoZ 8, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuan~ ~o Torrens Case No. 15805, thence Westerly and Northwesterly along the South line of said Lot 8, 207.77 feet to a point which is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 16002; thence continuing Northwesterly along said South line 162.58 feet to a point which is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 16002; thence continuing Northwesterly along said South line to the West line of said Lot 8; thence Northerly along the West line of said Lot 8 to a point which is 40.14 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Lot 8, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens. Case No. 16002; thence continuing Northerly along said West line 40.14 feet to the point of beginning, according to the recorded plat thereof. Tax I.D. No: Part of 13 117 24 34 0066 Torrens Certificate: No. 410243 Encumbrances: Subject to County Road 15 over approximately South 33 feet of Parcel 1. Pursuant to Stipulation filed in Case 17105, three judicial landmarks in Northwest corner of said parcel are to be corrected by relocation approximately 1.5 feet East of present location. Legal Description: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 13, Township 117, Range 24, described as beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 36, Auditor's Subdivision Number 170, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 16002; thence Westerly, along the North line of said Lot 36 a distance, of 25 feet to a point marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 15078; thence North, parallel with the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, to the point of intersection with a line 40 feet Northerly of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the Northerly line of said Lot 36 said point of intersection being marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 17105; thence Easterly, along the last described parallel line, a distance of 25 feet to the point of intersection with the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, said ,,'~oaauuI~ 'g~unoo uI~auuaH ~dI~au.~o$ a~alz~auuI~-puno~ o~ uoI~Ippv e~q~taH usAIgg. 9900 ~- ~Z L~ ~ $o %-,~& 'os '(I'I x~& MICHAEL J. ADAMS GREGORY D. GUSTAFSON JAMES D. ATKINSON Ili DANIEL R. TYSON GARY D. PIHLSTROM WILLIAM M. HABICHT .JAMES C. LAMPHERE GUSTAFS0N & ADAMS, P.A. ATI'0RNEYS AT LAW SUITE 411 7400 METRO BOULEVARD EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 TELEPHONE (612) 835-7277 August 3, 1985 OF COUNSEL HARRY GUSTAFSON HAND DELIVERED Honorable Members - City of Mound Ci%y Council and Planning Commission Mr. Jon Elam Ms. Jan Bertrand 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Application for Conditional Use Permit - Planned Industrial Area Balboa Minnesota Co. Dear Honorable Council Members, Plannin§ Commission, Mr. Elam and Ms.. Bertrand: , This office is local counsel for Balboa Minnesota Co., a Minnesota cor- poration, which previously submitted to you an application for Conditional Use Permit - Planned Industrial Area ("Permit Application"), with respect to the Tonka West Business Cen.ter ("Facility"'), formerly Tonka Corporation's headquar- ters. This letter is intended to supplement and modify the information con- tained in the Permit Application, The Permit Application included as Exhibit A a sketch of the Facility ("Sketch"), together with information regarding parking ajdacent thereto. Included in the Sketch was certain property located to the southeast of Cypress Lane and Shoreline Boulevard, showing 40 ca~ parks which should not be taken into consideration in connection with the Permit Application. In addition, our analysis of the available parking adjacent to the Facility indicates variances from the car parks as provided on the Sketch. hmnediately to the west of the Facility there are approximately 43 car parks, as detailed on the Sketch. Adjacent to the Facility to the north and across the Burlington Northern rail spur there exists approximately 245 car parks, as opposed to 147 detailed on the Sketch. We have yet to ascertain the optimal design for efficient parking, and upon reassessment of the space available, this number may vary upward or downward. Our analysis indicates that there are approximately 50 car parks adja- cent to the east side of the Facility. Our analysis also indicates 92 car parks adjacent to the south side of the Facility, consistent with the number provided on the Sketch. Honorable Members - City Council Planning Commission Mr. Jon Elam Ms. Jan Bertrand Page Two August 3, 1985 Therefore, our analysis indicates a total of approximately 427 car parks for use in conjunction with the Facility, subject to reassessment as to optimal configuration which may result in a variance from the total number calculation. The Sketch attached to the Permit Application reflects a number of parking stalls which understates the actual level of available parking for use in conjunction with the Facility° We trust the information provided in this letter will supplement the information provided in the Permit Application and, where inconsistent, the information provided in this letter should be used in your review of our Permit Application. If you have any questions regarding parking availability, please feel free to call me° Very t~yyours, J Gregory D~gGustaf§on ~ GDG/maj Enclosures cc: David H~ltquist C. Michelle Marlo Scott Anclerson Mark Koegler MIS43/PARK1.1 EXHIBIT A TO APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY C.R. MFG. CO. BACKGROUND & MARKETING OBJECTIVES Upon completion of our analysis of the existing 408,000 square foot faci)ity locatea on 12.6 acres in Mound, Minnesota (herein "Property"), we have concluaeo the roi!owing, subsequent to closing on the Property in February, 1985: The Property has been evaluated in terms of local industrial, retail, commercial and light assembly markets and existing physical facility constraints. As a result, this redevelopment plan proposes subdividing the existing Prdperty for multiple uses and occupancies. In the proposed overall reoevelopment of the prOperty, the existing physical constraints and the current market potential served as guidelines and became criteria by which retrofit cost decisions were made. The overall aim has been to create a marketable and aesthetically pleasing structure for both Balboa Minnesota Co, ("Balboa") and the City of Mound ("City"). Our marketing objective has been specifically to create a new environment in which potential users can either work or shop comfortably and efficiently while maintaining the proper exteriOr building ~ppearance demanded by our pro- posed clientele and the City. Many of the physical needs of prospective tenants can be met by the existing facility structure and the existing mechanical and electrical systems that are currently in place. The major part of our re-use plans consider subdivision of the building into multiple units and uses, with separate utilities systems that - Page Two - service the individual units. This plan was created by the general requirements of the marketplace and is intended to provide flexibility in adapting to speci- fic tenancies. In the future, we will present the City with a concept which will allow indivi- dual classification of units ranging in size from 17,860 square feet to 113,180 square feet. This proposed concept would be provided in the future and will allow for maximum flexibility in our marketiny efforts (leasing or selling). The individual unit sizes were determined using market research and keeping in mind the physical constraints of the facility. As the marketin§ program progresses to completion, the subdivision plan will be presented reflectin~ the composition of the remaining Property. At that time, specific tenancies will have been created in portions of the facility, thus enabling us to determine the best possible alternatives for the remainder of the facility as the same is sub- divided. FACILITY ANALYSIS Enclosed with this application on subsequent pages are facility analyses of Units 1 through 8, which in the composite total the 408,000 square foot Mound/ Tonka Toys Corporate Headquarters. These analyses currently depict the physical constraints that have created our marketing parameters. PARKING Currently parking exists in the amount of approximately 350 spaces located' in five individual areas, described as follows: - Page Three - PARKING (Con%ipued) 1) 43 car park area West of Unit I 2) 147 car parks N~rth of Units 1 and 2 3) 40 car parks South of Units 2 and 3 4) 82 car parks Adjacent to Southern elevation Units 2 and 4 5) 63 car parks Adjacent to Units 7 and 8 Redevelopment of these parking areas w~th new bituminous surfacing and concrete curbing as well as additional landscaping will maximize the efficiencies of these areas to provide additional parking areas for the redeveloped facility. Currently, if you analyze the square footage of the entire facility (408,000 s.f.) vs, the potentional parking areas (382 spaces) you will see a ratio of approximately one car park per 1,000 square feet of facility area. As we rede- velop the faci)ity, we are proposing alternate and mixed uses throughout which will have varied parking requirements, It is our opinion that with these varied uses, the current parking situation, as redeveloped, will be adequate to fulfill the new mixed use development. - Page Four - The above opinion takes into consideration the following mixed uses: Unit 1 - Light assembly, storage, production Unit 2 -Office, light assembly, production, storage Unit 3 - Office, retail, light assembly, day care Unit 4 - Hiyh bulk warehousing, office, retail, light industrial, mini-storaye Unit 5.- li§ht assembly, storage, food production Unit 6 - Office, retail, light assembly, production, storage Unit 7 - Light assembly, storage, production, retail, office Unit 8 - Office, retail, restaurant, medical, health club SUMMARY As can be summized from the foregoing information, we have created a marketing plan that will positively impact the surrounding community of Mound. As speci- fic tenancies develop, we will keep the City staff informed as to our progress, and we wil work closely with you on any zoning or building code requirement changes that may arise. At this time, with this application for C & R Mfg. Co., we feel we have outlined in its entirety our current 9oals and obje~ives. Should you have any questions in regard to this application, please feel free to contact Gregory D. Gustafson, counsel for Balboa, at (612) 835-7277, or Scott R. Anderson, Anderson & Associates, at (612) 934-2053. We look forward to working closely with you in this dynamic redevelopment of the Property. Thank you for your consideration of this Conditional Use Permit request. AGR23A/SRA1.1 By Gregory D. Gustafson, Attorney for Balboa Minnesota Co. ~? FACILITY ANALYSIS 1 UNIT NO. 1. SQUARE FOOIAGE: 60,800 square feet 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR HEIGHT: 29' O" 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 60 x 25; 38 x 25 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 5. PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed-Use DiStrict (proposed) - light assembly, stora, ge, production 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts throughout entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 1000 amp. 440/220/110 volt service Facility Analysis - Page Two Un it 1 Be EXISTING HVAC: 5 roof mounted forced air gas fired heating units and a supplemental gas fired 50,000 CFM air makeup unit; 2 gas fired dock heaters and a free standing gas fired furnace with blowers 9' PROPOSED HVAC: Retrofit and self-meter existing equipment 10. EXISTING BATH FACILITIES: None 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Men's and women's facilities tb City of Mound occupancy requirements to be installed. 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Approximatley 6,000 square feet inner court truck yard 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: Reuse existing area 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: None 15. PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: None (see unit 3 narrative) financial Analysis - Pa~e Three Unit 1 16. EXISIING PARKING AREA: Gravel area adjacent to west elevation unit 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: 43 car parks to be constructed with bituminous surface and cement curbing ' Northern elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSIEMS Wet system connected throughout facility, group 3 ordinary hazard 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zOned for Unit 1 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Patching and minoS.repair B. FLOOR REPAIRS:' Ail existing pits for mechanical distribution to be filled C. DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCTION: Overhead garage door entry to Unit 2 to be filled in with masonry block construction LANDSCAPING: Landscape plan to be submitted for southern elevation of the facility and west of the new parking area. MI S41/BALBOA2.1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIl NO. 2 1. SQUARE FOOTAGE: 66,710 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR ,HEIGHT: 14' ~" to bottom of bar joist (Butler metal building ceiling) 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 20 x 60 and 25 x 35 and 20 x 25 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 0 PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed Use District (proposed) - office, storage, light assembly, production 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 1000 amp. 440/220/110 volt service Facility Analysis - Page Two Unit 2 EXISTING HVAC: 4 ceiling mounted gas fired forced air furnaces 9. PROPOSED HYAC: Distribution modification new individual gas service and individual meters and complete retrofit of existing furnaces 10. EXISTING BATH FACILITIES: Men's (8 stools) and women's (15 stools) lavatories 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Retrofit of existing bathrooms with new bathroom partitions and floor finishes 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: None 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: Demolition of southeastern elevation of facility to allow for truck dock access to Unit 2 and western elevation of Unit 4 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: None 15. PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: None (offices to be provided in first floor, Unit 3) Financial Analysis - Pa~e Three Unit 2 16. EXISTING PARKING AREA: Shared parking area with Unit 4 - total = 82 stalls 17, PROPOSED PARKING AREA: Resurface and cement curb new construction for above- referenced parking area Northern elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Wet system connected throughout facility, Group 3 ordinary hazard 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 2 20. MI SCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Repair existing Butler metal roof, patch "hump" areas B. FLOOR REPAIRS: Broom sweep and seal existing concrete finish C. DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCTION: See Unit 1 east elevation new construction; see above proposed loading area new construction, new demising wall construction east elevation Unit 4 D. LANDSCAPING: Plan to be presented - islands in common parking area to be planted MI S41 / BALBOA2 . 1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIT NO. 3 1. SQUARE FOOTAGE: 19,660 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR HEIGHT: 12' 0" (to be modified to 8' 0" clear or 9' 0" clear - typical office finish) 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: Not applicable EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed-Use District (proposed) -retail, office, light industrial 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 600 amp 220/110 volt service Facility Analysis - Page Two Unit 3 EXISIING HVAC: 40 ton and 10 ton heating/cooling unit PROPOSED HVAC: New heating and cooling units to be provided with new office finish throughout 10. EXISTING BATH FACILITIES: None 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Men's and women's lavatories to be installed to City of Mound occupancy codes 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Not Applicable 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: Not Applicable 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: East-end of unit to be removed 15. PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: East end of facility to be open office; west end to be typical office; center area to be typical office Financial Analysis - Pa§e lhree Unit 3 16. EXISTING PARK1NG AREA: Southern elevation 10 car parks 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: Southern 50 car parks Northern elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system connected throughout facility 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 3 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Not applicable B. FLOOR REPAIRS: 'Ail floors in Unit 3 to be carpeted C. DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCTION: Ail exterior walls will receive gypsum finish to be finish taped, painted or final surface D. LANDSCAPING: Landscaped play yard area for potential child care center MI S41/BALBOA2 . 1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIT NO. SQUARE FOOTAGE: Level 1 - 61,180 square feet Level 2 - 51,000 (to be modified to 36,000 square feet) e FACILITY CEILING CLEAR HEIGHT: Level ,1 - West end: 35' O" clear; East end: 9'6" clear Level 2 - 9' 0" clear 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 20 x 20 and 20 x 60 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 5. PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed Use District (proposed) - Unit 4 uses will include high bulk warehousing, office, retail, light industrial, mini storage ~ 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 1,200 amp 440/220/110 volt service Facility Analysis - Pa~e Two Unit 4 8. EXISTING HVAC: Existing boiler located in Unit 5, also 150,000 BTU oil fired forced air furnace: air conditioning systems include 15 ton, 5 ton, 10 ton, 1 ton, 6 ton, 7-1/2 ton units 9. PROPOSED HVAC: Level 1 - West end (35' clear area): gas fired unit heaters, separately zoned and metered; East end (9'6" clear area): All new HVAC systems to be installed subject to · prospective tenancies and uses (see over) 10. EXISIING BATH FACILITIES:' Northwest elevation (35' clear area) men's and women's lavatories provided 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Southern elevation (in new retail/office/light assembly areas) no baths proposed in Level 2 area. 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Southeastern elevation -.four truck access 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: Reconstruction of existing loading area with block masonry construction 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: Various offices to be removed and reconstructed, subject to new tenancies' requirements 15. PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: To new tenancy requirements Proposed HVAC Level 2: 35' clear area): gas fired unit heaters East end (mini storage) gas fired unit heaters separately zoned and metered Financial Analysis - Page lhree Unit 4 16. EXISTING PARKING AREA: Common with Unit 2 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: To be reconstructed (see Unit 2 narrative) Northern elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISIING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Wet system connected throughout facility, group 3 ordinary hazard 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 1 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Level 1 - Not applicable Level 2 - West end - typical built up deck to be patched and repaired; East end - Butler metal roof to be patched at "hump" FLOOR REPAIRS: Level 1 - broOm swept and sealed (east end) columns to be removed supporting old mezzanine above and floor patched (west end) Level 2 - See below DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCTION: Both East and West ends - all where applicable for new tenancies LANDSCAPING: See Unit 2 narrative *West end - floor to be removed East end - mini-storage units to be constructed MI S41/BALBOA2 . 1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIT NO. 5 1. SQUARE FOOTAGE: 59,925 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR HEIGHT: 16' O" (old indoor rail spur area clear height 30' 0#) 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 20 x 30 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 5.. PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed-Use District (proposed) - light assembly, storage food production 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: , 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 1,000 amp 440/220/110 volt service Facility Anal),sis - Paye Two 8. EXIST!NG HYAC: 400 horsepower low pressure Cleaver Brooks boiler Unit 5 9~~ PROPOSED HVAC: Separately zoned and metered gas fired heaters to be installed 10. EXISIING BATH FACILITIES: Northeastern elevation- single facility 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Expand existing ,facility to City of Mound occupancy code requirements 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Common with Unit 4 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: See Unit 4 narrative 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: None 15. PROP~JSED OFFICE FINISHES: Offices to be provided in Unit 4 area ~inancial Analysis - Page Three Unit 5 16. EXISTING PARKING AREA: Common with Unit 4 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: See Unit 2 narrative Northern elevation 147 car park 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Wet system connected throughout facility, group 3 ordinary hazard 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 5 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Not applicable B. FLOOR REPAIRS: None, except fill in old boiler pit area C. DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCTIUN: Separation between Units 5 and 4- western elevation D. LANDSCAPING: See Unit 2 narrative MIS41/BALBOA2.1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIT NO. 6 1. SQUARE FOOTAGE: 17,860 square feet 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR ,HEIGHT: West pnd - 14' O" clear East end - 18' O" clear 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 20 x 38 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 5. PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed-Use District (proposed) - retail, office, light assembly, production, storage EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire fac±lity 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 600 amp 440/220/110 volt service Facility Analysis - Pa~e Two E X I ST I NG HVAC: Serviced by existing boiler in Unit 5 and 50,000 gas fired forced air roof mounted air makeup unit Unit 6 PROPOSED HVAC: Separately zoned and metered gas fired unit heaters throughout 10. EXISTING BATH FACILITIES: Single facility in southwestern elevation 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Expand existing facility, plus add free-standing facility in eastern elevation of the facility, depending upon tenancies requirements 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Single overhead drive-in door southern elevation middle 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: ¢ Depending upon tenancies requirements, new truck dock and drive-in doors to be constructed at southern elevation 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: None 15. PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: Finishes to new tenancy requirements F{nancial Analysis - Page Three Unit 6 16. EXISTING PARKING AREA: Southern elevation gravel surface 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: Common parking with Unit 7 to be constructed for 61 cars with bituminous'surface and cement curbing Northe. rn elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Wet system connected throughout facility, group 3 ordinary hazard · 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 'Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 6 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Typical built-up roof system -to be patched as required B. FLOOR REPAIRS: Fill in mechanical distribution trenches, and seal concrete surface C. DEMISING WALL CONS'TRUCTION: Separation wall western elevation between Units 6 and 7 installed D. LANDSCAPING: Per plans to be submitted, common parking area installation MIS41/BALBOA2.1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIT NO. 1. SQUARE FOOIAGE: 50,400 square feet 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR HEIGHT: 16' 0" clear 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 20 x 60 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 5. PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed-Use District (propOsed) - light assembly, storage, production, retail, office ~ 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 1,000 amp 440/220/110 volt service L/ 2 Facility Analysis - Paye Two Unit ? 8. EXISTING HVAC: Shared boiler with Unit 5 PROPOSED HVAC: Separately zoned and metered gas fired unit heaters to be installed 10. EXISTING BATH FACILIIIES: Single facility - northeastern elevation 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Expand existing facility to tenancy requirements 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Eastern elevation - exterior truck pits 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: Eastern elevation - reconstruct to include four interior truck docks, and 50% of eastern elevation to be reconstructed as office facade (see Architectural Rendering attached) 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: None 15. PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: Up to 10,000 square feet to be finished to individual tenancy requirements Financial Analysis - Page Three Unit 7 16. EXISTING PARKING AREA: See Unit 6 narrative 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: See Unit 6 narrative Northern elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Wet system connected throughout facility, Group 3 ordinary hazard 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 7 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Typical built-up roof system 'to be patched as required B. FLOOR REPAIRS: Concrete surface to be sealed ¢ C. DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCTIDN: Eastern and western elevations where required D. LANDSCAPING: See Unit 6 narrative MI S41/BALBOA2 . 1 FACILITY ANALYSIS UNIT NO. 8 1. SQUARE FOOTAGE: 19,660 2. FACILITY CEILING CLEAR HEIGHT: 8' O" .clear (typical office) 3. FACILITY TYPICAL BAY SIZING: 25 x 20 4. EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (Light Industrial) 5. PROPOSED ZONING: Mixed-Use District (propOsed) - office, retail, restaurant, medical, health club 6. EXISTING ELECTRICAL: 13,800 volts distributed throughout the entire facility 7. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL: 600 amp 220/110 volt service Facility Analysis - Paye Two Unit 8 Be EXISTING HVAC: Roof mounted 60 ton gas fired forced air heating/cooling unit PROPOSED HVAC: Separately zoned and metered existing equipment 10. EXISTING BATH FACILITIES: Men's and women's lavatories - northeastern elevation 11. PROPOSED BATH FACILITIES: Reconstruct and expand existing facilities t° City of Mound occupancy code requirements 12. EXISTING LOADING AREA: Not applicable 13. PROPOSED LOADING AREA: Not applicable 14. EXISTING OFFICE FINISHES: West' end - executive offices Center - cafeteria East end - kitchen/serving area 15, PROPOSED OFFICE FINISHES: Finish to tenancy requirements Financial Analysis - Page Three 16. EXISTING PARKING AREA: Common with Unit 3 Unit 8 17. PROPOSED PARKING AREA: Common to entire facility - northern elevation 147 car park area Northern elevation 147 car park area 18. EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Wet system connected throughout facility group 3 ordinary hazard 19. PROPOSED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Group 3 ordinary hazard wet system, separately zoned for Unit 8 20. MISCELLANEOUS: A. ROOF REPAIRS: Typical built up roof system to be patched B. FLOOR REPAIRS: New carpet and/or tile surface as required to tenancy specifications C. DEMISING WALL CONSTRUCIION: As required to tenancy specifications D. LANDSCAPING: See Unit 3 narrative MI S41/BALBOA2.1 Resolution Granting Conditional Use Permit # To Balboa Minnesota Company for the Establishment of a Planned Industrial Area 5340 Shoreline Boulevard WHEREAS, Balboa Minnesota Company (applicant) has applied for a conditional use permit for the establishment of a Planned Industrial Area for the property generally known as the Tonkawest Business Center at 5340 Shoreline Boulevard, and WHEREAS, the property is presently zoned I-1 and Planned Industrial Areas are conditional uses in the I-1 zone, and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a conditional use permit to facilitate the full utilization of the Tonkawest Business Center structure through the establishment of one or more business enterprises either on a lease or sale basis, thereby expanding employment opportunities in the City of Mound and contributing to the improvement of the economic climate in the surrounding area, and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has determined that the establishment of a Planned Industrial Area is a more efficient usage of the existing structure and land than could be accomplished under traditional I-1 zoning. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND: It is hereby determined that the proposed Planned Industrial Area is consistent with the land use and economic development policies of the city and is consist~ent with the general purposes and interest of the zoning code of the city. The Conditional Use Permit is granted in accordance with the following conditions: ae Modification or alteration to the exterior of the building is expressly prohibited pending submittal of the comprehensive exterior remodeling plan for the entire structure by Balboa Minnesota Company or by approval of an o~erations permit for portion of the structure. Ce ge h® In accordance with the performance standards of the Mound zoning Code, industrial, warehouse, storage and handling of bulk goods facilities are required to have at least one parking space for each employee on maximum shift or one space for each two thousand (2,000) square feet of gross floor area, which ever is larger. The redevelopment plan for Tonkawest Business Center (Exhibit 1) has identified 427 total parking spaces. As uses occupy this building, their parking requirements will be verified at the time of building permit or operations permit application. If a parking shortage occurs at any time during the development (leasing or sale) of the building, the applicant shall be responsible for providing additional parking for the use of all applicable businesses. Loading access areas (loadingberths) shall be restricted to the locations shown on Exhibit 2 unless modified by a subsequent approval of an operations permit for a portion of the building. All loading berths shall conform to the provisions of Section 23.717 of the Mound Zoning Code. Within 90 days of approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the applicant shall prepare landscaping pl.ans for all parking areas, entrance areas and common areas on the property. Such plans, clearly identifying species, caliper and root type shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner. Tonkawest Business Cent'er shall be combined into one tax parcel. Balboa Minnesota Company shall prepare a comprehensive sionage plan of the entire structure depicting locations of concentrations of wall signs, the general signage theme and the location and design pylon signs. Sign permits for individual business establishments shall be withhelduntil such time as a comprehensive sign plan is submitted and approved. Subdivision of the Tonkawest Business Center structure in two or more units shall require review and approval by the Mound Planning Commission and City Council. Subdivisions shall be consistent with all applicable city ordinances and at the time of subdivision application, the City Council shall make a determination of ~ark dedication requirements. No change in the external mechanical devices shall be permitted unless authorized by operations permit for a portion of the building. Additionally, no roof vents or emission stacks shall be constructed without operations permit approval. Proposed improvement along the north side of the structure including but not limited to walkways and driveways between the building and the existing parking lot shall be reviewed by the Burlington Northern Railroad or subsequent owner. No outside storage is permitted except by operations permit. Parking of vehicles exceeding 24 hfs is prohibited except delivery which in designated spaces and trucks in loading berth areas. RESOLUTION 1985- Resolution Granting an Operations Permit for Lunalite, Inc. at 5340 Commerce Boulevard WHEREAS, Lunalite, Inc. (applicant) has applied for an operations permit to operate an electrical lighting assembly operation which will occupy a total of 63,000 feet (50,400 square feet in unit seven, 2,700 square feet of converted dock space in unit seven and 9,900 in unit six - see Exhibit 1); and WHEREAS, electrical lighting assembly operations are allowed by operations permit in Planned Industrial Areas. NOW, THEREFORE~ BE IT RESOLVED BY /'HE CITY ODUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND: It is hereby determined that the Lunalite electrical lighting assembly operation is consistent with the criteria for granting operational permits found in Section 23.650.7 of the Mound Zoning Code. The operations permit is Granted in accordance with the following conditions: ae Ba~ed upon an employmentestimate of 125 'per shift, Lunalite is hereby assigned a total of 125 of the spaces in the Tonkawest Business Centers parking facilities. Conversion of a portion of the existing loading dock area to office use is approved contingent upon the submittal of detailed architectural and building plans to the Building Official and City Planner for review and approval. Ce .Plans for the modification of the existing parking facility on the east of the property including restriping shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. If the applicant desires signage, a sign permit application consistent with the Mound Signage Ordinance and the theme for the entire structures signage as submitted by Balboa Minnesota Company shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Mound. Outside storage including but not limited to raw materials, goods, delivery vehicles and trucks excluding those involved in loading or unloading is expressly prohibited. Ail off-street loading and unloading areas shall conform to the requirements of Section 23.717 of the Mound Zoning Code. Contracted prices for repairs and improvements for the purposes of evaluating a building permit for .... 2624 Westedge Blvd S. Mound, Mn. 55364 $3,625 inc. $600 6OO 200 2,558 65O inc. $1,500 5,000 1,750 5OO 6OO Repair and improve foundation on .'-~ :-~;uFrancis Miller existing structure (basement) Add 2 support beams and posts Install additional electrical outlets Install 100 amp service Floor joists are O.K. as is 2" 6"~16" on center Hook up water heater and sink Install furnace and ductwork Ditter, Inc. 2"×4" walls O.K. ~ Remove old chimney, install new-concrete Francis Miller Add c~iling insulation Change Db0fline, move kitchen wall, remove Mitchen, bedroom walls Addition- carpentry Addition- foundation (basement) Addition- plumbing Addition- electric Allstar Electric Robert Sells Robert Sells Francis Miller Allsar electric 817610 as set out in the approval of said house reconstruction by the City Council of Mound. 2. We herein agree that the Letter of Credit fund will be (a) held to accomplish and complete all the requirements set forth for the prior mentioned house reconstruction and (b) if necessary paid out and disbursed as provided under this Irrevocable Letter of Credit if the aforementioned improvements are not completed on or before August 15, 1987. It is further understood and agreed that: (a) No part of the Letter of Credit fund will be released except against a certificate by the City signed by the City Manager stating that Mary Pacholke and Aaron Applequist have completed the work specified in the approval and in this Agreement. (b) Any portion of the Letter of Credit fund which has not been released on or prior to August 15, 1987, against a certificate from the City of Mound stating that the construction has been completed and approved will be paid by us to the City of Mound against a certificate from said City under the signature of the City Manager stating that said improvements have not been completed and that the City is entitled to the undisbursed portion of the Letter of Credit fund to be used to complete said improvements. (c) We have no obligation or right to (1) inquire into the correctness of, or question, any such certificate or (2) see to the proper application or use by said City of any payments by us to it under any such certificate or Letter of Credit. Very truly yours, Bank of By¸ Its_ City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Property at 2624 West Edge Boulevard Mound, Minnesota Gentlemen: This is to advise you that we have issued to you an Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. in favor of Mary Pacholke and Aaron Applequist of 2624 West Edge Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, in the amount of (the Letter of Credit fund) in which we assure you of completion of the project under the following conditions: 1. It is understood and agreed that $ of the Letter of Credit fund is being held to assure the completi6n of the City's requirements for bringing a substandard building up to Code, which requirements cover the construction of the following listed items: A. THOMAS WURST, P.A. CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A. ~JOSEPH E. HAMILTON, P. A. ~JAMES E). LARSON, P.A. THOMAS ~. UNDERWOOD, P.A. ~:~OGER J. FELLOWS LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAHILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD IIOO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540:~ July 31, 1985 TELEPHONE Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, ~ 55364 Re: Mary Pacholke and Aaron Applequist Dear Jan: Mary Pacholke called on July 30 and asked for a sample letter of credit form. I have made one out in blank which she wants to pick up and take to her bank. A copy is enclosed for your file. Veyy truly/yours, / City Attorney CAP:ih Enclosure cc: Mary Pacholke (w/enc) 2624 ~.~estedge Blvd. :~.~. 61223 · 4353 · ' ' ~, :. :',.'.;.'~:. ;.:.. :*L: Section 23 · · ~ :;,'... i-:'TL C~' r -,,... ..... ., Insulation md paneling of interior ADDRESS 2624 V~stedge Blvd. PLAT 61223 PERMIT NO. 5042 OWNER CONTRACTOR PLUMBING CONTRACTOR CHrist Eallevig 529-3571 ..... s~m~ PERMIT NO. DATE 19. . HISC. ~ERHIT NO. DATE 19 PARCEL ¢ LOT BLOCK o95o DATE ~-!3-79 FINAL INSP... OCCUPANCY PERMIT SUBDIVISION... Section ~3 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION raise cottage reside~ new flooring and instal~ki~chen ~ONING !~! cabtne~ .0 2UARE FOOTAGE ~LDG. SQ. FOOTAGE VALUE $ %800 FEE ARAGE SQ. FT. COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. ECK S 36.00 REPAIR LIST FOR 2624 WESTEDGE BOULEVARD: Install a new footing and foundation wall for crawl space at the structure perimeter. Install 100 amp electrical service with 20 amp circuit to the kitchen grounding for service and equipment; remove all hazardous wiring throughout (worn, open spl ices, any missing junction boxes, etc.) Install a new heating system to meet current code. Complete and install plumbing piping to all fixtures including the installation of a water heater to current code. Protect the water service and piping from freezing. Install post, beam, and footing pads to properly support floor system. Submit blueprint drawings for all necessary repairs and improvements. Level floor system in the proposed bedroom (converted former porch area). Install smoke alarm adjacent to the bedrooms connected to house wiring. Remove fireplace and chimney. Correct yard grade to provide drainage away from the structure. Install beam or install new ceiling joists to allow for proper length of span. Install bracing of the roof rafters; if the roof is replaced, all roof boards shall have solid sheathing placed over it before roofing is applied. o70 8 · 0 '0~ . .': 0 001 CASE NO. 85-432 (HAZARDOUS & DANGEROUS) NAMES OF ALL INSPECTORS WHO INSPECTED THE PREMISES AND FILED REPORTS: Henry Truelsen, dan Bertrand, Gre~ Skinner S I GNATURE TITLE ATTORNEY REVIEW ATTORNEY ACTION '' COUNCIL HEARING dan Bertrand Buildln? Offici, a] DATE DATE DATE DATE COUNCIL ACTION BUILDING POSTED DATE DATE ORDER SERVED DATE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE HOW SERVED COURT ACTION TAKEN FILED WITH CLERK OF COURT FILED WITH COUNTY RECORDER DATE · DATE BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZARDOUS & DANGEROUS) LIST SEPARATELY ALL PEP_MITS ISSUED FOR BUILDING t~v ILDING HEATING PLUMB iN G Permit # 5042 3-]3-79 Value $5,800. for remodeling & siding all of which was not completed. Permit # 4353 5-3-77 Insulation & pane]inq # 8l 10/9/62 Wateb connection #29l 10/22/64 Sewer connection # 214 ]0/22/64 Inside. plumbing CONCLUSIONS: IS BUILDING A FIRE HAZARD? yes WHY the use of extension cords due to inadequate outlets and receptacles, fireplace too close to combustibles. IS BUILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC SAFETY? yes ~HY overspanned wood member and inadequate foundation system. Ungrounded type electrical system. IS BUILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH yes WHY all plumbing is not comp]eted~ no kitchen sink, no hot water, no heating system; plumbing is subject to freezinq P~ECOM_MENDATION: CHECK ONE X 'REPAIR (LIST ALL REAPIRS REQUIP~ED) as per attached. REMOVAL WERE PHOTS TAKEN? yes, before"1979 IF SO, ATTACH cOPIES TO THE REPORT. ¢/)/ 'p ELECTRIC LIGHTING AND WIRING CONDITION OF ABOVE BUILDING INSPECTION " (HAZARDOUS & DANGEROUS~ 60 amp service; inadequate out]ets and receptac)es be iow minimum and hazardous KIND OF ROOF 2 X 4's - 2 foot on center overspanned wil;h roof boards CONDITION OF ROOF. poor CONDITION OF B-k~EM~-NT crawl space - extremely poor CONDITION OF WINDOWS fair ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR PROVIDED yes CONDITION OF SILLS fair CONDITION OF CHIMNEYS hazardous with no footing; too close to combustibles ATTIC: HOW USED no storaqe CONDITION OF FOUNDATION WALL bad - no footing and portions witt~ no blocks; only dirt dug out CONDITION OF BEARING WALLS not visible - wa]] covered on inside and OUtside, ,but Do CONDITION OF NON-BEARI~qG WAL~equate beam and support system under floor CO~DITION OF EXTERIOR WALLS wood siding fair with interior finish of painted Dart~/ ~ oar an s eetroc wit seams open CONDITION OF PLU~ING poor to felt; ~,nFini~h~a ~y~t~m a~d subject to freezing of w~ter pipes, no water heater connected. CONDITION OF OTHER SB~ITARY FACILITIES-ooo~ e~r~pt Flint Fin;ch mrn~nd .~.~mtmr ~* iS plywood with no f]ooriDg CONDITION OF COOKING EQUIP~NT [P gas to a ran~a~ no w~tar tn $1nU nor %,~aste ,and vent piping ~%~ICIPAL WATER Yes WELL M~ICIPAL S~ER Yes CONDITION OF INTERIOR, LATH AND PLASTER, ETC. poor TYPE ~3qD CONDITION OF FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT OR FACILITIES none DIMENSION OF BUILDING survey attached SETBACKS, FRONT REAR SIDES DISTANCE FROM OTHER BUILDINGS okay REM. AR3<S IN GENEP_AL floor in east bedroom is sloped (converted old porch); house is settinq iow to y_qrd_~_.qrade~oses a draina eqs_~roblem. Ceiling__joists are overs 2 X 4's 2 foot on center; west porch is resting on the ground. Roof is sagged. CITY O? ~(~UIqD REPORT OF INSPECTION P.I::I~kTI\rE TO HAZARDOUS ~d~D D;LNGEROUS BUILDING(S) AT '~4 Westedge Boulevard, SITE ADDFd~SS WHAT INSPECTED 2624 Westedge Boulevard single family dwelling CITY OF ~OLTND DATE July 31, 1985 PRINCIPAL USES 1 single family structure USE ZONE R-1 FIRE ZONE N/A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Commencing 227½ feet south from southeast corner of Lot 4 than south along west line of LoL 3 a disLan~ of 50 fees than ease at right angles to shore of Lake [angdcn than northwesterly along said shore to point due east from beginning than west to beginning O~'~rNER Mary Pacholke and Aaron Applequist 472-3008/ ADDRESS 2624 Westedg.e Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota PHONE ~]-6868 AG EN T ADDRESS O~CUPANTS PHONE ADDRESS PHONE HEIRS of Estate of Christ'Kallevig - Ac~ministrator Everett Kalleviq ADDFESS Route 1, Willmar, MN. 56201 PHONE C, UARDI AN ADE;PF. SS LIEN IH OLDE RS PHONE ADDPJESS PHONE CO,~S~RLC. IO.N OF BUILDING wood frame NO. OF STORIES 1 TYPE OF HEATING PLANT none CC:b:£,2']'lO'..~ C,T HL.k?ZNG Fk%.KT ~'HEP F'E'CHA?~]CAL EQUIP:4E!0T none o/ RD TRACT A ~.. zm '(5"~' PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 85-431 RESOLUTION NO. 85- RESOLUTION VACATING CERTAIN STREET EASEMENT AND RETAINING FOR THE CITY A UTILITY EASEMENT OVER, UNDER AND THRU A PORTION OF NORTHERN ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Mound has claimed a street and utility easement over the following described land: That portion of Beverly Avenue (now known as Northern Lane) as dedicated to the publicbythe recorded plat of Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist's Ravenswood, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851 provides that the City Council may by resolution vacate any street, alley, public grounds or public way, or anypart thereof, when it appears in the interest of the zpublic to do so; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on August 13, 1985, as required by law; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that good area planning requires that these easements be vacated and that a portion be retained as ~ utility easement and that it would be in the public interest to do so. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesqta, hereby vacates~the following: .. That portion of Beverly Avenue (now known as Northern Lane) as dedicated to the public by the recorded plat of the Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist's Ravenwood; Hennepin County, Minnesota and described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 27, said Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist'sRavenwood; thence northerlyalong the west line of said Lot 27 a distance of 20.00 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 26; thence westerly along the south line of Lots 26, 25 and 24 to the southwest corner of said Lot 24; thence southeasterly to a point 15 feet southerly of and 37 feet easterly of said southwest corner of Lot 24; thence southeasterly to a point 20 feet southerly of and 100 feet easterly of said southwest corner of Lot 24; thence easterly to the point of beginning. ~ And retaining c~t~a~n utility easements over, under, and through t~eM~s~ibed vacate~ p~rtion which will be ~dded t~ thi~ di~cripticn-~ th~_fi~ld location o~ tl~e existing uti!itie~ by the City Enginc~r,~ mn ~ ./ RD 30 ~. I; TRACT A Z/al V' r.~ RESOLUTION NO. 85- PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 85-431 RESOLUTION VACATING CERTAIN STREET EASEMENT AND RETAINING FOR THE CITY A UTILITY EASEMENT OVER, UNDER AND THRU A PORTION OF NORTHERN ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Mound has claimed a street and utility easement over the following described land: That portion of Beverly Avenue (now known as Northern Lane) as dedicated to the publicbythe recorded plat of Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist's Ravenswood, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851 provides that the City Council may by resolution vacate any street, alley, public grounds or public way, or anypart thereof, when it appears in the interest of the zpublic to do so; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on August 13, 1985, as required by law; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that good area planning requires that these easements be vacated and that a portion be retained as ~ utility easement and that it would be in the public interest to do so. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesqta, hereby vacates~the following: .. That portion of Beverly Avenue ( now known as Northern Lane) as dedicated to the public by the recorded plat of the Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist's Ravenwood; Hennepin County, Minnesota and described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 27, said Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist'sRavenwood; thence northerlyalong the west line of said Lot 27 a distance of 20.00 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 26; thence westerly along the south line of Lots 26, 25 and 24 to the southwest corner of said Lot 24; thence southeasterly to a point 15 feet southerly of and 37 feet easterly of said southwest corner of Lot 24; thence southeasterly to a poin~ 20 feet southerly of and 100 feet easterly of said southwest corner of Lot 24; thence easterly to the point of beginning. o~nd retaining certa~n~u~il~y easements over, under, and through the~escribed vacated portion~~be added to this dlscrmptlon after th~.Yield location of the existing utilities by the City Engineer~as an Exhibit A. .,~, ~' ,..~ ::? ?'-:,i CITY OF HOUND LEGAL ~ESC~T~ON OF ~O~E~TY O~NED BY A~L~CANT~ ~D ~ IS-D~'~ LOT BLOCK SUBBIVI5 1 ON CASE NO. FEE DATE FILED STREET TO BE VACATED.~O~-i'h~5~ REASO, REQUEST SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT Applicant's Interest in Property Residents and owners of property abutting the street to be vacated: (Please attach list. CertiFied mailing list can be obtained from Hennepin County by calling 345-3271~ Need Need~' Need Recommended by Utilities: NSP~en~innegascoeaseme~t Continental Telephone eascm~nt Recommended by City: Public Works ; Fire Chief ; Engineer ; Police Chief ~' .; Other Departments Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve the staff's recommendation to grant the vacation as requested subje.ct to retaining utility easement for any utilities. Council Action Date July 8, 1985 ~O/~R'6'so 1 u t i on No. Planning Commission Minutes July 8, 1985 - Page 3 The Commission discussed materials dishes were made of and the Planner reminded them that the proposed ordinance restricts dishes to galvanized steel or alumi- num, have a perforated (meshlike) or opaque surface and of a color that is com- patible to the surroundings. The Commission wants to drop "opaque" as it's not clear what an opaque surface is. A motion made by Meyer amending Section 23.732.1(f) by striking "constructed of galvanized steel or aluminum", died for the lack of a second. Reese amended his original motion so Section 23.732.1(f) would read: "A satellite dish antenna shall have a perforated (meshlike) surface and be of a color " It was discussed that people should have a choice and cost might be a factor. Michael withdrew his second; he stated he can't go along with just one type of material. Ken Smith seconded the motion because he thought we can work with variances. It was discussed that there really wasn't any grounds for a vari- ance; can't be granted on basis of cost. Reese withdrew his motion and moved to table. Steve Smith seconded the motion to table. The vote was unanimously in favor. The Planner was asked to research the' costs of the various satellites around; staff should consider whether they want to grandfather them in; check what to do with existing dishes; if they can be brought into conformancy and get a permit. BOARD OF APPEALS Item '3. Case No. 85-431 Public Hearing on Proposed Vacation of Unimproved portion of Northern Road abutting Lots 24, 25-and 26, Plat of Subdivision of Lots I and 32 Skarp and Lindquist"s Ravenswood (4800/4804/4810/4820 Northern Road) Applicants, Phiilip and Eva Hasch, were present. The Building Official reviewed the City Engineer's recommendation. Basically he is saying we can vacate the road, but will need to retain utility easements for sewer and water, as well as for electric, telephone lines, etc. It was questioned if any roadway will be changeQ from what is there now. Roadway it- self will not be changed. City Manager stated the applicants' buildings are on the right-of'way. Discussed width of road and getting emergency equipment in. Weiland moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to approve the staff's recommenda- tion to grant the vacation, as requested subject to retaining utility easement for any utilities. The vOte was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 4. Case No. 85-432 House size variance to do structural.repairs at 2624 Westedge Boulevard; Metes and Bounds Description, PID # 23-117-24 24 0005 Mary J. Pacholke and Aaron M. Applequist were pre~ent. The Building Official reveiwed the request to do some structural modifications on an undersized dwelling in an R-1 Zoning District. She noted there are two issues; one is the zoning question as to the non-conforming floor area and to establish a hardship to allow the variance to be granted. The other is. sue is the minimum housing standards that should be afforded an owner to evaldate habitable living area; the structure versus the use of the property in non- conforming. The structures are referred to in Items 1, 2 and 4 of Section C CASE NO.__ COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 85-431 CONSULTING ENGINF:ER~ ,,: LAND SURVEYORS i PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 3une 28, 1985 Jan Bertrand Planning and Zoning City of Mound 5341Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Proposed Street Vacation Northern Road File #2113 Dear Jan: As requested we have reviewed the proposed vacation of a portion of Northern Road adjacent to Lots 24, 25 and 26, Subdivision of-Lots 1 and 32 Skarp and Lindquist's Ravenswood. We have previously furnished your offlce with a legal description to be used in publication for the public hearlng. We see on reason to deny this request, in fact this vacation request is one of the more logical ones, since a building is .locateO within the area to be vacated. One item does need to be varified if the vacation ls granted. We are not sure of the exact location of the watermain in Northern Road, therefore we would recommend if the vacation is granted, it be subject to a utility easement. After approval we can determine the exact location in the field and revise the legal description of the vacated portion if necessary. 8y followin¢ this procedure, the City will not be spending money to locate the main and write additional descriptions should the request be denieO. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact US. JC:tdv Sincerely, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED VACATION OF UNIMPROVED PORTION OF NORTHERN ROAD ABUTTING LOTS 24, 25 AND 26, PLAT OF SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 32 SKARP AND LINDQUIST!S RAVENSWOOD (48OO/4804/4810/ 4820 NORTHERN ROAD) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, tha~ the City Council will hold a Public Hearing at 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, the 13th day of August, 1985, to consider the following: Vacation of a portion of Right-of Way for Beverly Avenue (now knowh as Northern Lane) as dedicated to the public by the recorded plat of SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 32 SKARP AND LINDQUIST'S RAVENSWOOD. -Sat portion of Beverly Avenue (no~ known as Northern Lane) as dedicated to the ~dblic by the recorded plat of the SUBDIVISION OF LOTS i AND 32 SY~ARP AND LINDQUIST'S RAVENWOOD,-Hennepin County, Hinnesota described as follows: Beginning at the sou~'hwest corner of Lot 27, said SUBDIVISION OF LOTS I AND 32 S~ARP AND LINGUIST'S RAVENWOOD; thence northerly along the west line of said Lot 27 a distance of 20.00 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 26; thence westerly along .the south line of Lots 26, 25 and 24 to the southwest corner of said Lot 24; thence southeasterly to a point 15 feet southerly of and 37 feet easterly of said southwest ~orner of Lot 24; thence southeasterly to a point 20 feet southe~'~y of and lO0 feet easterly of said southwest' corner of Lot 24; thence easterly to the point of beginning. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the above will be heard at this meeting. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk ~. TNO~AS WURST, CURTIS A. PEAR$ON~ P. A. JOSEPH I~. HAMILTON, ~. A. ..lANES D. LARSON, THOHAS F. UNDERWOOD, ROGER U. FELLOWS LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD I100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540::3 August 12, 1985 TELEPHONE (.612) Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Mary Pacholke/Aaron Applequist - Variance Dear Jan: Pursuant to the materials you sent me, I have prepared a proposed resolution for the Mound Council's consideration. I did talk to Mary Pacholke on August 12, and I am not sure that she will agree to all of the things contained herein. I am sending a copy to her and to Jon Elam so they will have it prior to the meeting. After you have reviewed the materials, if you have any questions, please give me a call. I will see you Tuesday night. Very truly yours, CAP:Ih Enclosure cc: Mr. Jon Elam Ms. Mary Pacholke Curtis A. Pearson city Attorney RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY AT 2624 WESTEDGE BOULEVARD IN MOUND WHEREAS, Aaron M. Applequist and Mary J. Pacholke, who reside at 2624 Westedge Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, have made application to the City for a variance on a nonconforming property; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has reported to this Council that the property is located in the R-1 District and requires a lot area of 10,000 square feet and a lot width of 60 feet, and a minimum floor area for the house of 840 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has examined the house and is of the opinion that property owners would be better off if they demolished the existing structure and started over but Aaron Applequist and Mary Pacholke are purchasing this property under a contract for deed from the Estate of Christ Kallevig and the personal representative for that estate is Everett Kallevig, and it is their belief that they can rehabilitate this structure; and 'WHEREAS, on July 8, 1985 the Planning Commission reviewed the request for variances and the right to add on or structurally change the building and the Planning Commission recommended to this Council that the request for a variance be denied for all the reasons set forth in the hearing and the staff report; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 1985 this matter was returned to the City Council who considered it and have directed the staff to work with the property owners to attempt to rehabilitate the structure; and WHEREAS, at the direction of the City Council the Building Inspector did go out and make a complete and thorough review of this building, all of which is set forth in a report entitled, "Report of Inspection Relative to Hazardous and Dangerous Buildings", dated July 31, 1985 and attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has recommended to this Council that no variance be granted unless all of the work set forth in her report and as set forth in this resolution be accomplished and that a copy of this resolution be placed of record in the office of the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County so that the work will be done or the City will be authorized to proceed under a bond; and WHEREAS, a letter of credit form has been prepared and delivered to Mary Pacholke and Aaron Applequist and upon receipt of that letter of credit form properly executed by a bank or trust company and upon the execution of a copy of this resolution showing a complete understanding of the terms by Mary Pacholke, Aaron Applequist and Personal Representative Everett Kallevig, then in that event, the City may proceed to authorize building permits in accordance with the additional terms in this resolution, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound: 1. Personal Representative, Everett Kallevig, for the Estate of Christ Kallevig, and Mary Pacholke and Aaron Applequist, contract for deed vendees, are hereby granted a variance to work on property at 2624 Westedge Boulevard in the City of Mound based upon the following terms: A. Ail safety and health provisions required by the Building Inspector and set forth in Exhibt B shall be completed by the applicants. B. A performance bond or letter of credit in the~amount of $ shall be filed running to the City of Mound which provides that if the work on this structure has hot been completed by , 198_, the City of Mound shall have the legal authority to go in and enter upon the property to complete the work or to have the property demolished. 2. The fee owner and the contract vendee purchasers shall execute a copy of this resolution indicating their complete and total agreement with this arrangement. 3. A copy of this resolution shall be filed in the office of the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles signed by Personal Representative Everett Kallevig for the Estate of Christ Kallevig and by Aaron Applequist and Mary Pacholke, as contract vendees, indicating that the City of Mound shall have the right to enter upon the following legally described parcel to complete the work in accordance with this resolution or shall have the authority to have the property demolished if all work required by this resolution are not completed on . The property is legally described as follows: "The North 50 feet of that part of Government Lot 3 of Section 23, Township 117 North, Range 24, West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning 227.5 feet South of the Southeast corner of Government Lot 4 on the West line of said Government Lot 3; thence South. along said West line a distance of 100 feet; thenc6 at right angles East 506.3 feet more or less to the shore of Lake Langdon; thence Northwesterly along said shore line 137._ more or less to a line drawn east perpendicular to said West line from the point of beginning; thence West to the point of beginning." 4. The following listed minimum improvements shall be made on or before December 1, 1985 to make this habitable during the winter season: 5. The parties to this agreement shall acknowledge that the building officials and administrative staff of the City of Mound have recommended that the variance not be granted or that the property not be improved and the fee owners and contract vendee owners shall agree to hold the City of Mound and any and all of its officers harmless from any or all claims which may result from health or safety hazards on the property and from which any of said parties shall be injured. Attest: Mayor City Clerk We, the undersigned, are all of the fee owners and/or contract for deed purchasers of the above legally described parcel. We. agree to all of the terms contained in this resolution and understand that an executed certified copy of this resolution will be filed with the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles of ~ennepin County. We further agree that if all work is not completed on , 198 , the City of Mound or its agents may enter upon the above property'and complete all the work agreed to and set forth in the resolution. Mary Pacholke Aaron Applequist Everett Kallevig, Personal Representative of Estate of Christ Kallevig State of Minnesota County of of The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this . .., 19 ., by __ day Notary Public CHECK LIST HAZARDOUS AND SUB-STANDARD BUILDINGS An inspection form should be filled out relating to the premises. This is necessary to show and, state the specific substandard portions and items relating to the structure which we want the council to order repaired.. Pictures ~ are helpful and should be taken if at all possible. The findings of the inspection report are incorporated in a resolution to be presented for the council's consideration calling for an enforcement ord. er. Special attention should be paid at this phase'of the proceedings to any questions relating to personal property which may be on the. site, and if personal property is on the site, the owners should be ordered to remove it or it may be necessary for the City to sell i't before it can proceed with the order. Service of the council resolution and enforcement ord~er must be made by personal service on all of the following: C~;ner Tenants Any lien holders. (The owner has 20 days to answer the council resolution.) A copy of the resolution containing the enforcement order must be filed, with the clerk of District Court at least five days prior to the filing of a motion to enforce the order. The City must file a notice of lis pend. ens with the County Record. er or Registrar of Titles noting the pendency of these proceedings describing wi~h reasonable certainty' the lands affected and. the nature of the order. (If the City drops the action, it shall within ten days remove the notice of lis pendens.' If the 'property owners or other interested, parties do not answer, the City then brings on a motion before the District Court fo~ the enforcement of the council's or,er. We then submit affidavits and other data necessary for the court to enter its order. Contested cases are tried by the court under the rules of civil procedure. The one advantaoe is that the case has priority and moves ahead of other cases on the calendar. AGREEMENT FOR RECYCLING SERVICES AGREEMENT made as of between the CITY OF MOUND, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation ("City"), and BEERMANN SERVICES ("Contractor"). The City and the Contractor agree as follows: 1 . Definitions 1.1 "Recyclable materials" mean newsprint, unsorted glass, unsorted aluminum, steel and "tin" cans~ motor oil, corrugated cardboard, car batteries, and other materials as mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. 1.2 "Recycling collection" means the taking up of all recyclable materials accumulated in containers at a single-, double-, triple-, and quadruple-dwelling unit residential properties located within the City of Mound, as identified in Exhibit "A" and the transporting of the recyclable materials to a site where they can be processed for the marketplace as determined by the Contractor. 1.3 "Dwelling unit" means a separate residential dwelling place with a kitchen. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 AGREEMENT FOR RECYCLING SERVICES Beerman Services agrees to extend the curbside recycling program to City-wide (approximately 3,050 households) for the cost of $950.00 per month plus $35.00 for drop-off site per month. This agreement shall be from October 4, 1985 thru September 5, 1986. The collection day shall be the first Friday of every month. The drop- off site will be the third Saturday of every month. The City and the contractor agree to follow the previous "Agreement for Recycling Services." Contractor Manager Services to be p~formed 2.1 The Contractor shall collect all recyclable materials for collection in the City once each month during the duration of this contract. Collections shall be made on the first Friday of each month for the City, as shown on Exhibit A. Such collection shall include collection of recyclable materials from all residential properties having four or less dwelling units in a single building. 2.2 The Contractor shall not be required to make regular collections on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, or Christmas Day; provided, however, that collection occurs on the routes reasonably in advance thereof or thereafter in the opinion of the City Manager and the week's schedule shall be completed regardless of the holiday. 2.3 The term of this Contract shall be from October 4, 1985, through September 5, 1986] The first collection date shall be Friday, October 4, 1985, and thereafter on the first Friday of each month. 2.4 This Contract may be renewed at the City's discretion or may be opened for competitive bidding. The City shall consider whether the Contractor has performed satisfactorily. Renewal shall be subject to mutual agreement to amendments proposed by the City of the Contractor. Drop-Off Site 3.1 The City also requires at least one drop-off site be provided for the residents of Mound. This drop-off site shall be manned by the hauler one day each month, preferably the third 2 Saturday of each month. The City will specify the location for this drop-off site. All materials must be removed within 24 hours. 4. Preparation for Collection 4.1 All occupants of residential properties consisting of four or less dwelling units in a single building in the City who are participating in this program shall separate and place recyclable materials in paper bags and/or cardboard boxes. 4.2 Containers shall be placed upon the boulevard area of the street for collection. Containers shall be placed for collection by 8:00 A.M. on the scheduled day of collection. 4.3 All recyclable materials placed for collection shall be owned by and the responsibility of the occupants of residential properties until they are handled by the Contractor. Upon handling the recyclable materials by the Contractor, the recyclable materials become the property and responsibility of the Contractor. 5. Coutractor'$ Equipment 5.1 All vehicles shall be painted and marked uniformly and shall be indentified on both sides of the cab. Broom and shovel in good usable condition shall be placed and maintained on each truck. 5.2 The Contractor shall make all collections of recyclable materials other than newsprint in a water-tight metal receptacle or vehicles with closed tops so constructed that their contents will not spill therefrom; however, all receptacles and vehicles shall be kept clean and as free from all offensive odors 3 as possible and shall not be allowed 6o stand in any street, alley or other place longer than is reasonably necessary to collect recyclable materials. 5.3 The Contractor shall keep all equipment used in the performance of the work in good operating condition and in a clean, sanitary condition and, if necessary, shall thoroughly disinfect each vehicle before the next monthly collection. Equipment is subject to periodic inspection by the City. 6, Contractor's Opertions 6.1 The Contractor shall establish and maintain in a location approved by the City Manager, an office with continuous supervision for accepting complaints and customer calls. The office shall be in service during the hours of 8:00 A.M. until 4:30 P.M. on all days of collection as specified in this Contract. Address and telephone number of such office and any changes therein shall be given to the City in writing. The address oF this office as of the execution of this Contract is: 6900 Dixie Ave. E., Inver Grove~Heights, MN. 55075. The telephone number is 451-1855. 6.2 Complaints on service will be taken and collected by the City. The City will notify the Contractor of all complaints it receives.- The Contractor is responsible for all corrective actions. A record of all such complaints will be catalogued by the City . All complaints shall be answered by the Contractor courteously and promptly. 6.3 Whenever the City or a resident notifies the Contractor of locations which have not received scheduled service, the Contractor is required to service such locations before 7:00 P.M. of the same day when notified prior to noon. When notified after noon, the Contractor shall service such locations not later than 10:00 A.M. of the following day. 6.4 The Contractor's employees shall handle all containers with reasonable care to avoid damage, and shall immediately clean up and dispose of any contents thereof which may be spilled. Contractor will not be obligated to collect unseparated materials. 7, Payment 7.1 The City will compensate the Contractor for the collection of recyclable materials from dwelling units in the City. During this Contract, the City will pay the Contractor on a monthly basis, in the sume of $950.00 per month, and an additional $35.00 per month for the drop-off site. 8. Filing of Reports 8.1 The Contractor shall submit a monthly summary of the quantity and kinds of all recyclable materials collected and the primary purchaser(s) of the recyclable materials. Monthly summaries shall be submitted no later than the 15th day of the month following the month for which the report is submitted. 8.2 The Contractor shall also furnish to the City throughout the duration of the recycling program a quarterly financial report detailing the expenses and revenues of the Mound collection and the Contractor's overall operations. Quarterly financial reports shall be submitted to the City on or before January 15, 1986, May 15, 1986, September 15, 1986. 5 9.. Access to .Records 9.1 The Contractor shall provide access to the City, Hennepin County, or any of their duly authorized representatives to review any books, documents, papers, and records of the Contract which are directly pertinent to this Contract for the purpose of making an audit, other examination and preparing excerpts and transcriptions. 10 · Insurance 10.1 Comprehensive general liability insurance insuring against liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death, in the sum of not less than $200,000 each individual, $600.,000 each occurrence, and against liability for property damage of not less than $50,000 for each occurrence. 10.2 Workers' Compensation i'nsurance and employers' liability insurance as required by law. 10.3 Automobile liability and property damage insurance, including coverage for non-owned and hired vehicles, in limits as for comprehensive general liability coverage above. 10.4 The City shall be named as an additional insured in these policies for coverage needed only for work as specified in this Contract, which shall provide that the coverage may not be terminated or changed by the insurer except upon 30 day's written notice to the City Clerk. 10.5 No policy shall contain any provisions for exclusions from liability other than provisions for exclusion from liability forming part of the standard basic unamended and unendorsed form of policy, except that no exclusion will be permitted in any 6 event if it conflicts with a coverage expressly required in this Contract, and in addition, no policy shall contain any exclusio~ from bodily injury to, or sickness, disease, or death of any coverage under the contractual liability endorsement of the liability of the Contractor under this Contract. Compliance by the Contractor with the foregoing requirements to carry insurance and furnish certificates shall not relieve the Contractor from liability assumed under any provisions of this Contract. ,11. Per.£orma~ce Bond 11.1 This Contract shall not be in in effect until the Contractor shall have executed and delivered to the Cit~ Clerk a performance bond in the sume of $2,500.00 and executed by a corporate surety company authorized to be business in the State of Minnesota to secure the faithful performance of this Contract by said Contractor conditioned that the Contractor shall well and truly perform and carry out the covenants, terms, and conditions of this Contract in strict accordance with its provisions. This Contract shall be subject to termination by the City at any time if said bond shall be cancelled or ~the surety thereon relieved from liability because of failure to pay the premium or termination of the period of~the bond without renewal thereof. ]~. I~emnification 12.1 The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, for which it may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts, or obligations in consequence of the performance of this Contract by the Contractor, his employees, agents, or subcontractors. ] B. Termination 13.1 The City shall have the right to terminate this Contract in the event of breach thereof by the Contractor and a continuing breach shall not be deemed to be waived because not followed by prompt termination. This Contract shall terminate, and neither party nor the officers of the City shall be liable for further performance after the termination, if it shall become invalid by reason of any present or future law other than ordinance of the City. 13.2 The work shall be done with forces which are adequate to insure the satisfactory collection and disposal of said materials at all times and failure to perform shall not be excused by adverse conditions of weather, breakdown, or similar hindrances which on other work might be regarded as "acts of providence". 13.3 Upon failure of the Contractor to fulfill any of the provisions of the Contract, the City~'~Manager may be authorized to hire such persons, or assign City employees and equipment, as may be necessary, to do such work and the cost and expense thereof may be charged and deducted from monies due the Contractor, collected from the Contractor, or collected by recourse from the Contractor's bond. 14. Penalties 14.1 Failure by the Contractor to conform with the provisions of this Contract may result in the termination of this 8 Contract and/or cash claims by the City of damages of up to $2,500.00. Minor infringements and informalities of Contract provisions shall not be considered subject to penalty. The City shall inform the Contractor of such failures in writing and the Contractor shall have 30 days from the date of notice to correct such failures before penalty may be invoked. 14.2 In the event of such failures, the Contractor agrees to pay, in addition to the actual damages sustained by the City as a result thereof, the reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the City in pursuing any of its rights under the Contract. No~rDi~criminatory Practices 15.1 Minnesota Statutes, Section 181.59, which prohibits discrimination on account of race, creed, or color in the performance of public contracts, is made a part of this Contract with the same force and effect as if set out herein verbatim. ~6. Successors. and Assigns 16.1 The Contractor binds itself jointly and severally, its successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to the City in respect to all covenants of this Contract~ except that the Contractor shall not assign or transfer any part of its interest in this Contract or sublet as a whole nor shall the Contractor assign any monies due, or to become due, without the City's written consent. 17. Whole Agreement 17.1 This agreement embodies the entire agreement between the parties including all prior understandings and agreements and 9 may not be modified except in writing signed by all the parties. Executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF MOUND Mayor Robert Polston City Manager, Jon Elam NAME OF COMPANY SIGNATURE DATE 10 August 8, 1985 TO: Jon FROM: Joyce SUBJECT: Recycling Survey Listed below is the results of the Recycling Survey sent to the residents of the Highlands area in July. 71 sent back the survey out of a possible 509 or 13%. Newsprint seems to be the item that most people recycle. 49 households recycle newsprint once a month or 69%. 7 households recycle newsprint every other month or 9% Glass 38 households recycle glass once a month or 53% 2 households recylce glass every other month or 2% Metal 43 households recycle metal once a month or 60% 6 households recyie metal every other month or 8% Of the above 35 households recycle newsprint, glass and metal once every month or 49% 8 households recycle just newsprint and metal once a month or 11%. 6 households recycle just newsprint once a month or 8%. 1 person recycles just newsprint and glass. 2 households recycle just glass and metal. 54% said the service was excellent, 19% good, 5% fair and 1 person said poor. 52% said no to seeing twice a month collection, 32% said yes. Miscellaneous comments: No containers for separate the paper from cans, glass. furnish us with containers to put out on the curb. Just creating a new habit is tough, but I want to do it. side pick-up. Keep informing the Public the importance of recycling. I am recycling paper don't us much glass, metal, etc. 4 households just moved and not aware of service. 2 households said to inconvenient to sort and save. Let us buy or I like curb- Rebec t f u 1 ly, Joyce Nelson Business Bu le :in A Special Background Report On Trends in Industry And Finance RECYCLABLE MATERIALS drop in value as demand cycles down. With plenty of slack in the market for fresh materials, demand diminishes for used ones..Recyclable paper, for example, is worth nearly 50% less, on average, than it was last year, says Oklahoma Paper Supply Co. In Boulder, Colo., Eco-Cycle Inc. says demand for recyelable materials has dropped 20% in a year, with a 40% to 50% decline in prices. The chances of clearing a profit on waste materials are much smaller. Says Stan Litman, the owner of Daltex Waste Material Co. in Dallas: "The spread isn't there like it was a year ago." Recycling drives no longer make finan- cial sense, many groups decide. In Midland Park, N.J., Church of the Nativity has dropped its paper drive after 10 years, says an official, because "too much time was in- volved at too little money." Onty about a dozen Boy Scout troops in the Dallas area- dowm from about 100 last year-are mount- ing recycling drives this year. "The day~ when recycling not only covered the cost of collecting but also returned money to the treasury are 9one," says Jean Clarlc, the president of a recyclers' ffroup in New Jersey. Mrs. Ioa~rence Koehler 1614 San Gabriel Ase. Glendale, Calif. 91208 ~e~ ~o 8 ZoO. To ~e o~F ~o off ~e Zo~ ~ve ~ ~e ava~abZe [o~ ~e. pa~Lc~ar ~e ~/~e G~~h~ ~. P. Koe~ 9~ve Zhe e~e price ~,oecL?ke~ ~F ~lck to be ~~. ~ am u.,~&~ to t~ thee io~ ov~ to tke C~ off fib~ //ou co~ tk~ tk~e are d~bie ~ on k~k ~~ a~ s L2~at~e u~ ~ e~,oe~e to me. 7kan~- you ?or ffot~ co~~atlo~ CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 DATE: July 24, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager The Planning Commission, at its July 22nd meeting, nominated Mr. William C. Thai, 4737 Dorchester Road to fill the vacancy created by the recent resignatibn of Mr. Michael Vargo. Mr. Thai has lived in Mound for one year and is a retired school teacher from Austin, where he served as a member and the Chair of that city's Planning Commission for 12 years. He has depth and experience that the Commission seemed to appreciate. Thus, they would like to nominate Mr. Thal to fill out the term that expires December 31, 1985. status ~: :',~ '.,dm;ss;on ~!,' ,fi,.';,tess '.o c, treatmen~ o' o"n~ ,'.7~,~:n~, ;n .ts orograms and acti~'ities Planning Commission Minutes july 22, 1985 - Page 3 Interview of Applicants for Planning Commission Appointment Acting Chairman Reese took the applicants in the order they were listed on the agenda. The following is some of the information each mentioned: Frank Ahrens has lived in Mound lO years and owns his home on Island View Drive; is married and has three children; he is with the State of Minnesota Department of Public Safety; manages an office of 33 people; has a B.A. in accounting and an M.A. in business; has worked for the State for lO years. He did serve on the Park Commission; in the summer, he coaches soccer. He would like to contribute his time and talent to the community he lives in and feels that working in the public sector and involved in decision making would be an asset to this Commis- sion. It is not his intention to run for Council for sometime. Monday evening meetings would not be a problem. Thinks Lake Minnetonka is most valuable asset; there is a great potential with the Tonka building being subdivided and make jobs; not a great amount of land left to develop in Mound--outside of redevelopment. He's willing to learn ordinances and spend time reviewing the material. Commissioners asked him several questions; after which the next applicant was interviewed. William Thal has lived in Mound I year; he contracted and had a'twin home built on Dorchester Road by Ron Gehring. He moved here from Austin, Minnesota where he had served on the Planning Commission for 12 years. He commented Austin is only City in State where Commission granted the conditional uses ~nd the Council acted as the Board of Review. He was instrumenta) in getting that through and he felt it's worked very well. M:st conditional uses are beauty shope and things like that. If it-was controversial, they scheduled a public hearing. While he was Chairman of the Commission, they wrote a gun ordinance and a sign ordinance, but never got a good home occupation ordinance. The Commission asked him about accessory apartments. In Austin, they allowed duplexes in the R-l; didn't have same kind of problems you have. Thal stated he is retired and about the only way he can serve community is on a commission. He taught in Austin 27 years; 8th grade science and then 12th grade sociology. He is interested in quality of the living; protecting living standards. Has MA in Social Studies from University of Illinois. Came to Twin City Area because of his 4 daughters. Feels Mound comes close to being a resort area and having a dock space is really a plus; really satisfied they are in Mound. He has no problem with Monday night meetings. After the Commission asked him several questions, they went on to the next appli- cant. Nell Weber moved to Mound 3½ months ago; he purchased a piece of property in Mound and then purchased home he's living in on Windsor Road; intends to remain here. Background is that he is an architect and planner; he's a partner in the firm of Schwarz & Weber. They have been involved in planning and architectural projects ' ranging from residential single family, multi-family, townhouses, condominiums to office ~uildings and industrial properties. Has office of 6-8 people in the IDS building. Since graduating from University in 1971, he has been before Planning Commissions and Councils all over the Metropolitan area. Right now, very involved working around the lake. Remodeling Carriage property in Wayzata. Commented he taught from 1977 through 1981 at North Hennepin and Inver Grove College architec- ture and building classes. He's also on several Boards (Neighborhood Development) etc. Before his marriage, it had been his intention to live in Minneapolis, but he likes more space and also likes to sail on the lake. Wants to become involved Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1985 - Page 4 with the Planning Commission; feels Mound will have to deal with a lot of redevelopment and sees that as being critical. He's quite enthusiastic about Mound, He gave a little of his philosophy on planning, etc. He doesn't feel he'll have~a conflict on most meeting nights; perhaps on a couple. The Commissioners asked him several questions; after which the interviews were concluded. A vote was taken on the 3 applicants. The results were: Thal recei~/ed 5 v~tes and Ahrens 1. The Commission will recommend that the Council appoint William Thal to fill the unexpired term of Michael Vargowhich runs to December 31, 1985. The City Manager reported on the problems of the house size variance to do structural repairs at 2624 Westedge Boulevard. The Commission discussed the subject of al lowing it to be upgraded or should it be razed briefly. Kevin Norwood arrived; he was. concerned about the Council meeting and asked if the sub-committee on accessory apartments had come up with anything he could use. Meyer, Chairman of the sub-committee, stated they had met twice and found subject a very complex issue; trying to e×plore a vehicle to allow accessory apartments and yet meet the following criteria: 1. Appear physically to be 2. Parking would h~ve to be not more than l½ times requir, ed 3. Building would have ability to be inspected for certain standards, codes, fire alarms, etc. 4. Not promote new buildings It was discussed that it's a real can 'of worms. The Council had indicated they had no interest at this time; not a rock they want to turn over right now. Smith asked if this is a problem that could be resolved if we have mandatory inspec~ tions such ~s with "truth in housing"? Adjournment Weiland moved and Smith seconded a motion t~ adjourn the meeting at 9:45 P.M. vote was all in favor, so meeting was adjourned. The Thomas Reese, Acting Chairman Attest: May 21, 1985 Mound Fire Dept. 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, M~ 55364 Gent lemen: In response to our phone conversation of this date, we are pleased to herewith enclose copies of our price quotation #0001303, on which we had quoted to you for the total replacement of the water tank on your Mack Fire Truck Pumper. As you will note, this quotation was dated March 4, 1985, and please be advised that we will honor this same price quotation for an additional working days. If we were to receive an order for this new water tank, we would come to your Fire Department and measure up the existing water tank in an attempt to pre-design and even pre-manufacture the water tank so that there will be a'minimum down-time. If we cannot get the proper dimen- tional information with the water tank still installed inside the apparatus body, we would then require the apparatus for approximately 3-4 weeks during which time the original water tank would be removed, duplicated, and a new water tank installed. If we, in fact, pre-manufacture the water 'tank, the down-time would then bc only one week. Also in response to today's phone conr~rsation, we are forwarding additional copies of our letter dated >.pril 19, 1984 whereby we quoted repairs and modifications of your 1973 Mack Engine #12. Unfortunately, because of the year that has passed since this quotation, we must ask that you add 9% to each of the quoted figures for today's current pricing. Also, please be advised that these repairs would take approximately 2 weeks down-time and if this is the same apparatus that is to receive the new water tank, both the water tank and the rust repairs can be accomplished at the same time. Thank you very much and we look forward to your receiving this information and reply to the same. Yours very truly, eric. Airport Road P.O. Eox 577 Osceola, W SOORS r~ 5;.(';?0 (7 ~ t~/ 2!.',-'2!' April 19, 1984 Fire Chief Bob Cheney Mound Fire Department 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Bob: In regard to your request and our visit of this past Sunday, we are herewith enclosing the attached detailed specifications on our proposed repairs to your 1973 Mack Engine No. 12. Based on our inspection of your 9ehicle, we have determined that the two areas of repair would be the fro~t chassis fenders, left and right sides, and the apparatus body front side compartments, left and right sides. The balance of the vehicle seems to be in good repair with no need for material replacement, or touch-up painting. As is noted in the attached specifications, we would propose to rebuild or replace the chassis cab front fend~rf eliminating all rusted areas of the fenders and the cab attachment points. Also, we would propose the cut out the damaged metal at the lower front areas of both front side compartment modules, whereby we would weld in new steel material properly rustproofed, and plate over this material with brushed stainless steel or the optional 4-way polished aluminum treadplate material. As I discussed with Jerry on Sunday, the 4-way tread- plate pattern, which is furnished on your pumper, is no longer available and our 4-way pattern would be more similar to the aluminum treadplate found on the Sutphen Aerial Tower. The interiors of the front side compartments would also be recoated, using a grey spatter compartment interior finish to resemble the original finish. You will note that I have also offered an option of remanufacturing and rechroming the front fender chrome kick plates. These kickplates are special Mack parts which we could not duplicate and therefore would have to rebuild the original ones and have them rechromed. Our repair proposal does not include the replacement of these chrome pieces, and we are therefore offering this option. Another option would be to furnish 4-way aluminum treadplate front compartment wrap-arounds in lieu of the specified brushed stainless steel. The aluminum material is considerably less money than the stainless steel and if you will accept the difference in 4-way patterns, we are offering this option for your consideration. Also, per my discussion with Jerry, we would herewith offer to exchange all of the original 3-1/2 inch diameter "Mack"non-liquid filled pressure gauges, for new 3-1/2 inch diameter liquid filled "freeze-proof", -30° x 600 lb. pressure gauges. These new pressure gauges (in exchange for original gauges) would cost $70.00 per gauge. This modification would also .eliminate the individual needle valves now found under all of the pressure gauges. Also, you may consider replacing ~.~Cm f .: AirpomRoadPO ~x577 ~t'.;L.~ ~ ~. :.. (715) 294-25~ Fire Chief Bob Cheney April 19, 1984 Page 2 the original pump pressure and pump compound gauges with the new style 4-1/2 inch diameter liquid filled pressure gauges at $95.00 per gauge, installed. The specified repairs and modifications would require five working days (one week) and could be scheduled at your earliest convenience with approximately two weeks notification. I thank you very much, Bob, for the opportunity to quote you on these repairs and modifications, and look forward to your early reply. Yours very truly, Jim Kirvida ENC. JK/bv Airport Road · P.O. Box 577 · Osceola, Wisconsin 54020 · (715) 294-2555 The following repairs would be proposed to the 1973 Mack Engine No. 12, for the Mound Fire Department, Mound, Minnesota: Front chassis cab fenders to be removed, left and right sides, including chrome plated front scuff plates. Fender attachment areas are to be sandblasted and any rusted or corroded metal is to be cut out and replaced· New Chassis cab fenders shall be furnished~ properly cut to f~.t the original fender openings and positioned in the cab fender cutout areas. New fenders are to be properly prime painted, enamel painted to match original cab finish. Attachment areas to be rustproofed prior to installation. New fenders to include gold tape striping on the full radius. (NOTE: Replace- ment fenders are not of exact same design as original fenders. Rebuilding of Customer's original fenders is also available per Customer's preference.) Runningboard sections below fire pump panels, left and right sides, to be removed for access to rusted areas of front body corners. FrOnt body corners, left and right sides, at runningboard attachment areas to be cut out, new metal to be welded in replacing all corroded/rusted areas. New metal to be welded in position, properly ground, prime and enamel painted and entire front body corners rustproofed prior to plating. Brushed stainless steel full height corner panels to be fabricated and installed, left and right side, front body corners. Front stainless steel corners to be 31 inches high, approximately 14-1/2 inches wide, fabricated to contour around the front corners ending at the compartment hinged area. Stainless panels to be properly fit, all holes drilled prior to specified rustproofing and final installation of panels. Interiors of left and right side front compartments to be refinished using grey spatter compartment coating. ecified repairs will require four working days. Total cost to be ~OI~: ¥o remanufac~ure, rechrome and ~eins~al± front cI~rome plated itick g~ards, add $95.00. OPTION No. 2: Furnish polished 4-way aluminum treadplate in lieu of stainless steel for above specified front corner modifications, please deduct $80.00. .Vound Fire Dept. 5341 .'4a~.:ood Rd. F~d, ,~.N 55564 L_ Attn: Don [ CUSTOMER REF.: TERMS: Net 10 days QUOTE VALID FOR: 30 days F.O.B. POINT: Our Plant DELIVERY: TELEPHONE: CONTRACT: IN RESPONSE TO YOUR INQUIRY, WE SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING PRICE PROPOSAL' To repair your 1973 ~ck, F~gine #12 as per the following: Remove d~assis front fenders and re~air. Repair fender attacl~nent structure after sm~dblasting. Fabricate and install new cab fenders to re~lace original rusted fenders. Remove fire pump. framing boards, left and right sides. Patch repair front body corners, left and right sides. Fabricate and install brushed stainless steel corner panels, left and right sides, full width and full height of front compartment corners. Refinish interior of left and right side front compartments. Patch repair all rusted areas. Note: !',re cmmot. ,.~uarantee color match due to age of vehicle. TOTAL PRICE PER 3~0~: ........................... TO SUBMIT MY ORDER BASED UPON THE ABOVE PRICES, ~CATIONS AND TERMS." ACCEPTED BY, DATF .P.O. NUMBER CUSTOMER COPY TRUCK UTILITIES AND MANUFACTURING' CO, John Bray D Mound Fire Department MoUnd, Minnesota PRICE OUOTATION AIRPORT RDAD~ P,O. BOX 5'7'7 OSCEOI-At WIBCONI~IN 54020 (715) 294-2555 3/4/85 ,h~, ,,mb,, when ordeHn[ same 3-4 weeks Jim KirvJda :Ri` IS OUR QUOTATION ON THe` (]00DS NAHED, SUBJE(.';T TO THE CONDITIONS NOTED: 0001303 net lO ,.o.l.Osce01a I "°' 1 NDITION$: The pr~:ee end terms on Ibis quotation are not ,ubjecl to verbal changes or other agreements unless approved in wriling by the Home Office of the Seller. quetationl end ogreemenll ore ¢ontingenl upon striP'.es, occident,, fires, availability al malarial, and oll olher causes beyond our control. Prices ore based on costs and :liti~na existing on dote of quotation and ore subject lo change by Ihe Seller before final occeplonce. I Typogrophh:ol and stenographic errors subject to correction. Purchaser agrees to accept either overage or shortage not in excess of ten percent to be charged for pro-rata. :he,er a,~umes liability for polent and copyright infringemenl when goods ore made to Purchaser's specifications. When quotation specifies material to be furnished by the :he,er, ample allowance musl be mode for reasonable spoilage and malarial musl be of suitable quality' to facilitate efficient production: Conditions not ,pacifically stated herein shall be governed by established trade customs. Terms inconsislent with lhose sloled herein which may appear on Purchaser's ~al order will not be binding on the Seller. Fabricate, and instal! the following water tank, in your Mack pumper A new 1000 gallon water tank to be fabricated ow "stress..relieved" construction with 1/4" steel plate bottom, 3/16" steel plate ends, and 10 gauge steel sides and top sections. Tank is to be baffled int( eight seperate compartments, With interior and exterior ~elded and air tested. Tank interior to be sandblasted to a white brasive finLsh and spray coated with Super Tank Solution. Tank exterio' to be prim,) painted and rustproofed proir to installation. A large ~ank fill stack with interior vent/overflow to be furnished in the left front corner, with hinged cover. Tank top to be equipped with large remov, ble section, for access to all of the interior compartments. Eight indi~ idual magnesium annodes to be furnished, removable from the tahk exterior. -- Above tank to be designed to replace the original water :ank. Customer's originaI..water tank to be removed, including l)ecessary body'disassembly. New tank to be installed in same local~on, with all piping re-connected. Total $4300.00 Thank You. Group Inc, 1~.3 :'.~m~d Fire Dept. 5341 ~a.~vood Rd. :~,'!oLu~d, ~'N 55364 i Attn: Don , [ 484-3305 2370 ENGLISH- CORNER Oi; HIGHWAY 3{~- SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 551109 DATE: 2-16-85 CUSTOMER REF.: TERMS: Net 10 days QUOTE VALID FOR: 30 days F.O.B. POINT: Our Plant DELIVERY: TELEPHONE: CONTRACT: IN RESPONSE TO YOUR INQUIRY, WE SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING PRICE PROPOSAL: The follm¢ing modifications and repairs shall be made to your red '%~ack" Pmmer as specified belm~,: Remove original water tank, with body dis-assembly as needed, and .furnish m~d install in same location a new 1000-gallon water tank.. Tank to be fabricated with 45° bends on 1/4 inch steel plate bottom, 3/16 inch steel plate ends, m~d 10 gauge steel sides and top sections. Six baffled compartments shall be provided (interior of tank) with one individual magensium am~ode to be furnished in each baffled compartment, easily removable from the tank exterior. The tank interior is to be sandblasted to a white abrasive finish and spray coated with' Koppers Tank Solution. The tank exterior shall be prime painted and spray coated with an approved rust-proofing material prior to installati~;n. A large tank fill stack shall be furnished with interior vent/overflow positio]~bd in left front con~er ~4th hinged cover. 2~]e tank to~ shall have a removable top section for access to all interior co~artments. After rust-proofinF., the new tank shall'be installed in the proper location with all necessary piping to be recom~ected. SUBMIT MY ORDER BASED UPON THE ABOVE PRICES, ;ATtONS AND TERMS." ACCEPTED BY DATF .P.O. NUMBER TRUCK UTILITIES. AND MANUFACTURING' CO. BY, ~ John Bray CUSTOMER COPY July 12, 1985 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO DO ENGINEERING STUDY BACKGROUND: In 1978, the City of Mound installed a storm sewer line to service an area outlined on the attached map. In the middle of this area is a large pond. The pond's elevation appears to have risen because of the increased drainage that flows into it. To off-set that, the City installed an overflow pipe just slightly above the level of the storm sewer line that flows into Lake Langdon on the North. The residents have petitioned the City to lower the elevation of the pond so that property damage from high water and winter freezing does not occur. The City's Engineer, McCombs-Knutson, has recommended that we either lower the storm pipe or have a maintenance program for the storm sewer. REQUEST: Because the City's Engineer did the original project and the neighbors feel they made some serious mistakes with the pond, the City Council has decided a second engineering viewpoint would be very useful. At this point, the City of Mound would like to receive a proposal from you to prepare an engineering report on this situation. We are seeking only a quotation to prepare the report, not to do any implementation with i.e. plans, specifications, etc. If you would like to prepare a proposal for us, please see that it is received by the City no laters than August 6, 1985. Please submit to: Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN. 55364 ;,~, ,.quu', :_';,~,o'::_:': :, :'::' .:, ;~¢er treat tlc:cs qo, O,5cr,,.m~nale on ',r~e basS$ of race co!or, nat;ona! origin, or handicapped status 0 545 Indian Mound Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 473-4224 August 2, 1985 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Request for Proposal for Engineering Study Dear Mr. Elam: We have reviewed your Request for Proposal dated July 12, 1985 to perform an engineering study of the pond and pond outlet located in Block 2 of Batdorf's First Addition in Mound. It is envisioned that the requested report would include investigation of the existing storm sewers and drainage area, verification of the pond outlet elevation and capacity, analysis of existing runoff conditions along with our recommendation for a solution to high water levels. We will prepare the requested report at a lump sum cost of $1,800. Our fee for services to attend meetings with the Mound City Council or interested citizens would be on an hourly basis, at a rate of $45/hour including expenses. We are capable of preparing the requested report within 10 working days of your notice to proceed. Thank you for this opportunity to submit our proposal. We look forward to working with you and the City of Mound on this project. Very truly yours, EUGE!E A. HICKOK AN~CIATES bt July 30, 1985 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Otto G. Bonestroo, Robert $1'. Rosene, la.E, Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E, Brodfort~ A. Leraberg, Richard E. Turner, P.E. James C, Olson, P,E. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. K~ith A Gordon, P.E. Thomas E. Noyes, P.E. ,Richard Igq Foster, P.E. Robert G. Schunicbt. P,E. Marvin L. $orvala, Donald C. Burgordt. P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon, P.E. Murk A. Hanson, P.E. Ted K. FraM, P.E. Michael T. Rautmann. P.E. Robert R. Pfaff erie, P.E. David Lo,~kota. P.E. Charles ,4. Erickson Leo M. Pawelsky Harlan M. Olson Dear Mr. Elam: The firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. (BRA) is pleased to offer this proposal to perform a storm water ponding study for the City of Mound. We understand the pond is bounded generally by properties south of Beachwood Road, east of Westedge Boulevard and west of Rosewood Lane. The area and its difficulties are outlined in your July 12, 1985 Request for Pro- posal. We will prepare an engineering report which: 1) Analyzes the hydrology/hydraulics of the pond drainage area, and 2) Recommends actions to allevi.ate high water problems. To perform this study in the most efficient manner possible, we request that the City provide us with the following information, presumed to be readily available City records: 1) Elevations of the basements or walkout flOors of the buildings surrounding the pond. ~ 2) Pond tributary drainage area boundaries, or a) Contour maps, or b) Street plans showing elevations. 3) History of pond water'levels (before and after construction of the storm sewer draining into and discharging from the pond). 4) Storm sewer plans with elevations. 5) Ponding area contours (to determine holding capacity). This information should be available to the City from its City Engineer. In addition, we request that the City's staff person most knowledgeable of the problems accompany us on an inspection of the area and the homes during proj- ect initiation. 9516c Page 1. Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound, MN July 30, 1985 If the information outlined above can be furnished to BRA, we will complete the study and report for a fee of $600. If not all the field information is available, we will have a survey crew secure any needed but missing data for additional compensation at a crew rate of $75 per hour. We anticipate that not more than 8-12 crew hours would be required. We will notify you if we ex- pect the crew efforts to exceed this estimate and we will not exceed this es- timate without your written approval. We appreciate this opportunity to offer our services. If you find the terms outlined in this letter acceptable, we will consider your signatures below to effect an agreement between Mound and BRA. We will further consider receipt of a signed copy of this agreement as authorization to proceed with the study. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Robert W. Rosene Vice President RWR:li Accepted by: CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA Mayor City Clerk Date 9516c Page 2. July 25, 1985 ' COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~ LANO SURVEYORS ~ PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Lynwood Boulevard MSAP 145-104-03 Statis Report #7193 Dear Jon: As you are aware, we have received final approval on the construction plans for the above project. There are a number of options open to the City regarding the next phase of this project. The plans and specifications were prepared as though, the project would be let under one contract. If the City wished to let the building demolition as a separate contract, a new plan and specification would need to be prepared which probably would have to be approved by the State Aid office. This method would add not only time but additional cost to the project. Another alternative would be to bid the complete project in two sections, with the demolition scheduleO for completion in late fall or early winter and the actual street construction to start early next spring. We have a number of concerns if the demolition is done separately from the street construction no matter if handled by separate contract or as a separate section under one contract. A substantial amount of fill, approximately 4,200 C.Y., will be required to fill the basements of the two buildings removed. We had intended on obtaining approximately one half or 2,000 C.Y. of the common excavation from the street construction. If the buildings are removed before the street construction commences, this fill material would not be available. Not only would additional cost be added to the demolition portion of the project, but the common excavation item would cost more since all the excess material would need to be removed from the construction site. Slo7 Mr. Oon Elam July 25, 1985 Page Two Another alternative would be to wait until after the first of the year to bid the entire project with construction commencing as early as possible in the spring. We believe this schedule is the most desirable for a number of reasons. Attached is a cost schedule which shows a projected expenditure of $382 , 500. 00 from the City's MSA Construction fund for the years 1985 and 1986. The monies available from this fund, including the estimated 1986 allotment, is approximately $367,000.00 which would leave a deficit of approximately $15,000.00. In order for the City to use the 1986 construction allotment for this project, the contract can not be let until after January 1, 1986. If the project were bid and let before January 1st, the City would need td formally request an advance from urban municipal funds. As mentioned previously, it appears there will be a deficit of funds even though the 1986 allotment is figured in the amount available; therefore, an advance may be needed from the 1987 allotment. We would also caution the City that an advance allotment is not ~hat it appears to be. The City is required to pay the initial cost in excess of the present available allotment and then the state will reimburse Mound from subsequent construction apportionments. We would recommend that the City wait until January or February and bid the job as one project, including the building demolition. If, after receiving bids and firming up acquisitions cost, there is still a deficit in the City's MSA construction fund, an advance allotment can then be requested. As we previously discussed, I will immediately complete the paper work necessary to request 95% payment for the acquisition costs. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, MoCONBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Jo~hn~Cameron JC:cah LVNWOOD BOULEVARD MSA 145-104-03 PROJECTED PROJECT COST Estimated Construction Cost Right-of-Way Cost Relocation Cost Estimated Engineering Cost Acquisition Service Total Estimated Project Cost Less Non-Eligible Construction Items (45% of Storm Sewer Cost and City Utility Services) $208,286.00 102,268.00 12,850. O0 36,000. O0 14 ~ 000. O0 $373,404. O0 (17, 324.00) Total Estimated Cost to be Paid from M.S.A. Construction Fund $356,080. O0 M.S.A. CONSTRUCTION FUND STATIS Present M.S.A. Construction Fund Balance 1986 Allotment (Estimated) Construction Fund Available 271,926.49 95 ~ 000. O0 $366, ~26.49 PROJECTED EXPENDITURES 1985 & 1986 (M.S.A. CONSTRUCTION FUND) Black Lake Bridge $ 12,740.00 Tuxedo Safety Improvement 13,680.00 Lynwood Boulevard ~56~080.00 Total $382,500.00 SF-O0006-03 DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION - Room 420 Office of State Aid STATE OF MINNESOTA O//fce emorancfurn TO: Municipal Engineers DATE: July 15, 1985 ¢ontlnuat£on of the 5-Year Construction Program Reporting FROM: SUBJECT: PHONE: 612-296-9872 The Municipal Screening Committee at its October 1981 meeting passed the directive which states that: By January i, 1983, each municipality shall submit a revised 5-year construction program which has been approved by their city council. This program shall include sufficient projects to utilize all existing and anticipated funds accruing during the life of the program. The program will be updated at 3-year intervals and a review made at that time to ascertain program implementation. The requirements wer~ reviewed and it was determined that this information is valuable to the Unencumbered Construction Fund Subcommittee, as well as, useful to the City Engineers in making the city councils more aware of State Aid funding. To comply with this directive, each city is requested to submit a council-approved, itemized 5-year program of proposed construction by priority, showing the termini, length, estimated cost, and type of anticipated projects on the enclosed forms. Include only. State Aid expenditures in this report. This'submittal should be returned to the District State Aid Engineer by Aug. 15, 1985. We are returning a copy of your previous 5-year construction program to those cities which submitted a report .in 1982. These reports could be helpful in preparing this year's submittal. Enclosure: 1982 5-Year Construction Program RESOLUTION NO. 85 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A HOLD HARMLESS CONDITION TO A VARIANCE APPROVAL FOR A SAFETY I~PROVE~ENT ON TUXEDO BOULEVARD AT ~qNCPESTER ROAJ3 - SAP 145-101-05 WHEREAS, the City of Mound has planned a safety improvement of Tuxedo Boulevard at Manchester Road; and WHEREAS, the existing street constructed in 1967 does not meet present State Aid Standards; and WHEREAS, the City has requested and received a variance from State Aid Rule #8820.9912. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mound saves and holds harmless the State of Minnesota and all its agents and employees of and from any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of actions of any nature or character arising out of or by reason of, in any manner, the reconstruction of Tuxedo Boulevard (MSAS 145) at its intersection with Manchester Road (Stations 14+00 to 16+50) in any other manner than as a design speed of 30 miles per hour in accordance with the Minnesota Rules 8820.9912 and further agrees to defend at their sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising as a result of the granting of said variance. McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS,LAND SURVEYORS.PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 August 5, 1985 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBOECT: City of Mound Municipal State Aid Street System Five Year Construction Program File #7409 Dear Mayor and Council Members: The Office of State Aid has requested that each City submit a five year construction program which has been approved by their City Council. This program is to include sufficient projects to utilize all existing and anticipated funds accuring during the next five years. This is only a projection and the City will not be held to these specific projects or scheduleo Oon and myself have looked at the total M.S.A. system and came up with following schedule as a suggestion for Mound's five year program. Also enclosed is a map which indicates the streets that are on the M.S.A. system. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, McCONBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. 3C:tdv Enclosure MUNICIPAL STATE-AID STREET SYSTEM 5-Year Construction Program For_~ (State Aid Expenditures Only) RZVEN"dE Present State Aid Construction Balance June 30, 19_~ 2stimated Annual Construction Allotment $ J~5.8~ x 4 Zstimated Total State Aid Allotment for Programming Purposes z?/. / Flor. / ESTI'AATED EXP".NDITURES Year Estimated of State Aid Expenditure Termini Project De. scrip t ion Expenditure From~.T ~A~4~--ETcL ~_SA~V~-O~ ~ ~~ ~g~n" z~o ~. ~~~ ~ $ ~,o9o,, From ~ '~ U~~U~ ~~~ O~ Length ~0 ~ :~~%~ ~ ~,0o0 ~ / Length ~.~S ~%~E~ ~* ~~ ~ From C,~.~,~, ~ ~ q ~ ~ T.o ~'~og~ ~. , ~ ~ 60T~, $ ~) QOO Length ~,o~ ~~, ~~ ~--~ ~ '' From ~h'O~ ~o~D * 6~T%~ ~ Length 0.0,~ ~~ 0~~' Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, Minncs )ta 55155 Oilice ol Commissioi~t'r August 7, 1985 William McCombs Mound City Engineer McCombs-Knutson Associates 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 In reply refer to: Request for Variance Dear Mr. McCombs: Upon the advice of a Variance Committee appointed expressly for the purpose of recommending to me the validity of the City of Mound's request for a variance from State Aid Rules § 8820.9912, I hereby grant the variance so as to permit a design speed of 20 miles per hour. The variance is conditional upon receipt of a resolution by the City of Mound that indemnifies, saves and holds harmless the State of Minnesota and all its agents and employees of and from any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of actions of any nature or character arising out of or by reason of, in any manner, the reconstruction of Tuxedo Boulevard (MSAS 145) at its intersection with Manchester Road (Stations 14+00 to 16+50) in any other manner than as a design speed of 30 miles per hour in accordance with the Minnesota Rules § 8820.9912 and further agrees to defend at their sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising as a result of the granting of this variance. Sincerely, Richard ?. Braun Commissioner cc: C.E. Weichselbaum, Dis=. 5 Jon Elam - City Engr. Gert Olson - Senator John Berger - Representative John C~_~ron - MoCk,ubs - Y. nutson Wm. McCombs = City Eugr. File- 420 Brian M. Johnson An Equal Opportunity Employer , _.~ ~.~, '~, McCOMB$-KNUT$ON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS I LANO SURVEYORS ~ PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 August 5, 1985 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 May~ood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Municipal State Aid Street System Five Year Construction Program File #7409 Dear Mayor and Council Members: The Office of State Aid has requested that each City submit a five year construction program which has been approved by their City Council. This program is to include sufficient projects to utilize all existing and anticipated funds accuring during the next five years. This is only a projection and the City will not be held to these specific projects or schedule. Oon and myself have looked at the total M.S.A. system and came up with following schedule as a suggestion for Mound's five year program. Also enclosed is a map which indicates the streets that are on the M.S.A. system. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, MoCCMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. ron JC:tdv Enclosure MUNICIPAL STATE-AID STREET SYSTEM 5-Year Construction Program For_~ (State Aid Expenditures Only) ,.REVENUE Present State Aid Construction Balance June 30, 19_~ Estimated Annual Construction Allotment $ J~5,8(~3 X 4 Zstimated Total State Aid Allotment for Programming Purposes ESTI'~ ~ATED EXPENDITURES Year Estimated of State Aid Expenditure Termini Project .De. scrip t ion Expenditure / Length 0.~ ~t~E% ~* ~~ ~ "- MUNICIPAL STATE.AID STREET SYSTEM 5-Year Construction Program (State Aid Expenditures Only) REVE.%~C E Present State Aid Construction Balance June 30, ~stimated Annual Construction Allotment $ ;%5:8(~3 X 4 Vssimated Total State Aid Allotment for Programming Purposes $ ~/~ /3~. ESTI.~IATED :~S / of State Aid Ex9end i ture Ex?end i,ture I MUNICIPAL STATE-AID STREET SYSTEM 5-Year Construction Program For (State Aid Expenditures Only) REVENUE Present State Aid Construction Balance June 30, Esti~ated Auuual Construction Allotment SZ~.. ~ Estimated Total State Aid Allotment £or Programming ESTI~ATED IRES of State Aid E?2 end i ture · Expend i t~re / Length. 0.,0 From ~, b..~ Length .... ~..0 ESTIMATED EXPENDITUKES ~ Year Estimated of State Aid E xp en_d i t.ur.e ,T,q, ~rmt n t, ProJ~e c.t De s.cr.ip.t t on Exp end i tut e "" ~ ~~/~ " Fr om To $ ...... Lengtl Fr°m~ On Fr~- ' ...... ~o Length-, ..... On ~ ~ ........ J//,q CITY OF MOUND MINNESOTA DENOTES STATE AID STREETS ........................ DENOTES COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAYS '\ L A K E ~oOtS M I N N E Minnesota Departr¥,ent of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, Minncs()la 55155 Oilice ol Con~mission~,r (Gl2) August 7, 1985 William McCombs Mound City Engineer McCombs-Knutson Associates 12800 Industrial Park Blvd. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 In reply refer to: Request for Variance Dear Mr. McCombs: Upon the advice of a Variance Committee appotmted expressly for the purpose of recommending to me the validity of the City of Mound's request for a variance from State Aid Rules § 8820.9912, I hereby grant the variance so as to permit a design speed of 20 miles per hour. The variance is conditional upon receipt of a resolution by the City of Mound that indemnifies, saves and holds harmless the State of Minnesota and all its agents and employees of and from any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of actions of any nature or character arising out of or by reasom of, in any manner, the reconstruction of Tuxedo Boulevard (MSAS 145) at its intersection with Manchester Road (Stations 14+00 to 16+50) in any other manner than as a design speed of 30 miles per hour in accordance with the Minnesota Rules § 8820.9912 and further agrees to defend at their sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising as a result of the granting of this variance. Sincerely, Richard P. Braun Commissioner C.E. Weiehselbaum, Dist. 5 Jon Elam- City Engr. Gen Ol$on - Senator John Berge= - Representative John CarLtOn - McCo~bs - Knutsom Wm. }fcCombs = City Engr. File- 420 Brian M. Johnson An Equal Opportunity Employer August 2, 1985 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER Enclosed is a petition to reactivate the previously considered road extension project for Denbigh Road. Last year when the Council considered this, several proponents were not at the public hearing, while all the opponents were, giving an indication that the neighborhood was badly split on the proposal. I don't know that things have changed very much since then. Five of the nine owners have signed the petition, but they represent only 5 1/2 lots of the 12 in the project area. Although three of the 12 are vacant lots and are for sale. Does the Council wish to re-hear this? If so, I would propose Sep- tember 10th as a hearing date. Almost ill the work has been done previously, so other than updating the hearing notices and sending them out, I don't think we will have to do anything further on this proposal~ JE:fc enc. PETITION TO THE ~-~ The -c,~d~rsi~qed property owners do hereby petition the city of .~..iound to reopen the petition to convert the now private section of Denbigh Road to a public road, NAME ADDRESS $gNtN 9. McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS [] LAND SURVEYORS I~ PLANNERS February 14, 1984 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: Mound, Minnesota Denbigh Road Proposed Street Improvements #7064 Dear Mayor and Council Members: For your consideration, we are submitting an alternate plan for the pro- posed improvements to Denbigh Road. This alternate would be similar to the original proposed construction except the street would be a dead-end instead of looping back to Wilshire Boulevard. Due to the limited space available, a full cul-de-sac is virtually impossible. In order to turn around, vehicles would have to back into the pri- vate driveways. This plan would eliminate the traffic hazard which would exist at Wilshire Boulevard if Denbigh Road were extended through. We do not like to see another dead-end street without a cul-de-sac, but his may be a better al- ternative than the traffic problems at Wilshire Boulevard. Attached is a cost estimate and the proposed assessments for Alternate A. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 3C:sj Enclosure Mound, Minnesota Preliminary Cost Estimate Denbigh Road - Alternate A #7064 Item Quantity Unit Price Total Common excavation 220 C.Y. 3-1/2" bituminous base Mn/DOT 2331 90 TON Bituminous tack coat 20 GAL 1-1/2" bituminous wear, Mn/DOT 2341 37 TON Driveway aprons 510 S.F. Concrete curb and gutter 530 L.F. Tree removal 2 EACH 12" RCP storm sewer 200 L.F. Catch basins 2 EACH Manhole 1 EACH Concrete apron 1 EACH Rip rap 2 C.Y. Black dirt and sod 400 S.Y. Relocate curb stop 2 EACH Adjust gate valve 1 EACH Contingencies Total Estimated Construction Cost 5.00/CY 28.00/TN 1.50/GA 30. O0/TN 3.00/SF 6.50/LF 200.O0/EA 15.00/LF 800.O0/EA 900.O0/EA 300.O0/EA 50.O0/CY 2.00/SY 200. O0/EA 150.O0/EA $ 1,100.00 2,520.00 30.00 1,110.00 1,530.00 3,445.00 4O0.OO 3,000.00 1,600.00 900.00 300.00 100.00 800.00 40O.0O 150.00 1,735.00 $19,120.00 Engine6ring, legal, fiscal and administrative costs 4,780.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST - Alternate A .......................... $23,900.00 O O (D · O_3 U_ 8 O0000O I 0000000000 ..~0~ ~, 0 II II II X × x COMBS-KNUT$ON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS :i LAND SUR¥~YORS ~ ?LANN~RS January 31, 1984 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Subject: Mound, Minnesota Denbigh Road Proposed Street Improvements #7064 Dear Mayor & Councilmembers: As requested by the City Council we have completed a feasibility study for upgrading to City standards the section of private road which is the extension of Denbigh Road east of Cardiff Lane. The existing driven road loops back to Wilshire Boulevard and is located on private property with easements to the various parcels in this area for access. The city constructed a watermain in this private road in 1974 but it appears the easements obtained at that time were strickly for utility purposes. The City would have to obtain the right-of-way necessary for any street construction. After a preliminary survey was completed, we do not feel that there is enough land available to construct a cul-de-sac, therefore our cost estimate is for construction of a thru street from Cardiff Lane to Wilshire Boulevard. Be- cause of the tight conditions and to be consistant with the 1978 construction of Denbigh Road to the southwest, we are recommending an 18 foot wide street including concrete curb and gutter. This construction would require a minimum 20 feet right-of-way with temporary construction easements along Doth sides. Due to the grades and the nearness of the existing garages, storm sewer is also a necessity. We are proposing two catch basins with an outfall line run- ning to the lake on the lot line between Lots 89 and 90. The concrete curb and gutter proposed would be the standard design used on previous projects with 3 foot aprons at all driveways. The estimated construction cost for these improvements is $23,200.00 with the overall cost of the project estimated at $29,000.00. These estimates do not include expense which may be incurred in acquiring the right-of-way neces- sary for construction. Enclosed is break-down of our cost estimates. City of Mound January 31, 1984 Page Two There are a number of methods that could be used to access the cost of this project. For discussion purposes we have calculated the proposed assessment for each property using the City's current assessment policy which combines area, footage and unit charges. Attached is a breakdown of this proposed as- sessment and a copy of Mound's assessment policy. We have included this policy mainly because it gives the properties abutting the County Road a deduction which of course is paid by the remaining properties. It is the opinion of the Engineer that the proposed improvement is feasible and can best be accomplished as described herein. Sincerely, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. William H. McCombs, P.E. WHM:j Enclosure Preliminary Cost Estimate Denbigh Road Item Quantity Unit Price Total Common excavation 300 C.Y. $ 5.00/CY $ 1,500.00 3-i/2" bituminous base Mn/DOT 2331 120 TON 28.00/TN 3,360.00 Bituminous tack coat 30 GAL 1.50/GA 45.00 1-i/2" bituminous wear, Mn/DOT 2341 50 TON 30. O0/TN 1,500.00 Driveway aprons 510 S.F. 3.00/SF 1,530.00 Concrete curb and gutter 720 L.F. 6.50/LF 4,680.00 Tree removal 5 EACH 200.OO/EA 1,000.00 12" RCP storm sewer 200 L.F. 15.00/LF 3,000.00 Catch basins 2 EACH 800.O0/EA 1,600.00 Manhole 1 EACH 900. O0/EA 900.00 Concrete apron 1 EACH 300.O0/EA 300.00 Rip rap 2 C.Y. 50.O0/CY iO0. O0 81ack dirt and sod 500 S.Y. 2.00/SY i,O00.O0 Relocate curb stop 2 EACH 200. O0/EA 400.00 Adjust gate ~alve i EACH 150.O0/EA 150.00 Contingencies 2,135.00 Total Estimated Construction Cost $23,200.00 Engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative costs 5,800.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST ........................................ $29,000.00 C:) 0(2) ED EDO I -~' ~:) O0 OOE:)O E:)O I O000OO I C) OQO(DO 0000 O0000 0 J JJJ JJ JJ J J 00~ J ~ O ,--~ _.,1 I I I r--I II II tl × × × · ,~ (D 0 c' ~ 0 (D > 0 .ri 0 0 > 0 In 1976, the City adopted a street improvement assessment policy under Res- olution No. ?6-77. The assessment criteria is as follows: 30 percent of the total cost to be assessed based on front footage· Corner lots shall be calculated to include all front footage (front and sides)· All lots shall be deemed to have at least a minimum of 40 front feet· be 30 percent of the total cost to be assessed shall be based on the square footage of the property to be assessed. 40 percent of the total cost to be assessed shall be based on a unit basis. Since 1976, the City Council has added the following refinements to this policy. Triangle Lots - lots that form a triangle on two streets are to be as- sessed for footage on the long side only. Multiple units other than duplexes are assessed on the basis of 3/4 unit per each residential unit in the building (Example: a 50 unit apartment is assessed for 37.5 units plus footage plus area). Lots tba't front on a County Road and a street improvement will be as- sessed on the same basis as other lots except that the units and square footage' will be reduced by 50 percent. Area of land formerly commons and now under private ownership, to be assessed as part of the private property. Larg~ parcels (a number of combined lots) to be assessed one unit, plus area and footage. Two separate parcels under the same ownership will be assessed two units, plus area~ and footage if they both have enough area to qualify as buildable sites under the present zoning. Single lots under separate ownership from adjacent property that do not meet the area requirements for a buildable site will be assessed only area and footage. Properties abutting alleys that are bituminous surface only, with no curb and gutter, to be assessed the same as any other property except the front footage will be reduced by 50% with a minimum of 40 lineal feet. Properties which have the garage located across the street from the house will be assessed on the same basis as other lots except the par- cel in which the garage is located will not receive a unit charge. 9. Lots that front on a street to be improved and which previously paid a full assessment on another street improvement project will be assessed for the footage only with no minimum. 10. Parcels which do not abut a street improvement project but received benefits from the construction will be assessed for the project. 11. Lots that are adjacent to a 12' wide bituminous street i~stalled for City purposes which front on another street in the project will not be assessed for footage on the side street. 12. Triangular lots that are combined with a rectangular lot are to be as- sessed for footage on the long side of the triangular lot plus the footage of the remaining lot or lots. 13. Duplexes are to be assessed on the basis of two units plus area and footage, with a minimum on the footage of 80 feet. 14. Lots that have streets on three sides are to be assessed for footage on the long side and the average length of the other two sides. 15. The cost of driveway entrances over 12 feet wide are assessed directly to the property oWner. 16. Commercial or industrial property get 1-1/2 units. 17. Credit is given for past storm sewer assessments except that when credits exceed the assessment no assessment will be levied and no as- sessment paid. 18. There is a maximum of 250 feet and 25,000 square feet per residential parcel. 19. Storm sewers are assessed as part of the street improvements and these assessments are included in the unit, square footage and frontage charges. August 1, 1985 NEW LICENSE APPLICATION Restaurant Lighthouse - (Roger Rager) 5098 Three Points Blvd. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager, and Members of the City Council Jan Bertrand, Building Official ~ August 1, 1985 Rager's Restaurant Mr. & Mrs. Rager are intending to sell consignment and used merchan- dise. I have discussed with them the zoning provisions of the B-3 Neighborhood Business District. The District Provisions do not allow the principal use to be the sale of used merchandise. They are intending to provide 12 customer seats for serving refreshments and food of the prepackaged type products, such as, Stewart sand- wiches and so[t drinks. Previously they have been li. censed as a full service restaurant which is not'their present intention. The operators, Mr. & Mrs. Rage~ have stated they would like the City Council to consider the proposed use the same as previously licensed. There has not been a Conditional Use Permit on the property except for the rear, north lots used for parking of the restaurant in a residential district. The on-site parking needs for the new proposed use will be 4 parking stalls. They no longer intend to use the rear lots for the new building use. ~5~/-.~.~ A:~ (;qu:~l t'gpo':'_r:.', F"¢. cer thai does F,.~! d:sc.f,tT~!na~e on ,.ne ba$~s of ri'~ce :'3tOt. natioi~ai origin, or handicapped status 23.635.1 23.635.2 23.635.3 23.635.4 23.635.5 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS (B-3) Purpose The neighborhood commercial center shall function as a small service area which may supply local retail sales to nearby residents. Permitted Uses ~qithin any Neighborhood Business District no structures or. land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: All residentlal uses permitted in Sections 23.604.2, 23.610.2, and 23,620.2 subject to lot area, height, and yard requirements established for said type of housing and as set forth in the afore- said sections. (ORD. 454. 12-6-83) Conditional Uses Within any Neighborhood Business District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Delicatessen and dairy store Drug store " Grocery store Accessory Structures other than garages Minor fuel station and motor fuel station convenience store Restaurants '(Class I) Restaurants (Qlass IV) (ORD. 454. 12-6583) Permitted Accessory Uses Within any Neighborhood Commercial District the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: Those uses permitted in Section 23.630.4 Lot Area, Height, Lot ~/idth, and Yard Requirements L. No building shall exceed 35 feet in height 2. Minimum Lot Area: 10,OOO square feet 3. Front, side, rear.setbacks: 30 feet 4. Minimum setback from side or rear residential area: 5. Refer to'Section 23.704, ~araqraph 2. 6. Minimum Lot Width: 60 feet 50 feet IN--ON 2101 S Street Northwest Washington, DC 20008 (202) 745-4596 Telex: 440432 MATCH July 31, 1985 Mr. John Elam 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: Please find attached three (3) copies of the Memorandum of Agreement and Technical Assistance Work Plan in support of your nomination and approval for participation in the HUD/SBA Technical Assistance Joint Agency Agreement. Please review the attached and add or delete tasks as you feel necessary. Note that cost computations used reflect the assumptions of billable cost. Upon receipt of an executed copy of the Memorandum of Agreement and the TA Work Plan we shall schedule the initial site visit. However, if changes are necessary in the scope of work these shall be incorporated into a revised agreement and forwarded for your approval. The HUD and SBA district offices shall receive copies of the at~ached and they may choose to participate in one or more sessions as the technical assistance moves forward. If there are any questions, ~lease do not hesitate to call. SinCerely, /~David Nesbitt -- Project Director DN/rb Enclosures MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT HUD/SBA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR LOCAJ~ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SM3%LL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE This Memorandum of Agreement is between Hennepin County- Mound, ~ (referred to in this Memorandum as the Community) and The MATCH Institution of Washington, D.C., (hereinafter referred to as MATCH), in behalf of a business or development expert (herein- after referred to as the Peer Expert). This Memorandum sets forth the obligations of the parties in the utilization of technical assistance services related to economic development and/or small business assistance. This Memorandum contemplates MATCH providing a coordina- tive role to the Community in the direct provision of technical assistance by a .jointly selected Peer Expert. Further, upon the completion of the technical assistance provided as part of this agreement and the Technical Assistance Work Plan, ~ennepin County-~und,~ , will provide to ~TCH (in a form and format to be provided at a later date), an evaluation of the work performed and any other reports deemed necessary. MATCH and the Peer Expert are prepared to offer these ser- vices to the Community in accordance with a Technical Assistance Work Plan predicated on materials provided by the Community, as part of the nomination process. The Technical Assistance Work Plan may be revised and modified with the concurrence of both parties. Compensation for said assistance shall be divided between 2 two technical assistance providers. MATCH and the Peer Expert. MATCH shall receive compensation for the following costs if and when incurred: a. travel reimbursement and per diem where a MATCH on site coordinator is necessary during the delivery of the pro- posed Technical Assistance, and subject to the projected person days approved and provided in the Technical Assistance Work Plan; and b. after the Community's receipt of a final report on the technical assistance provided under MATCH's SBA/HUD Agreement, and subject to the Community's assessment that follow-up technical assistance is necessary, MATCH shall negotiate an agreement with the Community for com- pensation to include travel, per diem, and a negotiated person day rate to include a base rate plus general ad- ministrative overhead'fee. The Peer expert shall receive compensation and reimbursement for the ~ollowing services and cost: a. professional fees reflective of the marketplace for like services, and subject to the person day schedule in- cluded in the Technical Assistance Work Plan; and b. travel and per diem costs consistent with the level of effort outlined in the Technical Assistance Work Plan. Further,-a separate Agreement shall be executed between the Community and the Peer Expert. However, said Agreement shall contain the following proviso; that payment for professional /3 services shall not be effectuated until the Community and MATCH concur on the completion of the Peer Expert's scope of work as outlined in the Peer Expert Agreement. T~is proviso should not affect reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs for travel and per diem incurred by the Peer Expert in compliance with the scope of work. This Memorandum of Agreement may be terminated at the discre- tion of either party upon two weeks notice to the other. Subject, however, to the compensation of all costs (including, but not limited to, person days, travel, and per diem) incurred to the date of said termination. Therefore, in consideration of the proposed cost sharing pro- visions contained herein, and subject to concurrence of both ear- ties to a Technical Assistance Work Plan, the undersigned parties agree that this Memorandum reflects the full understanding and intent as to the Technical Assistance project to be pursued. The Community and MATCH shall indicate their concurrence by executing this Memorandum of Agreement and returning the original to: The MATCH Institution 2101 S Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20008 The parties have executed this Agreement on of , 19 . For the Community By: Ti~l.c: (day) For The MATCH Institution By: Title: HUD/SBA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WORK PLAN Prepared For: Hennepin County -- ~pund, Minnesota NARRATIVE SUMMARY This plan of work is intended to be a basis for the pro- vision of technical assistance through peer to peer e>:chanqes in selected CDBG Entitlement Communities. The MATCH Institution, under a joint working agreement be- tween the Small Business Administration and the Department of Housing ~nd '.~rban Development, shall be partially compensated for work to b,. performed under this work plan. The technical assistance is targeted to a specific project or process and the expectation is that as a result of the tech- nical assistance provided, a reasonable chance of success exists. The program identifies tasks, estimates time commitments and defines schedules in order to facilitate and expedite the technical assistance process. In addition, there is an attached budget summary which re- flects the cost to you for The MATCH Institution's work, as well as the proposed level of effort and projected cost of the se- lected Development/Business Peer Expert. Please note that The MATCH Institution's work may be divided between Project Coordi- nation and Direct Technical Assistance delivery. The Project Coordination cost is being paid by the SBA/HUD joint agency agreement. The proposed work is to begin in August 15 , 1985, and be completed by October 30 , 1985. A combined total of 20 person days of effort are projected for MATCH and the Development/ Business Expert. Any follow-up time requirements after the delivery of this level of effort will be negotiated at the appr¢)r~rJate tin:,,'.~ and by separate agreement. JIJ? The Community and MATCH shall indicate their concurrence by executing this work plan. Please return one (1) copy to: The MATCH Institution 2101 S Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 2008 The parties have executed this work plan on of , 19__. (day) For the Community For The MATCH Institution By: By: Title: Title: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COSTS TRAVEL AIR FARE: MATCH PEER EXPERT @ $522.00 round trip DCA/Minn. 3 X $522.00 HOTEL OTHER PER DIEM 5 nights /~ $50/night _qround transportation @ $50/night X 7 days @ $50/day X 7 days PERSON DAYS PROJECT COORDINATION - MATCH DIRECT DELIVERY - MATCH PEER EXPERT 7 days paid by SBA/%~3D 13 days X $250.00/day TOTAL TRAVEL AND DIREC? LABOR COST $1,566.00 250.00 350.00 350.00 $2,516.00' 3,250.00 $5,766.00 *Represents a not to exoeed figure. direct oost reimbursable basis. Travel will be billed on a E 0 BILLS ...... AUGUST 13, 1985 Batch 854703 per computer run dated Batch 854704 per computer run dated Batch 854705 per following list 818185 8/9~85 Total Bills 56,446.74 28,947.65 443,274.18 Ben Franklin Bryan Rock Products Bury & Carlson Copy Duplicating Coast to Coast Emery's Tree Service Gerry's Plumbing Glenwood Inglewood Kelly Services The Laker LOGIS Mpls Oxygen Mound Fire Dept Wm Mue 11 er Marina Auto N.S.P. Navarre Hdwe d.L. Shieiy SOS Printing Twin City Testing V ~ deo One Van Doren Hazard Happy's Potato Chips Mark V I I Rex Distributing Tri State Beverage Supplies 166.75 Rock 3,115.70 Asphalt 436.00 Copier 15.O0 Supplies 300.85 Remove Stump 25.00 Faucet-Coleman 38.80 July Water 53.65 Secr. help 219.68 July ads 132.18 July computer 2,039.63 July oxygen 57.00 July salary etc 4,277.00 Sand 7,289.32 July parts 287.70 July electric 4,692.70 July supplies 167.98 Sand 79.85 Maps, surveys 8~7.65 Review paint syst 536.42 Tapes 89.00 Consult serv 1,195.O0 July supplies 138.94 July beer 2,133.85 July beer 140.O0 July mix 432.00 28,947.65 i I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I v f~ 0 I-.- 0 hi C~ Id Ld bJ tLI Z~- ~ c, CL 13. IIIIIIt~1111111 III IIIIIllllllllJt? Ill ~'~G~G ....... U~'~g~ ooo bJ L,J bJ W (3 8; I ! I I I I I I1. I ! I I I I ! I I I I t I I I II IIII II1~ IIII IIII II ~111 II W bJ: b.J W td t.J id ¢) rq g r- U U Z 0 '.r bJ Z bJ Z b! .J t~ bJ ~.~ ..J cD ! U td U ~d U X Z .J Z Z ~> cz;n~ .->-~ bi t~JbJ I-- I-' Z Z U IIIII I I$111 IIIII hi U ? U U I CDC~ lDO U 000 000 0 U U ~J ,, 0 ::3 D. Z U,. E3 U .,? r~ 0 W U LI U U U hJ U 0 U Z U c~ U UUU U U I I aoc3 ! ! ! ! UU O0 ..J.J W U C~ bJ 0 U =- U b~ CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, September lO, 1985, at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the preliminary plat and final plat of land described as follows: Lots 7 through 13~ Block ~6~ The Highlands - PID Numbers 23-117-24 34 0052/0053/0054/0055/0056/0057/0058 Such person's as desire to be..heard with reference to the above will be heard at th'is meeting. F r~ n-c-e ne -C 7 C 1-~rk¥ -C]-ty- Cle rk ~ Metropolitan Area fflanacjement l:lssoclatlon of the Twin City Area August 6, 1985 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY MANAGERS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS OF ORGANIZATIONS PARTICIPATING IN JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY William S. Joynes, Chairman MAMA General. Labor Relations Committee JOINT COMPENSATION sTuDY STATUS REPORT July Progress and Completion Questionnaires were completed by employees, returned to Business Advisors, and questionnaire computer processing began. All jurisdict{ons participated in completing questionnaires. Task valuing began. Ail jurisdictions were requested to participate in uing meetings from July 22 to August 2. August Plans Business Advisors will complete data entry of completed questionnaires and produce computer-generated position descriptions (tasks performed and percent of-time spent) for all employees completing questionnaires. These will be returned to the jurisdiction with Business Advisors instructions for review and revision by employees and their supervisors. Task va].uing within occupational group will be completed. Business Advisors will notify jurisdictions of selection areas which will require - more valuers. Business Advisors will arrange data entry and produce initial values for Occupational Advisory Group review. The process of linking job evaluation results across questionnaires will begin. IO12K-F Northern States Power Company Minnetonka Division 5505 County Road 19 P.O. Box 10 Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 Telephone (612) 474-8881 July 26, 1985 City of Mound Attn: John Elam, City Manager 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: The following street lights have been installed in the City of Mound: 5 - 100 Watt H.P.S. Overhead Street Lights Installed 7-12-85 Project #STLT-MND-AAV 869800 Auditors Road (3) Three Points Blvd. (2) Sincerely, M. E. Peterson D-[str. Eng. Mgr. MEP:jh 545 Indian Mound Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 473-4224 August 5, 1985 Mr. Jon E1 am City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: 300,000 gallon water storage tank Dear Jon: Enclosed is Twin City Testing's most recent inspection report on this storage tank. ! have enclosed the invoice from Twin City Testing which should be paid directly by the City., We will deduct this from Allied's payment request in accordance with All ied's letter of December 10, 1984 submitted by their legal counsel. Please call me if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES :~/gohn C. Lichter, P.E. bt cc: Curt Pearson PROJECT`` REPORTED TO: REPORT OF,' ELEVATED W^TER TANK EVERGREEN STREET MOUND, MINNESOTA I::uJin C11:¥ I::esl::lncl 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL. MN 55114 PHONE 612/645-3601 REVIEW OF EXTERIOR PAINT SYSTEM Hickok & Assoc Attn: John Lichter 545 Indian Mound LABORATORY No. 4111 86-563 DATE: July 19, 1985 FURNIBHED BY: COPIEB TO: INTRODUCTION: This report presents the results of our recent observations of the elevated water storage tank on Evergreen Street, Mound, Minnesota. We were requested to comment on the ability of the existing exterior paint system to provide adequate protection for the steel sub- strate and offer our recommendations concerning the need for remedial work. We received verbal authorization from Rod Cole of Hickok and Associates on July 3, 1985. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of our observations, our opinion is the exterior paint system is pro- viding only minimal protection to the steel substrate at the present time. Paint failure in the form of delamination will continue to occurr with increased frequency. Detrimental effects to the steel substrate (pitting corrosion) in the failure areas can be expected in the future unless remedial work is performed. BACKGROUND: The tank is a 300M gallon, double ellipsoidal elevated water storage tank built in 1968. The interior and exterior of the tank was repainted in the fall of 1984. Project specifications required the exterior surface of the entire tank be sandblasted in accordance with Steel Structures Painting Council brush-off blast cleaning requirements (SSPC-SP7) and subsequent- ly recoated with a suitable paint system. Please see our previous reports, Laboratory No. 5-7875 (dated December 28, 1984) and Laboratory No. 4111 86-184 (dated May 13, 1985). FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS: On July 5, 1985, we observed selected areas on the exterior surface of the tank. The obser- vation was performed by Daniel Larson and Donald Johnson. Our access to the tank was limited to the lower portion of the tower legs, riser ~nd sway bars. We had requested that the safety cage be unlocked to allow us access to the upper portion of the tank, but this was not done. The upper portion of the tank was reviewed dur- ing a previous site visit. Please see our report, Laboratory No. 4111 86-184, dated May 13, 1985~/~ REPORT OF: I:uJin c11::¥ anO encllneerlncl lac~oratorq, tnt. 662 C¢~OMWE L L ST PAUL MN ~114 PGONE 6t2 64~-360! REVIEW OF EXTERIOR PAINT SYSTEM LABORATORY No. 4111 86-563 OATE: July 19, 1985 PAGE: 2 PIELD OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS: (cont) We observed many areas on the legs, riser and sway bars where paint failure has occurred in the form of delamination between the old primer and old finish coats. In general, the bond between the old primer and old finish coats is poor. A dull knife was easily inserted be- tween the coats in these areas and lifted. The new paint system, though it exhibits good bond to the old finish coat, is failing as the old paint system delaminates. In our opinion, the life of the old paint system was significantly reduced at the time of repainting. In the areas reviewed, we believe that the specified surface preparation (brush-off blast cleaning) should have removed much of the old finish coat. Steel Struc- tures Painting Council defines a brush-off blast cleaning as a method which leaves the surface free of all loose paint, while allowing tightly adherent paint to' remain. Paint is considered adherent if it cannot be removed by lifting with a dull knife. ION: The old primer exhibits good bond to the steel substrate in the areas that were reviewed. For this reason, we believe a full commercial blast cleaning of the exterior surface is not necessary at this time. In our opinion, a brush-off blast cleaning of the entire exterior surface would remove most, if not all, of the finish coat, leaving adherent primer on the surface. Prior to applying a new finish coat, all areas where the steel substrate has been exposed by blast cleaning should be reprimed. Depending upon the condition of the primer on other areas of the tank which were not reviewed, repriming could be extensive. On-site review of prepared surfaces will be necessary before any priming or painting is performed. ND uanlel d tarson Structural Engineer DJL/lo ENGINEERING LABORATORY Donald E Johnson, Mgr, NDT Dept CI%~/ OF FiO'b~l'D MOUND, ACT1Ar~Ty REPORT OF LIQUOR DEPART~[ENT ' SAJ~ES THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS ZEAR LAST ZEAR Month &. Year July 19, 1985 Metropolitan Council 300 Metro Square Building Seventh and Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Telephone (612) 291-635g TO: Metropolitan Area Citizens and Governmental Officials SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Amendments to Part 1, Water Resources Management Development Guide, Sewage Treatment and Handling On Thur%day,.Aug. 29, the Metropolitan Council will hold a public hearing at 7 ~.m. in the Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Dr., Chanhassen, to receive public comments on proposed revisions to its regional sewer plan contained in the water resources management chapter of its Metropolitan Development Guide. The attached amendments provide for 1) the reallocation of sewage flow for several western Lake Minnetonka area communities and 2) the provision of addi- tional sewer service in service area No. 4. Two alternative ways of providing sewer service are presented and one will be selected after the public hearing. We encourage you to review these amendments and to attend the hearing to offer your comments. If you wish to speak at the hearing, please contact Lucy Thompson at 291-6521 by Wednesday, Aug. 28. Written comments may be sent to the Metropolitan Council, 300 Metro Square Bldg., St. Paul, Minn. 55101, Attention: Marcel Jouseau. The Council will accept written comments until Monday, Sept. 9. Additional copies of the public hearing draft are available free of charge from the Council's Communications Department, telephone 291-6464. Sincerely, S-~n~ra S. Gardebring, unair SSG:jel Attachment ~:7~ /~L// An EqualOpportunity Emp!oyer PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PART 1, SEWAGE TREATMENT AND HANDLING ~~For a Publ~cHeari~ to be held: August 29, 1985, 7 p.m. Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area 300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Sts. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612-6359/TDD 291-0904 July 1985 Publication No. 13-85-098 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE This report contains proposed amendments to Part i of the Metropolitan Council's Water Resources Management Development Guide addressing sewage treatment and handling. It also contains a discussion explaining the amend- ments, including background information considered in preparing them. Only the text identified as amendments is proposed for inclusion in Part 1~ Water Resources Manaqement Development Guide/Policy Plan. Text proposed for deletion is crossed out, additional text is underlined. The amendments are proposed to revise the metropolitan system plan section of Part 1. They are necessary to update the system plan in light of local compre- hensive plans the Council has reviewed and approved, to respond to local govern- ment requests for adding certain interceptors to the metropolitan disposal system, and to eliminate a capacity problem in part of the disposal system. Part I of the Water.Resources Management Development Guide/Policy ~.lan is the first section of a two-part document. It deals with controlling water pollu- tion through sewage treatment and handling. Part 2 of the document focuses on controlling water pollution through stormwater management. Together the two sections constitute the regional plan for water resources management. Part 1 was prepared under federal requirements for a regional wastewater manage- ment plan (U.S. Code, Title 33, Sec. 1288) and state legislation requiring a policy plan for sanitary sewer facilities (Minn. Stat., Sec. 473.146). The process under which these amendments are considered and adopted is spelled out in the Council's Procedure for Adopting or Amending Metropolitan Council Regional Policy Plans, adopted Dec. 17, 1981. BACKGROUND Between 1982 and 1984, the Council considered a force main interceptor as a way to provide additional sewer service to eight communities on the western shores of Lake Minnetonka. Subsequently, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie requested the Council to consider an alternative solution using a gravity interceptor. The Council then referred the matter of service to the Lake Virginia lift station area back to staff for study in April 1984. During the past year, Council has examined this issue closely. Various alternatives have been considered as a mean~ to provide a connection f om the Lake Virginia lift station to the Purgatory Creek interceptor. The Metropol- itan Waste Control Commission {MWCC) provided assistance in this effort. The Council has also met with representatives of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie to try to resolve three issues. These are 1} an equitable comparison of a grav- ity and a forcemain alternative; 2) means for evaluating local and regional cost-sharing options; and 3) unresolved growth management issues in the two communities. The MWCC currently serves the western Lake Minnetonka area communities of Mound, Shorewood, Minnetrista, Victoria, St. Bonifacius, Waconia, Spring Park and Laketown with a wastewater lift station on the shore of Lake Virginia, in Shorewood. The lift station pumps into the Shorewood interceptor which, in turn, discharges into the Excelsior lift station. The sewage is then dis- charged via the Shorewood interceptor into the Purgatory Creek interceptor. In the recent past, the Lake Virginia lift station has experienced peak flow problems because the Shorewood interceptor causes a bottleneck and because some local inflow and infiltration takes up too much capacity. Inflow is generally thought of as water from roof drains, sump pumps, foundation drains or storm sewers that enters a sewer pipe, while infiltration is groundwater.entering the sewer pipe through bad joints or cracks. Sewage has bubbled up at manholes, and in April 1985, during a heavy rain, sewage overflowed into Lake Virginia. The present conditions will continue to exist until an interceptor route is selected and the interceptor is built. The Council has identified and analyzed two alternatives to address this capacity problem. These two alternatives are presented under Amendment No. 1; they are referred to as the Lake Ann and Lake Virginia alternatives. The Lake Virginia alternative would provide service until approximately the year 2020, after which additional facilities would have to be put in service. The Lake Ann alternative, on the other hand, would provide service until well beyond the year 2020 without additional improvements. The two alternatives differ in the length of their service life and require different staging of the capital improvemehts. However, they can be compared financially by a present value analysis. The present value of the capital and operating costs of the Lake Virginia alternative and additional facilities needed after the year 2020 is $10,074,000, whereas that of the Lake Ann alternative is $14,356,000. In early 1985, the cities of Waconia and Spring Park requested the Council to approve amendments to their comprehensive plans to provide additional 1990 sewage flow. Constraints in the metropolitan system suggested that until the Lake Ann or Lake Virginia interceptor is built, allocating sewage flow to these two cities could be obtained only through reallocation of yet unused alloca- tions to other cities in the service area. The proposed flow reallocation is the subject of Amendment No. 2. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT NO. 1--LAKE ANN OR LAKE VIRGINIA INTERCEPTOR Recommendation 1. Alternative No. 1--Lake Virginia Interceptor Changes to section entitled "Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant and Service Area," page 60, left-hand column, third paragraph: As the Shorewood interceptor is currently overloaded downstream of the Lake Virginia lift station, the Lake Ann intcrccptcr Lake Virginia forcemain interceptor must be constructed to divert flow around the overloaded section to a downstream section of the Purgatory inter- ceptor. -~~~-e-~ ........ " _A.~.~^.. Modifications to the Lake Virginia and Excelsior lift stations are required to optimize the existing Shorewood interceptor system, alleviate current operating problems and allow diversion of flow through the'~,.~'-~ ~nn· ~-~,,,.~,~,~ Lake Virginia forcemain. In addition) the replacement of about 700 feet of the Chanhassen interceptor (segment 4) and an increase in capacity of the Chanhassen lift station to a capacity of 5 mgd will be necessary to provide adequate service to Chanhassen. Specific actions will be required of Chanhassen to reduce problems caused by inflow, which use up an inordinate amount of capacity. Timely staging of the Lake Ann interceptor construction of the Lake Virqinia forcemain~ modifications to the Lake VirQinia~ Excelsior and Chanhassen lift stations andChanhassen interceptor will permit optimization of existing interceptor capacityprior' to construction of the Riley Creek interceptor. Page 60, right-hand column, second and third paragraphs under "Recon~nendations": - 4 0 1985-89 Period. The MWCC should include in its 1986-1990 Develop- ment Program the Lake Virqinia interceptor, consisting of a forcemain with a capacity of 17.3 mgd extendin9 from the Lake Virginia lift station to the Purgatory Creek interceptor (Figu[e 1). The MWCC should also include the upgrading of the Lake Virqinia lift station to a capacity of 17.3 mgd, increasing .the capacity of the Chanhassen lift st~t. ion to a capacity of 5 mgd and replacing about 700 feet of the Chanhassen i..nterCeptor (segment 4I. The estimated capital cost of the interceptor~ ancillary improvements and increasing the capacity of the Chanhassen lift station and...segment 4 of the Chanhassen interceptor is $5.991~000~ and the ann~al opera- tion and maintenance cost is estimated to be $121~000 (1984 dollars). ANALYSIS There is an immediate need to replace the overloaded Shorewood interceptor. The upgrading of the Lake Virginia lift station, the construction of the Lake Virginia forcemain to a capacity of 17.3 million gallons per day (mgd), and the increase in the capacity of the Chanhassen lift station to 5 mgd and of segment 4 of the Chanhassen interceptor to 4 mgd will provide adequate capacity to the communities served by these facilities for approximately 34 years, or until the year 2020. This alternative, however, requires all the cities served by these facilities to address problems of inflow and infiltration (I/I) to ensure that capacity is available through the estimated period of service. Chanhassen would have to eliminate 50 percent of the inflow problem. There is presently no need to expand the MUSA in this part of the region until some time after the year 2000. The need for a metropolitan facility to serve multicommunity needs upstream of Eden Prairie does not occur, even with optimistic growth assumptions, until well into the 21st century (2030). 2. Alternative No. 2--Lake Ann Interceptor Changes to section entitled "Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant and Service Area", page 60, right-hand column, second and third paragraphs, under "Recommendations": ~ 6 I- D. LLI 0 O~ LL! I-- I-- Z rr LL! i-- 1985-1989 Period. The MWCC should include in its 1986-1990 Devel- opment ~rRgram the construction of the Lake Ann interceptor. This project consis.ts of updg~ding the Lake Virginia lift station to a caPacits of 17.3 m~d and a forCemain from this lift station to approx- imatels Galvin Blvd. with a capacit~ of 17.3 mgd; the Lake Ann inter- ceptor, Phase II~ with a capacity of 30.6 mgd connectinq to the Red Rock interceptor upgraded to 32 m~d (Figure 2i.. The Chanhassen lift station and the Chanhassen forcemain would be .phased out of use. The estimated capital cost of the Lake Ann intercepto~....(includinq the lift station, forcemain segment, the gravity segment and the upgrading Of the Red"Rock'i~erceptorI is $12,723,000 '(1984 dollars/. Annual operat!on and m~intenance cost ~'§ estimated at $86~0Q@...(1984 dollars). Construction of the Lake Ann interceptor must be closely coordinated with Carver County to minimize the impact on Lake Minnewashta Regional Park. ANALYSIS This alternative would provide sufficient capacity for approximately 36,500 new households which is equivalent to a population increase of about 100,000. It would provide needed service to the western and southern Lake Minnetonka com- munities, most of Chanhassen and a portion of Eden Prairie. The interceptor would replace.the need for a new local trunk line for a portion of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. The Council forecasts that the communities to be served by Alternative No. 2 will add 12,000 households or about 32,000 people by the year 2000. If this alternative is chosen to resolve the regional sewer capacity problem, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie may be required to share in the cost of this facility. It should be noted that such cost sharing would not allow the cities of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie to use this facility unless permission is given by the MWCC. Such permission would be conditional on the two cities meeting the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. AMENDMENT NO. 2--FLOW REALLOCATION IN SERVIC~ AREA OF THE LAKE VIRGINIA LIFT STATION Recommendation Changes to Table 3 entitled "Wastewater Flow Projections for Metropolitan Treatment Plants", p. 44: Figures for 1990 in the columns "Domestic Flow," "Industrial Flow" and "Total Flow" for Laketown Township, Minnetrista, Mound, St. Bonifacius, Shorewood, Spring Park, VictOria, Waconia would be replaced with the respective figures shown in attached Table 1. 8 ANALYSIS In the recent past, the Lake Virginia lift station has experienced peak flow problems, in part because the Shorewood interceptor causes a bottleneck and because local inflow and infiltration takes up too much capacity. Sewage has bubbled up at manholes, and in April 1985, during a heavy rain, sewage over- flowed into Lake Virginia. Relief is to be provided through either the Lake Virginia forcemain interceptor or the Lake Ann gravity interceptor. But the present conditions will continue to exist until an interceptor route is selected and the interceptor is built. In 1984, the actual average flow through the Lake Virginia lift station was 2.63 mgd (Table 1). Through its actions on the individual local sewer policy plans of the communities in the service area, the Council has approved an average daily flow of 2.905 mgd for 1990 (Table 1). This flow of 2.905 mgd for 1990 is the overall control for any local reallocation of flow. In the last several months, both Waconia and Spring Park have requested increases in their flow allocations, stating that their present flow was in excess or equivalent to that projected for 1990. On the other hand, of Minne- trista has relatively substantial unused capacity. In May 1985, the Council recommended that Minnetrista defer the unneeded portion of its 1990 allocation and make it available to meet the pressing needs in other communities. While Minnetrista has responded to that recommendation, the local needs and the allocation Minnetrista is willing to defer do not match, requiring the Council to reconsider flow allocations within the service area. Table I shows both the original approved 1990 flow allocations (through local policy plan app~ovais) and the new proposed 1990 flow allocations. The reallo- cation is based on the Council's new housing and employment forecast for the region and its minor civil divisions for 1990. The 1990 growth forecasts for housing and employment within the service area show a flow need for 2.926 mgd, somewhat greater than the presently approved 1990 flow allocations of 2.905 mgd. To Stay within the constraints of the allocation for the service area and of the pumping problem, the flow needed to satisfy the entire housing demand was determined and allocated to the communities; the remaining allocation has been distributed proportionally among the ~ommunities on the basis of the employment distribution. As noted in previous Council's discussions on sewer service to and the flow allocation in the Lake Virginia service area, some communities have a demon- strated I/I problem. Additional capacity for an individual community with this problem could be obtained by eliminating the I/I problem while still staying within the flow allocation. JL2046-PHENV2 07.19.85 MJ:jel A Message This week a Senate subcommittee will' beg'in hearings on the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act to state and local governments, a subject that usually glazes the eyes of all but the most devoted. This year, though, it is not just a matter of a million dol- lars here, a million there. Real money is at stake. And state and local politi- cal leaders actually may be coming forward to say so. Early this year the Supreme Court, in the Garcia decision, extended the reach of the FLSA to cover state and local government activities that were once exempt. Among other changes, local employees will not be permitted to work overtime and take compensa- tory time off later on. From now on the workers will have to be paid for their overtime at time-and-a-half rates. Local government trainees, from firefighting recruits to youth em- ploym'ent program workers, will also fall under the time-and-a-half rule. The price tag will vary by locality and region. Big cities in the Northeast will suffer least, since their labor practices are already the most expen- sive and most favorable to public-em- ployee unions. But even these cities will pay more than their spokesmen.~. currently admit. And for the country as a whole, the Garcia decision may cost about $3 billion. Lest you think this figure is a right- wing scare tactic, be advised that it does not include the cost of renegotiat- lng contracts, administering the changes or going to court in disputes -over retroactive pay. Nothing in the current Reagan budget will even ap- proach this decisi(~n in added burden to local governments. As the Journal's Joann S. Lublin pointed out in a story yesterday, even local government workers are not ec- static about the Garcia decision. The From Garcia rule requiring time-and-a-half, for overtime ~qll often mean no overtime at all, and hence less total wages than . in the bad old days. Senior citizens who now do government jobs at rela- tively low wages in order to stay be- low their Social Security ceilings may well find the jobs eliminated. Para- medics who work in town and volun- teer their after-hours services in their rural home communities will not be able to do so anymore. Though the public-employee unions have an insti- tutional interest in uniform national labor standards, labor organizations are divided on this issue. Until very recently, local govern° ments were urffing the Reagan admin- istration to press for corrective le~s- lation but somehow not yelling quite loud enough for their voices to reach the general media or the Democrats in the House of Representatives. With state and local support slow in com- ing, the administration faced its own dilemma: Should it step forward and take the political heat alone, or should it let the costs run up and start to en- trench themselves until the localities got up the gumption to join vigorously in the debate? In the past few days there have been signs of more action. The hear- ings will give us the first public indi- cation of how all the calculations have come out. If a thundering silence emerges from the hearing room, do not assume that the Garcia problem is -trivial; what you hear will simply be local leaders whose ties.to an old ide- ology make them afraid to acknowl- edge the depth of the trouble. And if you hear a bit of healthy yelling, you will knorr that economic realities are at last forcing some necessary recon- siderations in American urban poli- tics. · "? / --1,.... 300 ,~letro Squ.~re Bldg., St. Paul, ,~IN $5'101 General Office Telephone (612) 291-6359 ~ ~-- ~' j+ M,S FRAN CLARK ~1 ~-~.m CLERK · .. ..... CITY OF MOUND AMetro 53z, 1 MAYWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 For mot July 12, 1985 RECENT COUNCIL ACTIONS (July 1-12) Downtown Development--The Council commented on two environmental assessment worksheets (EAWs) prepared by Minneapolis on revised proposals for the large Norwest Canter office building and adiacent commercial development, City Center Phase 2. The project", are planned for downtown Minneapolis bet:ween 6th and 7th Sts. The proposals outline a combined project: larger than the original proposal, calling for up to 2.5 million square feet, a department store of ut) to !30,000 ~quare feet and parking for 850 cars. The next step is an environmental impacts statement for each project. The Council said: -- Each ElS should address additional transportation impacts due to the increased size of the projects; - 'Cne EAWs adequately cover air quality concerns; - The City Canter Phase 2 EAW does not indicate any recycl- ins program to reduce the amount of waste disposed; and - The two projec=, which will use groundwater for air conditioning, should be encouraged to recycle water through the buildings to conserve groundwater resources. Bloomington Development-The Council commented on a dra~ environmental impact statement (ELS) prepared by Bloomington. The draft proposes constru~ion of four office buildings, about 350 hotet rooms.and up to 5,100 parking spaces for the northwest corner of Interstate Hwy. 494 and France Ay. The Council said the draft.ElS adequate!y addresses potential impacts on regional air quality, storm- water volume and transportation. The Council added that interstate Hwy. 494 is a heavily traveled corridor that will require study of regipnal impacts. However, the draft does not adequately address'impacts of degraded runoff on the water quality of Nine Mile Creek, the Council said. Tall Tower-The Council authorized a request for proposal for a consultant to study the need for and the economic feasi- bility of building a telecommunication tower, similar to the C~nadian National tower in Toronto-the world's tallest freestanding struc':ure. The study will examine projected revenues from tourism, lease of te!ecommunication space 'and other economic spin-off development. The study also will examine possible interference problems among broadcast signals and between those signals and other electronic tech- nologies. Funding for the study, estimated to cost about S50,000, has not yet been. determined. It is to be completed by next February. Housing-The Council approved an application to be sub- mit-ted by the Metropolitan Housing and Redevelopment Authority to the state Housing Finance Agency to administer funds for a home rehabilitation loan program. Funds totalling S106,000 are designated for cities in Ramsey County except for St. Paul and North Oaks. The program, to assist home. owners with Iow incomes, will be in operation from Sept. 1, 1985, to June 30, 1987. ommunifation$ Deportment at 291-6464. Water Quality-The Council said a proposed amendment by Chanhassen to its comprehensive plan, involving rezoning seven acres of residential area to commercial use, is consistent with regional land use guidelines. However, the C~uncil recommended the city take additional steps to minimize impacts on water quality of Riley Lake from increased runoff. NEW APPOINTMENTS The Council made the following appointments last month: Arts Advisory Committee: Pa~icia Vomhof, Flymouth, chair; Susan Broadhead, Minneapolis; Joan C{,almers, Champlin; Jeffrey Bartlett, Long Lake; Carolyn Bye, Shore- view; Nancy Anderson, Minneapolis; Doug Niska, Maplewood; Nancy Restuccia, Roboinsdale; Mary Lamp, Farmington; and John Roth, Minneapolis. Metropolitan Health Planning Board: Margit Berg, Mir, ne- apqlis, chair; Jane Legwold, Minneapolis; William Burnes, St. Paul;Jan Malcolm, Minneapolis; Sue G. Grosse-Macemon, Sdllwater; A. Frank Srnar% Minneapolis; Frances Strong, Minneapolis; David Lutes, Minneapolis; Gladys Murray, Blaine; Mary Stapleton, Chaska; and Steve Nielsen, Apple Valley. Waste Management Advisory Committee: Burnell 8eermann, Inver Grove Heights; and Charles Kutter, Minneapolis. PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC MEETINGS Health-The Metropolitan Council and its Metropolitan Health Planning 9pard will hoid a public meeting Wednes- : day, July 24, at 5 p.m. in the Council Chambers on a proposed policy for reviewing proposals to provide high-cost, iow- volume specialized inpatient care services. Such services include open-hear~ surgery, perinatal and neonatal intensive care and others. For a free copy of the proposal or for more information, ,~311 the board at 291-6352. To ~;eak at ',he meeting, register by calling Carol Borons at 291-6352. Solid Waste--The Council set a public meeting for 7 p.m., July 24, on ~n environmental as:essmfr, t worksheet (EAW) describing a 200-ton-per-day mass-burn facility proposed by Waste Energy Systems, inc., for New Brighton. The meeting, to determine whether an environmental impact statement will be necessary, will be held at the New Brighton City Hall, 803 5th Av. NW. For a copy of ;he draft EAW, call the Communications Department at 291-8484. Parks and Open Space-The Council will hold a public hearing Monday, July 29, at 4 p.m. in the Council offices on a proposed revision to the capital improvement program for regional recreation open space. The proposal would change S60,000 currently allocated for acquisition in Lake Elmo Park Reserve by Washington County ;o a new allocation in South Washington County Regional Park for land acquisition by the county. For a free copy of the re~ort, call the Communications Department at 291-8464. Register to speak at the hearing by calling Lucy Thompson at 291-8521. Sewer Construction--The Council will hold a public hearing at, 7 p.m., Aug. 29, ta hear public reaction to t, wo alternative sewer construction ~ians to accommodate forecasted growth among eight communities on t~e western shores of Lake ,,linnetonka. A temporary reallocation of sewage capacities g the cities ,,viii also be presented. The plans involve amending the Councit'~ Water Resources Management Deve/opment Gu/de. The hearing will be held in the Chanhassen Council Chambers, 690 Coulter Dr., Chanhassen, To speak at the hearing, please register with Lucy Thompson at 291-6521. For repo~s on the two plops, call the Council at 291-6464. COUNCIL SEEKS APPLICANTS FOR REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD ~e Metropolitan Council is encouraging Twin Cities Area residents to apply for appointment to the Regional Transit Board (RTE). The new appointments are necessary because the Minnesota Legislature reduced the size of the RTE from its curren~ 15 members to 9. The RTS was created in 1984 to put together shor~-range transit plans and earmark money for transit ~ervices ~hrough- cut the seven-county area. All seats are open, including the at-large posi~on of chair, curr~ndy held by E!liotz Perovich. For information ~bout the RTB, call the Council's Sanoi Linds~rom at 291-6390. For ~n appiication form, call the office of ~he secretary of state at 296-2805. Applications will be acce:ted until July 21. Public hearings for candidates ~o appear before a Council apoointments committee will take place a~ 7 p.m., July 22 through 25, ~n ~ne RTE'district from which each member will be chosen. To find ou~ what hearing you ~hould a~end, call Sandi Linds~rom at 291-6390. The commi~ee will make its recommenoadons to ;he Council Juty;28 and the Council appoin~ the board at a special meeting Aug. 1 a~ 4 p.m. PUBLIC RELATIONS WORKSHOPS SET FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS The Government Training Service (GTS) will hold two evening Workshops for local government officials in July and August, "Dealing With the Public" will be on July 30 and "Negotiating for Success" will be on Aug. 22. Spin will be he~d at 7 p.m. at :ne White Bear Lake Public Library, 4698 C',ark St., White Bear Lake. The workshocs are cosponsored by the League of Minnesota C~t~es, ~he Association of Minnesota Counties and t~e Minnesota Association of Townships. For more informa- tion, call Carol Schoeneck, GTS, at 222-7~09. PARK OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDS ALLOCATED The S2 mill;on ~he state legislature set aside for operating and maintaining Twin Cities Area parks nas been divided up among ~he region's 10 regional park operating agencies. Metropolitan Council staff has recommended the allocation to the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission under a s~e formula. The forrr,~i~ ;S bas~¢l On p~rk us~, ~cr~cje ~n~ the amount ~scn agency ~!readv spends for operation and maintenance. The agencies and cro¢c~eC ailocations are a~ follows: Anoka County, S152,000; ~rver Count,/, S23,000; Dakota County, S98,000; ~e~ne2~n County P~rk Reserve Dis~ric~ and Scott Count','. S625,C00; Ramsay ~unty, S129,000; Washington Ccu- . S29.~00; Bloomington, S24,000; Minneapolis, S5;:. 300; ~d SL P~ul, S356,000. This is the fir~: ,,esr ~ha legislature has provided state ~und~ for operating and ~aint~ining regional parks. PEOPLE WITH NEARING IMPAIRMENT8 CAN NOW CALL THE COUNCIL People with hearing impairments can now call the Council using a telecommunications device for the deaf, or "TDD." The Council's TDD number is 291-0904. Information about Council programs and publications is available at ,',hat number. COMING MEETINGS (Juiy 22 - Aug. 1) (Meetings are :er, rat/Vd. To verify, call 2£1-6~64.) Metropolitan Parks an0 Open Space Commission, Monday, July 22, ,t ~.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Systems Committee, Monday, July 22, 4 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan Waste Management Committee, Tuesday, July 23, 2 p.m., Council Chambers. Aggregate Resources Committee, Tuesday, July 23, 3:30 p.m,, Conference Room E. Rural Issues Task For~e,Wednesday, July 24, 9 a.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan Health, P!anning Board, Wednesday, July 24, 4 p.m., Council Cham=ers. Metropolitan and Community Development Commi~ee, Thursday. July 25, 1 :,30 ;.m.. Council Chamoers. Metropolitan Council, Thursday, July 25, 4 ~,m,, Council Chambers. Advisory Commi~ee on Aging, Friday, July 2~, 9 a.m., Council Chambers. Appointments Committee (made up of Council members), to appoint members ~f ~gior. ai Transit ~oard, Friday, July 26, 11:30 a.m., Conferer:e ~oom ~. Regional Transit Board, Monday, July 29, 4:30 p,m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan River Corridors Study Committee, Thursday, August 1, noon, Conf=,r?ce Room =. Metropolitan and Community Development Committee, Thursday, Aug. i, 1:30 c.m., Council Chambers. Management Commi~,~e, Thursday, Aug. 1,3 =.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Council special meeting to appoint members of Regional Transit Boar=), Friday, Aug. 1,4 p.m., Council Chambers, z _-- © ... the shape of things in solid waste 300 Metro Square Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612/291-6464 July 1985 Issue No. 8 Editor; Joan Steinmann WHERE DO TRASH HAULERS STAND ON ISSUES? The trash haulers of the Twin Cities Area will be as important a part of the new regional system of solid waste management as they are of the present one. Because of their experience dealing with trash, the Wasre//ne asked a handful of area haulers about their views on some controversial solid waste issues, Although the following article represents only a smattering of opimon and not the views of the area's entire trash hauling industry, it may serve as a good introduction to a different perspective on these issues. Organizad collection of trash, where overlap of hauler service areas is prevented or controllecl: The haulers contacted by the Wasteline had mixed feelings about organized collection. They thought it has some advantages, but could reduce healthy competition among haulers. Concern focused on howa community went about organizing pickup of trash. "From the viewpoint of efficiency, cost to customers and safety, it's good," said Don Hinz of Eagle Sanitation, Newport (he's also the president of Waste-to-Energy, Inc.). "it can also help recycling programs. But it reduces competition; big multinational or international firms can underbid for contracts and then raise prices after the small local haulers have been driven away." "Organized collection has a lot, of merit," said Richard Wybierata of Poor Richard's, inc. "But it could put some haulers who have been in the business for years out of work." The several dozen haulers who joined together to form Minneapolis Refuse, Inc. (MRI) found a way to organize collection without damaging their businesses in 1971, when backyard burning was prohibited in Minneapolis, tripling the volume of trash. '¥,~e got together and negotiated a contract with the city to keep the haulers in business," explained Chuck Kutter, MRt president. "We have a 50-50 split with the city for hauling in Minneapolis, and we found organized collection is cheaper." Wybierata said that Minneapolis's was the "most fair, civil system" he knows of. Flow control, or designation by counties of facilities where trash must 9o: Haulers understood the counties' need to assure that resource recovery plants get a steady supply of waste, but felt that subsidies could keep fees at such facilities Iow enough to be competitive with landfills, so that flow control would not be necessary. "1 look at it two ways," said Mary Ayde, executive secretary of the Minnesota chapter of the National Waste Management Association. "The counties need to provide guarantees for those operating the plants. On the other hand, if the counties are responsible for disposal of trash, they could eliminate fees at the doors." Ultimately, the people will pay for the additional cost of resource recovery facilities, she said. "I'm opposed to flow control," said Mike Hinz of Gopher Disposal, Newport. "The free market should dictate where trash goes, and if a subsidy is required to get it to resource recovery plants, the counties should tax the public. The government should be responsible for collectlng the money" necessary to run these plants, said Hinz. In addition to the high fees to drop trash at a designated facility, Shirley Johnson of Bellaire Sanitation, Stillwater, was concerned about the possibility of illegal dumping. In order to avoid higher fees to dispose of trash, "people are already dumping" at unauthorized sites, she said. Chuck Wegner of Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), a national company, identified a problem cf particular concern to larger firms. "We serve all the metropolitan counties, and many of our routes go from county to county. Flow control will be a routing nightmare" since it requ res that waste from a given county--but not from others --be dropped at a particular place. Contracts between counties and haulers for delivery of wastes to certain facilities: Under the state law that permits metropolitan counties, through an ordinance, to designate plants where trash must go, counties are required to seek contracts with haulers that wou~d provide for delivery to resource recovery facilities without regulation by ordinances. Ramsey and Washington Counties are negotiating with ha,Jters over the terms of such contracts, which would oblige h.=ulers to drop trash from the two counties at a refuse-derived fuel {RDF) facility in Newport, to be owneo and operated by Northern States Power Co. Some haulers who serve those areas have signed the contracts; many have not. Those asked by the Wasteline saw lit[ie differenr~e between signing such contracts and being regulated by a flow control ordinance. "We're just now scra',cning the surface" in negotiations with Hennepin Co~,nty, said Kutter, "but I don't see any advantage for haulers in the Ramsey-Washington contract over their ordinance." In general, counties can guarantee a f~,ow of waste through contracts with haulers, said Don Hinz. "If the fee was evon close to that at landfills, they'd r, avea lot of takers." But Ramsey and Washington Counti.~s "agreed (with NSP) for delivery without consulting with the people who have to do the delivery (the haulers). There realty wasn't much negotiation," said Hinz. Ayde's opinion was similar. "if counties are really sincere about having contracts with had;ars, they'll enter into negotiations before committing themselves to a vendor" for a resource recovery plant (s;,cn as NSP), "so that haulers could sit down and discuss thin.cs with the county." The haulers shouldn't be left out of the beginning of the desig- nation process, said Ayde. Mandatory source separation of recyctable materials from other trash by households: Some cities-St. Cloud, for example--have ordinances requiring that people recycle at -,;,m,e. Haulers' views on this policy varied quite a bit. "I'd li~. to see mandatory recycling," said Johnson. "We're one of the largest recyclers in the area- we've done it for 30 years." Very few people would comply with a mandatory recycling ordinance, said Wybierala. "Separation of recyclables should take place at a transfer station, cefore trash goes to an incinerator," he said. Wegner also thought mandatory recycling would be hard 133 enforce, "You need economic ir, centives to make it work," such as a reduced fee for trash co!ieclion for those who recycle, he said. Others focused on the econom[c problems involved in marketing recyclabtes once they're co lected; recycling, they emphasized, does not pay for itself. Kutter opposed mandatory recyc;ing, because "we can't take care of recyclables now. No sys;em works on a continuous basis," because of the instability of marke~s for recycIables, he said. Government units will "nave to spend money to get recycling done, if they want lancfill abatement," but not simplya lump sum at the outset of a program. Taxpayers should lose money or benefit according to the market for recyclables. "You can't develop markets that don't exist," said Don Hinz. "Separate pickup of recyclablas would be as expensive as pickup of trash. Why pay for both if resource recovery facilities can process it all?" Hinz, like most of the haulers we talked to, had done some pickup of recyclables. "1 did it on my own, spent about $10,000, and got about 42-43 percent participation by picking up trash and recyclables on the same day." But the effort was "a victim of the market." Since there isn't any profit in recycling, it's got to be subsidized, he said. Mary Ayde agreed that recycling '~isn't self-supporting" now, but said haulers can start up recycling programs to get people to develop new habits. The changing system of waste management gives haulers "an opportunity to provide more services," she said. LEGISLATURE MOVES TO MAKE TRASH A RESOURCE When the Minnesota Legislature closed its doors after its 1985 session, it gave people interested in solid waste some signifi- cant changes to digest. Among them is a law saying that after Jan. 1, 1990, no Metropolitan Area landfills will be allowed to accept mixed municipal solid waste unless it's been through a resource recovery facility first. That law will help the Metropolitan Council implement its solid waste policy p~an, which mandates a shift away from heavy reliance on landfilling and places emphasis on recycling and resource recovery instead. The legislature also made it clear that metropolitan counties have the authority to adopt ordinances that make separating recyclabie materials from other trash, a process known as source separation, mandatory. The legislature said that when a county passes such an ordinance, it will apply to all the areas in the county that haven't met the local standard for land. filling abatement the county spelled out for them. Along those lines, the legislature passed another law that will help the Council implement its solid waste policy plan. The legislature said that the solid waste master plans that counties submit to the Council must now include specific and cluanti-. f/able landfill abatement objectives. The counties also must provide a list of cities that have not satisfied the abatement performance standards they set. Another new law will be good news for communities joining the recycling effort. The legislature voted to give communities a $4 rebate for each ton of residential trash they collect and recycle. This is in addition to the rebate of up to 50 cents per household authorized by 1984 legislation that cities and townships have available for money spent on resource recovery and landfill abatement projects. The money for both payments will come out of the Metropolitan Council's landfill abatement fund. For communities to receive household rebate funds, they will have to provide adequate documentation of recycling expenses, such as timesheets showing hours employees devoted to recycling efforts during the year for which a city or town- ship is seeking reimbursement. To help local governments meet the costs of implementing waste reduction and source separation programs this year's legislature also gave municipalities permission to levy taxes beyond the normal limits to cover the extra costs of such projects. The legislature also'allocated $11.4 million for landfill abate- ment programs to be administered as grants by the Minnesota Waste Management Board to cities, counties and solid waste management districts (note these grants may pay no more than 2§ percent of the capital costs of a given project). Private groups as well as counties and local governments may apply to the Council for funds from a grant and loan program designed to help them meet the costs of starting recycling and resource recovery programs. The Council is developing guidelines for awarding these funds, and for administering rebates for cities. These guidelines are expected to be ready by September. The legislature also expanded the Council's $15 million bonding authority so it may now fund the purchase and improvement of resource recovery facilities as well as landfill site acquisition and other related costs. For more information about money available for recycling and resource recovery projects, call abatement program administrator Katy Boone at the Council, 291-6421. Carol/ne Nason COUNCIL TASK FORCE REPORTS ON ORGANIZED COLLECTION Organizing the collection of trash to control or eliminate overlap between areas served by different haulers could have many advantages, but there isn't a need for a system to establish organized collection throughout the Twin Cities Area. That was the finding of a special Metropolitan Council task force charged with studying the need for such a system. Where collection is "organized," only one hauler picks up trash in an area. A city may contract with or franchise one company to collect from the city or an area within it, or provide pickup service itself. Also. a neighborhood group may contract with haulers for service, or several haulers may form a consortium to organize their collection routes. About 30 percent of metropolitan households are served under such arrangements, while the rest arrange directly with haulers for pickup of trash. In its report, the task force concluded that organized collection can reduce the cost of pickup by increasing its efficiency: when routes don't overlap, travel time between stops goes down, so a hauler can make more stops in the same amount of time. The cost of collection services for cities with organized collection is, on the average, about two-thirds to three-fourths that of cities where each household arranges for trask pickup. Organizing collection of trash reduces wear and tear on roads and the potential for accidents involving garbage trucks, because the trucks travel fewer miles, said the report. It also improves air quality because of decreased fuel consumption. Another benefit of organized collection identified in the report is that it may be done in ways that could help cities increase participation in recycling or other landfill abate. ment programs. Municipalities and towns have adequate authority to organize trash collection, the task force found, and s~hould consider potential benefits of doing so. The report, which was called for under state law, will be sent to the Legislative Commission on Waste Management. WHAT PART FOR CITIES IN NEW SYSTEM7 Recent initiatives for change in the way the Twin Cities Area manages its trash may have left some city and county planners confused about responsibilities and opportunities for local governments. A brown.bag luncheon meeting sponsored by the Minnesota chapter of the American Planning Association and the Metropolitan Council, "New Roles for Cities in the Metropolitan Solid Waste System," may help those planners cut through the fog. Topics of discussion will include changes in solid waste legislation, the Council's new solid waste policy plan, funding for landfill abatement efforts such as recycling programs, organized collection of trash and the county planning process. The meeting is to be held at noon, Aug. 27, in the Council Chambers at 300 Metro Square Bldg., 7th and Robert Sts., St. Paul. August 6, 1985 iesgue of minnesota cities TO: FROM: RE: Mayors, Managers, and Clerks Donald A. Slater, Executive Director and Ann Higgins, Staff Associate Key Issues for Cities Result from Federal Budget Pact Mandatory Social Security and Medicare Cover.a~e for State and Local Employees Congressional action late Thursday night, enacting a FrY '86 - '88 Budget agreement, adds some new costs and requirements that will affect all cities. Key among them is the requirement that all state and local employees be covered by Social Security, beginning January 1, 1986. ~%ile other direct spending for programs benefitting cities increased over reductions proposed earlier this summer, mandatory coverage for current public employees and new hires provides $1.7 billion in additional revenue to the U.S. Treasur, and results in incxeased employer costs to cities (and other state and local its of ~overnment). The'actual budget resolution requires only that $1.7 billion be raised, leaving to the tax-writing committees the actual decision regarding increased mandatory social security and medicare coverage for state and local employees. It is evident, however, that House-Senate budget conferees assumed that mandatory social security and medicare coverage would be approved by standing committees following the adoption of the budget resolution by both bodies. Further examination of mandatory coverage will be necessary to determine the full extent of costs to local government. State and local employees belonging to the Basic Public Employees Retirement Association do not currently have such coverage. Their costs and those of employers will have to be determined as will the outcome of labor negotiations in order to determine costs. Full ?undin~ of General Revenue Sharin~ in FrY "86 Just two weeks ago, the House voted to support a budget resolution that would have reduced General Revenue Sharing (GRS) by 25 percent, beginning OctoEar 1, 1986. In final Congressional action on the House-Senate budget conference committees resolution, GRS came out a winner! The final agreement restored GRS to full funding for FrY '86 with termination scheduled for October 1, 1986 (the d~te at which GRS is schedule for reauthorization if the program is to be continued at all). The budget agreement provides $4.6 million to GRS instead of the $3.45 supported earlier by the House and assists many Minnesota cities working to adopt '86 budgets this fall. -over- ' ':-~'-- '-',';ens~t::;V sven,,je east, s'C. paul, minneso'Ca 55 fi ~ 1 (6 '1 ~) ~7-5t~00 Mayors, Managers, and Clerks Page 2 CDBG Cut 15 Percent - No Termination Senate Approoriation Only Cuts 10 Percent More confusion for cities stems from the contradictions also present in action taken last Friday by the Senate Appropriations Committee which approved CDBG funding with only a ten percent reduction under current funding levels ($3.125 billion) as compared with the budget resolution just passed by Congress calling for a 15 percent cut to $2.94 billion. The House had earlier called for a 10 percent reduction in FFY '86, and a freeze at that level for '87 and '88. The difference of $185 million could be affected by a decision by the Senate Appropriations Committee to accept the budget target enacted by Congress. The Senate committee maintained current levels of funding for the HUD's Secretary's Discretionary Fund ($60.5 million) to be available to deal with unusual circumstances that will likely result from proposed program cuts. In addition, funding was also retained for the Section 108 loan program used for economic development by CDBG entitlement cities. Also retained was the Section 312 rehabilitation loan program. Funding retained by the Senate committee action wculd provide technical assistance and revenues for special projects if the committee's current actions are sustained. UDAG Reduced 20 Percent UDAGs, threatened with elimination and steep cuts throughout budget neggtiations, actually retains a bit more funding than had been approved earlier by the House. Final budget resolution provides $352 million for the program in FFY '86, as compared with $440 million in FFY '85, a 20 percent reduction. The House had previously proposed cuts of 25 percent.. Other Bud.~et Resolution Aation Other programs affecting cities also faired better in the final budget resolution than in earlier proposals. Mass transit funding was reduced by 15 percent, whereas the Senate had proposed a 20 percent cut. The Economic Development Association, slated for terminated by the Senate, was cut by 20 percent, and no elimination of the program was approved. In addition, conferees rejected ~he Administration's efforts to drastically reduce and eliminate housing assistance programs. What Did not Ha~?en No action was taken to limit or cap.any non-needs entitlements, despite early NLC support and indications of some movement during negotiations. No freeze on tax expenditures or defense spending resulted from the resolution. There, too, NLC policy did not prevail. But, NLC's top priority, General Revenue Sharing. actually emerged far better than it might have been foreseen just weeks ago. Budget deficit reduction, however, is still a very large question left unanswered. With Congress in recess now until September 4, it will be important for cities to ccz~unicate their views on the saving of needed programs for cities and the continued need for Congress to more carefully and systematically examine the rapid growth of tax expenditures while avoiding the addition of difficult and costly mandates for local government. August 5, 1985 TO: FROM: RE: Mayor~, Managers, and Clerks Do~\! Slater and Diane Loeffler~/. Seminar and Strategy Planning Session regarding Tax Increment Financing and other Development Tools TAX INCREYfENT FINANCING ~D OTHER DEVELOPMENT TOOLS THREATENED WE NEED YOUR HELP! The League is hosting a ~eeting to discuss a lobbying strategy regarding tax increment financing and development tools on Friday, August 16, at 2:00 pm, at the Center City Inn, Downtown St. Paul. (See page 2 for further details.) in the past few years, city officials have increasingly appreciated the importance of job preservation and tax base improvement as they have weathered the storms of state and federal cutbacks in aid and dramatic changes in economy. Many of you have effectively used development tools (tax increment financing, revenue bonds, CDBG, etc.) to rehabilitate blighted areas and assist in new economic growth. These development tools are under attack. There is serious discussion of significantly limiting or eliminating the use of tax increment financing. Much of the opposition to city involvement in development is due to erroneous impressions. To help legislative committees make an informed decision on tax increment financing and other development program, we must make certain they get the REAL FACTS. We must combat the horror stories they have heard with documented success. As Mayor June Demos, Roseville, says, "We must understand that some of the horror stories told to legislators have led some of them to believe nhat as city officials we often go helter skelter into neighborhoods, condemning property to make land write-downs to our 'friends'. You and I know that this is perfectly ridiculous, but the job set before us today is to convince others that this, indeed, is false." In a Senate hearing this sunnr~,,er, there was significant discussion of whether or not city officials are accountable enough and whether they can effectively negotiate development projects. Unfortunately, many legislators believe that city officials are only too happy to "give away the Mayors, Managers, and Clerks Page 2 The League of Minnesota Cities is holding a seminar and strategy planning session as the first step toward developing a coordinated and effective approach to influencing legislation on this topic. Speakers will cover :he Citizen's League recormmendation to eliminate tax increment financing, legislative concerns, the Legislative Auditor's study, and the impact of federal cutbacks in development programs. After this briefing, participants will have an opportunity to help develop an action plan to address these challenges. If your city has ever been involved in or plans to be involved in development projects, your participation is critical. Please make every effort to attend. It is expected that one necessary component of an effective lobbying effort will be an extensive research project. Very little good data is currently available on who uses development tools and the results of those efforts. Tnat information is critical to our being able to correct erroneous impressions about city involvement in fostering development. A special lobbying effort may require the hiring of additional personnel. Please be prepared to discuss how a special effort might be financed and how much individual cities may be willing to contribute. This meeting presents a unique opportunity for you to gain valuable knowledge about anticipated changes and to be involved in building an effective effort to ensure that cities have an appropriate role in influencing the development of their communities. Please make every effort to attend, i~ is important that all types of cities be involved. The Development Tools Strategy meeting will be held at: .-WHERE: The Center City Inn 77 East Ninth St. (Corner of Minnesota & Ninth) Downtown St. Paul In the Ballroom k~EN: Friday, Augu~st 16 10:00 am - 2:00 pm Lunch will be provided at the cost of $5.75, please make your reservations for the the meeting and/or lunch by August 13, to Lynda Woulfe, at (612) 227-5600, ext. 28. Parking is available in the City Walk Ramp directly across the street from the Center City Inn On Ninth Street. Cost of parking will be approximately $2.50; cost depends on the length of time your car is parked in the ramp. DAS:DL:lw league of minnesota oities July 29, 1985 To: City Clerks and Managers From: League Research staff Re: New law on collecting utility bills Chapter 135 of the 1985 laws provides that a property owner may not be charged for utility bills incurred by a tenant. There appears to be some confusion as to which kinds of utilities are covered by this law. The new law affects only gas and electric service. It does~n°t affect water, sewer, refuse collection, or.any other utili~ties which the city may provide. Thus, there is nothing to prevent a city from continuing to certify unpaid water, sewer, or refuse collection bills to the county for collection with property taxes. G mes of Skill Minnetonka Music 2252 Commerce Blvd. Mound, MN. 55343 Owner: Keith O. Johnson 5040 Shady Island Pt. Mound, MN. Pg. 2273-2274 Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present Petition for Local Improvement for Improvement for Lots 7-13, Block 16, The Highlands Continuation of Item 2-A from February 12, 1985, Council Meeting Re: Rezoning from R-3 to B-l, A Small Parcel in the Town Square Development Project Discussion of Existing Conditional Use Permit of Century Auto covered under Resolution #78-488 ~. Mound Police Reserve Request for a 3.2 Beer License and a Set-Up License ~. Request to Consider the Implementation of a Canine Program for the Police Department 1~. Set Date for a Public Hearing on a Zoning Amendment for Conditional Use Provisions of 23.635.3 to Allow Consignment/Gift Shop by Conditional Use Permit (Suggested Date: September 10, 1985) Request to Submit Application to Hennepin County for Use of CDBG Fund for a Senior Citizen Van Total - $8,000.00 Discussion on Variance Application from Gordon Wolf at Lot 39, Block 11, Seton (4610 Kildare Road) - Jan Bertrand Balboa Report Concerning Public Works Building Payme'nt of Bills Appointment to LMCD Board for 3 Year Term Set Dates for Public Hearings: A. CBD Assessment Bo C. D. E. F. (Suggested Date: Unpaid Delinquent Utility Bills Unpaid Weed Removal Bills Unpaid Tree Removal Bills Unpaid Garbage Removal Bills Removal of Hazardous Structure September 24, 1985) Pg. 2275 Pg. 2276-2306 Pg. 2307-2309 Pg. 2310 Pg. 2311 Pg. 2312 Pg. 2313-2315 Pg. 2316-2329 Pg. 2330-2337 Pg. 2338-2348 Pg. 2349 23. Appoint Acting City Manager Page 21 93 24. ~ INFO M ITION/MI$C LLANEOU$ A. Notice From Dept. of Labor Re: Garcia Decision U.S. Supreme Court B. Letter to Balboa Re: IDB's & Incubator Center C. Letter from West Hennepin Human Services D. League of Cities Memo on New Distilled Spirits Excise Tax E. Letter from D.N.R. Regarding Lake Minnetonka Lake Use F. Letter from City of Chanhassen G. Summary of Hearing of Senate Public Utilities Subcommittee H. Letter of Thanks - Jake Gibbs/Nancy Gardner I. Letter from League of Cities Re: Increased City' Costs for Social Security & Medicare Ehler's & Associates Newsletter Solid Waste Control Commission Newsletter K. L. M. N. Pg. 2350-2351 Pg. 2352-2354 Pg. 2355-2358 Pg. 2359-2361 Pg. 2362-2366 Pg. 2367-2368 Pg. 2369-2372 Pg. 2373 Pg. 2374-2375 Pg. 2376-2377 Pg. 2378-2383 Metro Council Study on Organized Refuse Collection Pg. 2384-2423 Agenda - Watershed District Meeting Pg. 2424-2436 Metro Council Review - August 9, 1985 Pg. 2437-2438 Page 21 94